Thrust-vectoring might just mean even more speed bleed. I worry about how Gaijin might screw them up.
Sukhoi Su-27/30/33/35/37 Flanker series & Su-34 Fullback - History, Design, Performance & Dissection
1 Like
I’m 100% sure they Will lol
1 Like
Thrown into the trash can as gaijin is satisfied with its current performance cuz it follows the g charts
Because many variants of the SU-30 get a FLIR pod.
The Russian version, in theory, would get the T220. But that seems a long shot, because Gaijin doesn’t seem to want USSR being able to multirole as effectively as other TTs.
I keep on reading about Su-30M2. Does it actually exist?
It might be a decent multirole for Russia.
Oh god… It’s still using the N001 according to this post.
Granted I don’t know how accurate that is.
M2 would be DoA. Pretty much the only decent Su30 choice to be added after the F15E’s introduction is the SM
uh huh, sure buddy
The devs literally said that they are comfortable with the plane’s performance as it is following the g charts on the reports that were previously made here by the community.
1 Like
It was that the devs acknowledged that there was a deviation of about 0.4g of underperformance but they think that 0.4g is close enough, and they don’t see the need for them to fine-tune it. In the meantime, F-15A and F-16A are overperforming, the eurocanards will likely overperform because of lack of documentation, so this exacerbates the problem.
To conclude, Su-27 is indeed underperforming, but not by an incredibly large amount. But a lot of other aircraft are overperforming so it makes the problem seem bigger than it is.
7 Likes
I’d say the most egregious would be F-16A Block 10 and Gripen. The J-10 seems correct to data that I’ve
found regarding instantaneous turn but is probably overperforming slightly in sustained turn. The Gripen can currently outrate the F-16 including the Block 10 which is pretty ridiculous. The Gripen has a much lower thrust-to-weight ratio compared to the F-16 and J-10, and plus the Gripen isn’t using a far-coupled canard like the Eurofighter which would be more ideal for energy retention.
I’m not sure about the specifics for F-15A, but I think it is overperforming in instantaneous turn.
2 Likes
I think ur mostly correct but the fact that the su27 can almost supercruise ingame feels kinda weird to me, i still think its engines are overperforming and that it has too much drag like Gio pointed out
1 Like
It’s the non-static thrust that is overperforming imo when in flight, on the ground it seems accurate.
I wonder what source/modeling method Gaijin went for to calculate engine thrust at different speeds and altitude.
1 Like
Likely this
Finger,Sky,ceiling
1 Like
Theres some information for eurofighter with weaker engines
1 Like
Kinda suprised nobodies mentionned the missing FAB-3000 with UMPK kit for the Su-34.
Sure it woulsnt be any good, and its super ugly, but its definitly got “meme weapon” written all over it, and there are pictures of it being dropped (which I cannot post due to forum rules)
Seems like itd be easy enough to get added if somebody wanted it ingame enough.
1 Like
Maybe that will come with the Su-34M/NVO
War Thunder cannot do automatic thrust vectoring at this time, and there’s no indication they’re working on it.
On top of that, thrust vectoring reduces sustained dogfight capability, and has no impact on high-speed maneuvers.
F-15JM: 2019.