Yep, same reason, although in the F-16A case the induced drag at lower speeds/medium-high AoA is not fixed out of pure laziness-extremely wide “accurate enough” standards.
F-16A doesn’t lack any charts for this, after trying to reject it for various minor details they just answered my report with “we don’t adjust low speed turn rate” and called it a day lmao https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/xwLVzgjxhsU5
“We usually do not adjust turn rate at low speeds due limitations of available estimations for how AoA affects to Cd and engine performance.
Only peak turn rate performance is adjusted and slightly supersonic”
Simply interpolating the curves on the image below to extend them all the way for Cl ~1.4 would get an easy accurate enough the game estimate. Plus there’s sustained turn rate charts for the F-16A, and they have gotten other planes right from just those.
i mean even the radar can be fixed, there was a change that incorrectly messed up the scan pattern for a bunch of radars which effectively doubled the cycle time - for the mig29A’s and su27’s turned it into a 8 second or so update, compared to all the radars with much faster scan rates to begin you didn’t notice the difference much but with the soviet ones it made them basically unusable. Bug report on that with good sources has been sitting open for 6months but never gets looked at. ( Almost all radar repeat top and bottom bars in scan // Gaijin.net // Issues)
Russia doesn’t even need new weapons or jets, simply fixing what we currently have in all aspects would make it perfectly competitive as is - just it seems devs either deliberately wont fix problem area’s due to various reasons, or lack the capability to address the issues properly in a way that doesn’t mess other area’s up.
That’s really what it comes down to, just fixing what we have right now, if we got buffs instead of new content, then we’d be in a much better place in the future.
But it is clear that the J-10A and JAS-39s perform better than the F-15C and Su-27 even in sustained turns. Although we do not have flight manuals for the J-10 and JAS-39, I believe this is not normal. Chinese pilots have repeatedly mentioned that the Su-27 (including the J-11, etc.) can beat the J-10 in continuous turns, while the J-10 has an advantage in the initial stage after the merge (higher instantaneous turning rate, larger available AOA and smaller turning radius). This is almost the opposite of the performance in the game. The longer the engagement, the lower the speed, the more disadvantageous it is for the Su-27.
The Su-27 is at a much greater disadvantage in terms of SB. The F-16 can easily fly an alarming TRT by trimming, and the Su-27 can’t do anything about it.
I’m not too sure if reverting UFO fighters to normal is a good idea, but the last aircraft to do so was the MiG-23 (and surprisingly, they did a great job).
Yes, I said that the J-10A is overperforming in sustained turn.
What I said is J-10A seems correct in instantaneous turn performance ingame, the quoted figure is 31 degrees per second.
But it should not be able to outrate J-11.
J-10B and J-10C will be a different story as drag was substantially reduced through remodeling of the nose cone and DSI air inlet, as well as engines with more thrust.
When we talk about real life, then it is necessary to compare normally. If a modern US aircraft showed good results in the war and destroyed a bunch of Russian planes. That’s in reality and not in the news. He destroyed a bunch of old planes that have not belonged to Russia for several years, as well as in all wars with the support of all who can.
so the concept of “Better as in life” does not exist
No one in the west has worried about the MIG-25 since Belenko flew his to Japan. It was designed to be a fast, high-altitude interceptor versus high-flying U.S. strategic bombers (B-52, B-58, and the never-fielded XB-70) and the U2/SR-71. It couldn’t intercept the 71.
Look down, shoot down? With those ancient, crap systems. LOL.
Could say the same about hundreds of vehicles in war thunder already, some added very recently. The reason to add the MiG-25 is to allow people to fly it in the game if they wish…
Valid. The idea that it would be some awesome ACM aircraft is just plain silly, though. There are other things I’d rather see Gaijin devote developer time to.
They’ve added aircraft that would perform horrible in the meta before, it is just for fun.
And besides, MiG-25 is one of the famous aircraft of the cold war. So I think it is quite interesting if it is in the game.
wait until the even more modern jets get added. It will get funny bc russia has 0 good planes nowadays. Their stealth plane is less stealthy than the f16 or eurofighter…
Stealth is a gimmick ingame, the Su-57 would still be able to lock the other 5th gens at 50km no problem the only downside is it would be in the NEZ which isnt an issue if you multipath but would put it at a disadvantage if you dont know how to do something as basic as notching
The F3 is by far the best 12.0 in particular. Excellent radar, excellent RWR, excellent missiles and a ton of countermeasures are more than enough to perform at 12.0.
I mean, c’mon… the alternative at 12.0 are F4S with HMD and an useless RWR, FGR2 which is just worse, F1C which has only 2 Magic 2 as weapons, and JA37D which is a flying brick with a 4-points RWR.
Sea Harrier FA2 is worse than the AV8B+, sure. It still carries AMRAAM at 13.0 with top of the line radar and RWR. And in Sim it’s a menace.
How is a su57 locking a plane, in game, that pantsirs can’t lock until a few KM away in the form of the f117? Unless this has changed(the lock/detection distance of f117 in game)I don’t see why or how the su57, in game, would somehow overcome the extreme differences between the f117 and the f35 for example, or even further the f22.
It doesn’t matter if it is the best at 12.0 (It’s not) because the BR is not in the most ideal bracket as currently there are many up-tiers. 12.3 is put in as basically the same BR as 12.0. That and planes below 12.0/12.3 can be better, like the MiG-23MLD Series. Although I will say the plane is an 8/10.
For the Harrier it’s that the airframe is just bad, in order to do something you need the enemy to be completely suicidal and horrible. It’s similar to how the Sea Harriers at 10.7/11.0 play (Super over-tiered) that you are slow in every regard and require enemy to be completely blind most of the time.
Cannot catch anyone, cannot run from anyone, get clobbered in 1vX that you can never avoid and you have 6 missiles vs 8-10. The GR.7 at 12.3 has 2 less missile but 320 more CM, 2 guns and infinity better MM especially if you bail on the 13.0 matches.
I wouldn’t call them super overtiered, aim-9Ls shouldn’t be on anything below 10.3, especially not on a platform faster than an A-10. They also shouldn’t be facing 9.3s, and don’t forget the Av-8s exist.
