The f15a in game only has a after burner thrust of 8510kgf when it should have somewhere around 10800kgf. Also the f15 top speed in game is wrong it tops out at mach 2.3 when it should top out at 2.5 and in game the f15 cant even go 2.4 if you give it more engine power if you do it will brake its wing
4 Likes
What are you on about, the F-15A in game produces ~13,500 kgf thrust per engine on AB
It’s actually massively over performing in the engine department as the F-15A uses the P&W F100-PW-100, which should only have a max thrust of ~11,300 kgf on AB and could only use that for short times as those engines had a LOT of reliability issues.
Maybe open a bug report, so they can fix the thrust :)
3 Likes
Careful you arent looking at afterburner vs combat thrust. War Thunder doesnt model Combat thrust, only afterburner which might be lower. Tornados for example should have a lot more thrust if combat thrust was available
3 Likes
I get so tired of this, you know that…
Tornado IDS uses the Turbo Union RB199 R34 Mk103 with a rated 71 kN on AB (~7240 kfg)
In game:
2 Likes
Clearly Russian bias.
1 Like
All the jets have this, you have a little higher thrust in game because rated power is on a test bench, while in flight you have some benefits from ram air, but also some channel losses as there is an airplane around the engine.
Some planes really suffer from poor design and have a lot of channel losses… like:
Wtf France.
1 Like
Would ram air really make that much of a difference though, considering supersonic air hitting the fan blades typically doesn’t end well?
Air intake is designed to slow down the air to subsonic speeds, but yes you’re right… above mach the engine is less efficient. You can see the same happening in WT, when you break mach engine thrust typically starts reducing somewhat.
F-15 jet inlet has mechanics inside to accommodate subsonic and supersonic flight, kind of creating internal shockwaves to slow the air down before it hits the compressor
It’s kind of weird they haven’t modeled this movement… as they HAVE modeled the air intake being on “down” (low mach) position on the runway, but as soon as you get even a little speed it moves to the “up” (high mach) position… even at subsonic speeds. This is incorrect.
Nevermind, they seem to have modeled it. Very cool.
2 Likes
i ask you this why cant it go mach 2.5 then ?
are you getting this in air ab ?
Seems to perform as it should, a tiny bit over it in fact:
Airspeed limit at 10,650 meters / 34,940 ft should be nearly reaching mach 2.3. This graph is from the F-15A flight manual.
This is RB forum.
still why cant it go mach 2.5
its top speed is 1920 mph
witch comes out to 10855 kgf and in game it has 8510kgf idk where your getting that number but its not right
You’re just wrong is all. You can look at thrust in game with WTRTI, you are just looking at the thrust on a F-15A with X-ray view, probably even stock or not fully upgraded. But don’t try and look at actual flight performance data and keep spewing copy pastas from wikipedia
1 Like
That’s the correct amount of thrust for at speed.
Same with RB199, that’s at-speed thrust which is higher than static tested thrust.
@KyrA91881
F100-PW-220s installed on later F-15Cs can help it reach mach 2.5.
Yup…
I said the same
People just too hell bend that their F-15A isn’t just clubbing everything in game, even though the F-15 and Su-27 should be cleaning up matches. Seeing how the Gripen is so successful that Gaijin even went ahead and nerfed it below their usual multipliers on actual performance data (ie. the 1.5x multiplier they use) because it can just turnfight everything with ease speaks volumes about how people use these jets. They do the exact same as they do with tier 1 props, fly right at each other and furball, then bitch that they get eaten by planes that excel in that category or die by the dozens when someone missile bombs the furball with 6 9M/R73s or so.
They should make smaller matches from 10.3 up tbh. 8v8 or 10v10 at most. 16v16 on these small maps isn’t an environment that enables people to use their planes properly when everyone is equipped to kill half the enemy team within 5 minutes.
1 Like
They don’t 1.5x to every performance metric when designing the FMs… that is just for structural limit, not the maximum Gs can it pull.
They do on the g overload as well… planes which have a 9G overload can pull 14 G in game as long as other aerodynamics allow. Also, nobody in their right mind would pull 14G in reality, heck, most planes won’t even allow it through limiters, and you as a pilot wouldn’t start pulling harder if you could when you start hitting anything near 9G for more than a second.
1 Like
G Overload / Maximum Gs are the same thing - the maximum force the plane can take before it self-destructs. Not every plane can pull hard enough to achieve this, whether due to the instructor, FM, or what ever. The Gripen was nerfed based on the proper sources that was bug reported. It’s still a great plane just not a UFO anymore.
The Gripen has a normal G overload of 9 to protect the plane, 9 * 1.5 = 13.5G, we have ~14G in game. There is also an emergency switch to disable this MLL which will add an additional 3G on the limiter. We lost that switch in Gaijin’s balancing.
PS. modern fighter jets won’t self destruct on exceeding G overload. That we still have wings breaking off clean on a minute G overload past, say, BR 8.0 is absolutely ridiculous. Espcially when you are talking about jets that have computer assisted controls (Limiters, FBW, MLL, etc). Even below it’s silly tbh. That whole mechanic is bad. Surely you can damage your plane pushing it over its limits too much… but wings coming clean off isn’t something that would happen.
Source (yes this is public information):