empty weight doesnt include oil, fuel and other vital things for the vehicles function, you need the “wet” or “combat” weights for a weight report.
Gaijin is also not very fond of doing weight reports generally, so even with perfect relevant info its usually ignored. focusing on thrust, lift and STR is usually best path to follow for buffing planes
The J-15T is even newer than the J-16, so it’s highly unlikely we can find fully accurate information on it. This isn’t just an issue with Chinese vehicles — it’s the same for vehicles from every country. Gaijin has a lot of discretion in this area.
Most of the time, we have to make vague speculations, but the people who handle reports don’t accept speculation…
The main goal for Chinese players is to improve the performance of the WS-10B, such as increasing thrust or reducing the engine weight. Reducing the airframe weight comes second.
But we can’t get official manufacturer data, so public forums are our main source — haha.
Typhoon players have the same issue. the only plane thats managed to sneak unverifiable buffs its way has been rafale.
meanwhile the harrier jump jet has had tons of reports about it being not even half what it should, mostly ignored
Same here.
I mean if I would get a euo every time I heard someone say “it’s only the dev server, don’t worry it will be fixed on live” and said thing not changing at all I would have a decent amount of money now.
Ironic coming from one of the champions of the British victim complex.
most the time things are changed significantly when its clearly early in development still.
I actually do something about it instead of just saying things are bad. almost a dozen changes this update were from my own personal reports, probably more as dev gets updated. I speak and actually act.
This update makes it very clear from the tweaks to british stuff that if you actually research and do good reports things will be done
I can not understand why bwd both want to make money from Chinese player and let the high-altitude acceleration capability of the J15T be so unimpressive at 14.7.
TOO FUNNY
What is the source of this imfo
reliable?
It is obvious that This is a unfair treatment, The AL-41F’s thrust curve is a simple scale proportionally from AL-31F’s curve as it looks almost the same. But WS-10b only have a slightly thrust improvement in high altitude. If WS-10B’s curve was designed with similar way, scale proportionally from WS-10A’s curve, the high altitude performance could be better. So come on, if you want more income from Chinese players, treat us fairly first.
In real world, It is. As WS-10series are a very complicated origin engine, the core machine is almost the same with F-110series, and the many design are similar to AL-31series, and the great high altitude performance is probably origin from Chinese’s first turbofan WS-6.
Gaijin always fails in both balance and simulation.
If gaijin want to gain more money from players,at least they should give J-15t enough strength and right power curve.
Gaijin isn’t a company which know how to make money.
So it always fails both in balance and simulation.
If gaijin wants to get more money from players,they need to receive players’ thoughts.
Whether in terms of balance or simulation,J-15t in game need more improvement.
Based on the latest data from the test server on March 3, the WS‑10B engine shows a significant lack of ram effect at high altitudes and high speeds, even performing worse than its predecessor, the WS‑10A. This is inconsistent with the PLA Air Force’s combat doctrine emphasizing high‑altitude, high‑speed beyond‑visual‑range (BVR) engagements.
Take the 7,000‑meter altitude band as an example:
At 0 km/h: twin‑engine thrust of the WS‑10B is 11750 kgf, and the WS‑10A is 10447 kgf, with a difference of 1303 kgf.
At 400 km/h: twin‑engine thrust of the WS‑10B is 11915 kgf, and the WS‑10A is 10968 kgf, with a difference of 947 kgf.
The thrust increase from ram effect for the twin‑engine WS‑10B at this speed is 165 kgf, while for the twin‑engine WS‑10A it is 521 kgf. Despite having greater static thrust and more advanced technology, the WS‑10B exhibits lower ram efficiency than the older WS‑10A.
While this may seem insignificant at first glance, the gap widens further at higher speeds, including supersonic speeds. As a result, the performance improvement of the WS‑10B over the WS‑10A at high altitudes and high speeds is minimal, which violates the logical progression of equipment development. Consequently, the J‑15T ranks last among top‑tier fighter jets in terms of acceleration at high altitudes and high speeds, which contradicts the development logic of PLA Air Force equipment.
We urge the game developers to address this issue. Please adjust the ram effect of the WS‑10B appropriately at high altitudes and high speeds, so that its ram gain ratio across all speed ranges matches that of the WS‑10A.
In the minor test server updates 0.20–0.21, the thrust curve of the WS‑10B engine has been adjusted. According to the revised data, its thrust coefficient across all altitude and speed ranges remains lower than that of the WS‑10A. This results in insufficient thrust at high altitudes and high speeds, significantly limiting the aircraft’s climb and acceleration performance, and causing the J‑15T’s energy characteristics at high altitudes and high speeds to lag behind top‑tier fighter jets.We ask the game developers to re‑examine and adjust the data related to the WS‑10B thrust envelope.
Taking the latest data of the WS‑10B engine flight envelope from the test server version .21 on March 3 as an example, the engine’s ram thrust coefficient is lower than that of the WS‑10A at all altitude ranges, resulting in a significant difference in the curve growth rate compared with the WS‑10A.
We sincerely hope the game developers will check the relevant coefficients and adjust the thrust curve reasonably. The acceleration curve of the J‑15T at high altitudes and high speeds is already ranked last among top‑tier fighter aircraft, and we hope this issue will be taken seriously.