This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
1 Like
If you keep at high altitude you either need to be very passive which won’t help the team or you risk being a easy kill by someone bellow you. Its much harder to turn at high altitude and the incoming missile will also be very fast since up there it wont slow down much from the drag.
The only jet I feel comfortable doing that is the rafale because the radar is very reliable and the jet picks up speed very fast
The sufa lines on the statshark are wrong. They are too high
1 Like
its really simple compare This:
WITH
This:
the difference in performance and the radar missile its pretty clear.
BTW the Mitsubishi F-2 recived the same buff as the Block 50 am just saying.
Pros and cons
Yes u need to be very aware to below u but ur missile have better start off in alt and speed
Also being high gives u the ability to go down which is great when u need to pick up speed or notch a few missiles at once
What do you mean?
Radar is about the same I think. Maybe 5km more range, but scan speed is the same.
Which buff?
Engine buff, the F-2 uses a license made GE-129
- am talking about its performance and the radar guided missile not the aircraft radar.
- the F-2A both recived the same engine buff that the Block 50 recived you didnt know it?
btw the F2A was already one of the best dogfighters now its even better and trust it feels better.
In what sense? The 120C5 is a downgrade, and most people agree on that.
F-2A feels the same to me
I know about the engine “buff” that supposedly improved engine thrust at very high altitudes, but in most relevant altitudes the F-16s and F-15s got a speed nerf somehow, with increased drag I think. So overall they are worse in this update.
I saw the adjusted engine curves in the devserver, but something isn’t right because they supposedly kept the same thrust at low altitude but they still got slower.
it’s a super low speed buff. it reduces top speed at sea level, increases it at altitude but they also got drag nerf. but, f-2 and 16c got a crazy low speed buff
before, f-2 had worse low speed than euro, now its better low speed than euro
ignore rafale, its old fm
1 Like
Do you mean that the F-16C and others got a increase in thrust below mach? Because they still have the same sustained turn rates as before. (The F-16s. I haven’t tested everything else because the F-16s I remembered the values from memory)
I’m doing some speed and turn tests between the 16c and the sufa, I’ll compare the f2 and typhoon next in sustained turnrate and check if statshark is truthful with ingame results
1 Like
this is all at 30% fuel/min fuel
Long story short. Statshark is wrong as usual. It overestimates SEP 0 turn rates for both across the board.
Sustained turn rates with clean config and min fuel, ±50m altitude
677kph IAS
F-2A - 22.7deg/s
Typhoon - ±23deg/s
400kph IAS
F-2 - 20.1 deg/s
Typhoon - 19deg/s
1 Like
@noamax I did some tests that might interest you
Firstly, since I haven’t fully researched the sufa, I had to test drive it with CFT tanks on, so to make things even between it and the F-16C block50 I did the following loadout.
F-16I with CFT and nothing else has 440kg loadout, 0.084kgf drag penalty and 2177kg of fuel (min fuel + full CFTs which is about 23m of fuel.
F-16C with only 5xaim9 has 422.3kg loadout and 0.09kgf drag penalty. To match the same fuel amount, I brought 28m of fuel, which totals 2178kg.
So the total fuel weight, load, and drag are almost the same between them.
sea level
F-16C - 1400kph IAS
F-16I - 1435kph IAS
8000m
F-16C - 1300kph IAS or 1992kph
F-16I - 1290kph IAS or 1977kph
Turn rate at 560kph IAS (just a random speed to compare both, it’s a slow speed to rate because I don’t have a crew on the sufa to test higher)
F-16C - 17.0deg/s
F-16I - 17.0deg/s
I was a bit surprised by the turn rate, but the stronger engine on the sufa will handle better when both are heavy with that loadout/fuel amount. On a clean configuration, the F-16C might have an edge, specially at lower speeds, but at higher speeds the sufa might be better, and I meann at like 800kph+ turns in full power. Similar to the F-15C and F-15E/I situation.
I see the F-16I as a sidegrade of the F-16C, although I prefer the latter because of turn agility and better missiles for the meta.
Fair
I will play it myself when i will grind it and see
but just the armament alone would make the sufa worse then f16c
Also its not just about top speed but also accelertion
The sufa accelerates a bit harder at any speed, but after mach they are almost the same.
I might test accelerations later but I would need to record some videos to time them. And right now I don’t have the time. No pun intended
1 Like
But it is consistent with it and shows that the sep0 for the F2 is better at lower speeds than the EF
Which is more than good enough to quickly compare two flight models to each other instead of doing extensive testing, which in some cases you might not be able to do, due to not having a specific vehicle