F15A also feels kinda strange imo, the difference in performance between it and the C is considerable, similar to the SMT and regular 29s
Sukhoi Su-27/30/33/35/37 Flanker series & Su-34 Fullback - History, Design, Performance & Dissection
Gonna go out on a whim and say the Su-27SM might be heavily overperforming in the speed or drag department, seeing as it can super cruise with bombs on at 6500m…
I’ve no real data to back it up (if anyone has any kind of chart for it it would be great) but, to put it simply, imho it’s one of the most bullshit fm that there are in the game… if a little higher aspect ratio with a slight change angle could give a MiG-21 that has less thrust than the SMT sustained turn performance comparable to a 4th gen aircraft all the modern MiG-21 variants like the lancer or the bison would have been upgraded.
4 Likes
It’s probably too low drag coefficient for transonic region at high altitude… dunno if gaijin will change stuff there thought, they refused to buff to historical levels F-15C high altitude speed Community Bug Reporting System
2 Likes
That’s because F-15A is around 8-10% better than it should be while the F-15C is actually slightly underperforming
1 Like
yeah the J-7E is straight up bs… Not only does it feel like its FM is outright whichcraft, but its been undertiered HEAVILY for the last 2+ years with gaijin categorically refusing to do anything about it despite the fact that its been the uncontested best performing aircraft at its BR ever since the PL-5B’s were “fixed” years ago, and its not like its been a secret either, with it constantly being paraded as an incredibly powerful aircraft by all the air CC’s until the F-16/MiG-29 were added and new toy syndrome pulled them away from using it.
Meanwhile my Premium F4EJ sits at higher br while having worse RWR,worse missiles and certainly worse flight model :)
3 Likes
Bruh, reading the replies of all of you i can only ask myself one thing:
Can top tier get more inaccurate?
Now imagine when they add the raptor and the felon, smh
Now that’s gigasad
Somehow i still enjoy flying with my premium EJ, something must be wrong about me
Well they just decompressed brs so, while both J7E and F8U br are embarrassingly low, gaijin may just need time.
Sad to say it, but F-4EJ 99% sure is overperforming too lol.
If I start reporting all this shit I guess I would need to disappear from the forum for quite a bit, I’d make a lot of people mad lol
2 Likes
They’d unironically probably try to doxx you for “ruining” their toys, there’s a lot of idiots without a life around the internet
2 Likes
Sadly gaijin saw that pushing modern vehicles out fast sacrificing accuracy worked for them in tanks and decided to do the same shit for aircraft.
I would have been even fine with it as long as prop gameplay did not end up suffering because of it, but now 1.0-5.7 is full of people that are there to just grind and not to play the game.
Used to sit around 2.0 k/d in props, last month for props I am probably over 9 lol, most people are bots (and most deaths are from people doing sucide headons, actual deaths by good players in dogfight have become rare).
Anyway to make top tier more accurate one would need to start testing basically every aircraft for sustained turn and confront it with the manual.
1 Like
In which areas?
Personally i would like to see accurate EJ on lower br.
Not to be mean but,
Guys, please discuss aircraft totally unrelated to SU-27 somewhere else please.
Gripen/F-16/15/Mirage-2000/MIG-29 are fine, since they are direct competitors to SU-27, at same BR range.
But please keep stuff like F-4EJ that will never ever see the SU-27 out of this
(but yes, F-4EJ being same BR as the best F-4E variant, the KURNASS sums up Gaijin’s joke balance)
Sustained turn, especially at lower speeds…
I’ve been a bit harsh on gaijin/the whole game looking at how I wrote things earlier, but the main reason for the over performance are 2:
Missiles used to have higher drag than real life 3 years ago, and most E-M diagram for aircraft have missiles onboard, so that now results in overperforming aircraft.
Second reason is that some manual use the “load factor” n_z (perpendicular to the aircraft velocity vector and to the airflow) instead of the “normal load factor” N_z (which is perpendicular to the aircraft body).
This is especially important for aircraft whose flight model was adjusted after a bug report, because most people do not know (and I don’t blame them because both are usually only labelled as “G load” or just “load factor” in the manuals).
What ends up happening is that the aircraft N_z values (N_y in local host because Russian manuals seem to use Y instead of Z for the axis perpendicular to the wing) ends up being tuned to follow n_z values, and this results in a higher turn rate than real life, because for the same turn N_z < n_z.
I’'ve found about that very recently (yesterday actually) when looking at the F-15A, because turn rate values didn’t match while overload was matching F-15 Eagle: History, Performance & Discussion - #2492 by Giovanex05 (see this also for additional details)
yep sorry
2 Likes
Weelp, guess we can get back to talking about the somehow supercruising Su-27 then. Anyone got anything saying this is accurate, cuz im pretty sure its not.
Fair enough, will do.
2 Likes
The delta wing suffers from airflow separation at lower AoA than conventional style wings - causing excess induced drag in turns. Has nothing to do with length of the plane or low thrust.
3 Likes