you can, but not in rb
slow is sub 500kph a place where you dont want to end up
you ideally want to stay at around 700 - 800 kph so you have enough energy to actually do something
the F22 wouldnt be able to hit the same exact shot because it dosent have TVC on the YAW axis
Thats fair the Su-30 has 3d thrust vectoring.
Would you expect a Su-30 to beat an F-22?
In that scenario?
yes because the guy in the EF played it wrong, he did a syrian lead turn, which caused him to lose all his position at the start of the DF
Typhoon probably didnt know where you were bet the Radar didnt even see you 😆
and even in a neutral merge the F-22 would struggle it is as heavy if not heavier as the Su-30
it loses alot of engine performance at lower speeds due to the s-ducts and it dosent/didnt have HOBS capebilities
I didn’t know this premature turn had a name, looks almost exactly like what happened in my video, maybe just narrower space in my case.
Probably T220 TGP too since there’s no evidence that it can carry it …
I don’t think there was a second step :)
Isn’t the 35k lbf static thrust?
It could cue it’s missiles with radar iirc
yeah, that line aged badly x)
~ 15k kg thrust,
i hope it is per engine
the other problem is that it might have more thrust, but depending on the surce it is as heavy, if not heavier as the Su-30 and has smaller wings than the Flankers and so a higher wing loading
(ik it is a Su-33 on the image, but it should be enough to get an idea)
that might certainly be true, but in an actual dogfight a HMD seems alot better to me than having to actively using your radar
Yeah F-22 is 35k lbf each engine static thrust.
And recently F-22 got HMD but I’m fine if it doesn’t since APG-77 is a very good radar, probably best in-game when added
is that really for inside the airframe or just bench thrust, because normally you only find the numbers for bench thrust
but to be fair, if there is a Flanker that would have to face the F-22 it would be the Su-35S
(atleast i hope that gaijin manages to do some decompression before adding 5th gens)
I mean maybe, but I’ve heard it can put out more power than they say so they could be using installed static as bench to hide true capabilities.
Something about being able to do mach 2 with 118% out of 150% power
If that isn’t an excess of thrust, I don’t know what is
Mach 2 at 40k with 118%, “I could go supersonic by the end of the runway”, “brake release to mach 1.7 and 60k in 3 minutes 30” (wasn’t allowed to go supersonic below 30k)
well highly dpends on altitude and if we are talking pure speed the Mig-25 beats it with mach 3
i hate when ppl use percentages like that
so 100% would be full dry thrust and 150% full afterburning, i assume
if we translate that to WT (as we are all a bit more familiar with that) 118% would corelate to about 104% throtle in WT (it would be percisely 103.6%, kinda hard to do in WT)
40,000 feet =12,192km
mach 2 is already possible to acive in the currently avaiable jets in WT at 104% throtle, at a lower altitude, while flying in a straight line
and i was able to get it up to mach 1.12 with 103% throttle
Can you check how long it takes to go from mach 1.6 to 1.9 at 40k ft, and 0.9 to 1.2 at 40k?
at full burner?
Yeah just gun it, I’m assuming that’s what F-22 test pilot did
around 30 seconds
i love when the embeds fail
around 33 seconds
probably not 100% accurate, because i couldnt exactly hold the altitude
Thanks. Seems like Raptor is worse from .9 to 1.2 (assuming max burner) and better from 1.6 to 1.9
Flanker might be tuned to high for that regime too
