why is it just… so much worse then its irl counterpart? like you could say its for balance… but its also seemingly a 9.7 flight model at 12.3 because gaijin has barely made any of the harriers better then the gr1 for whatever reason
but like if we just talk about the take off… irl without a ramp under full load it could take off in 305 metres… ingame its take off is 550m, and unless the stat card is lying (which wouldnt be surpising) its just… makes no sense?
like lets take the Saab Jas39c, irl it had a take off… of around 400 metres and a landing of 500 metres but ingame its 500? so like just… why?
2 Likes
Minor nation hate*. They cbf doing more research than necessary and minor nations tend to have less time given than Majors for research. Also doesn’t help major nations bring in more money which means they get more out of research and/or making things overperform.
*Possibly Hyperbole. We’ll see once they add more eurodeltas.
2 Likes
Ordinarily I agree but fairly confident Gunjob has reported the Harriers to a point of being pretty accurate to available data. Though I personally dont think something is 100% with them
As for OP. I suggest asking in the main Sea Harrier Thread about take-off times and stuff and see if they have sources or an explanation
1 Like
Just had a thought, did you use 30% nozzle or not?
1 Like
To be fair, if not for Gunjob they’d be laughably awful.
1 Like
Hey, we have spitfires. It’s pretty hard to fuck up a spitfire.
But yeah, you’re not wrong there.
A lot of the Swedish/SAAB aircraft are, very poorly lacking, to their real world capabilities. The Vigg is able to take off from MINOR ROADWAYS for gods sake, 400-500 meters, in game it takes the whole runway to even get to 320+ mph, afterburning. The Draken is capable of landing a 900meter runway, I can’t find a full take off though. Oh, and that’s not even mentioning the BS FM nerfs they are getting from someone’s homebrew math equation, and ignoring the DAMN FLIGHT MANUAL FROM SAAB. IRL the flight performance of the J35, JA37, and JAS39 are Much, much better than in game.
Anyway, not to get off topic now. Not being biased in any way, mostly because I love the harrier in every sense, the reason the harrier is like this, is because it is Literally a brick with wings, if it wasn’t for the extremely powerful RR Pegasus engine, if wouldn’t get off the ground.
2 Likes
Nah, you don’t get it. Americans say it’s a UFO and physically impossible to perform that well, so obviously it’s wrong.
Well, that’s unfortunate. Just gonna stop trying to find things to credit as accurate for minor nations, seems 90% of the time they’ve fucked it in some way.
1 Like
It’s not?
@Zyranovos
39 blocks is how long it takes Gripen to take off.
Gripen wing span is 8.4 meters, one block is <10 meters.
390 meters tank off length full fuel, with missiles, in-game right now.
So Gripen is accurate.
Sea Harrier FA2 I do not own, but I can test drive.
24 blocks, or ~240 meters full fuel clean.
So with missiles <300 meters.
I can test with Harrier 2 and FRS1 any load.
Gripen probably is, but the Vigg is not.
I’d double check their figures instead of taking them on face. Alvis is notoriously dishonest.
Yes, Gripen’s performance is questionable in game compared to reality. Should be pulling more Gs if they were consistent, and have a notably less stable FM. Alongside the fact the wings really shouldn’t rip.
1 Like
Same with the Draken it is massively underperforming in its G capacity, AOA, and turn rate.
@ZendikarHaven has the Draken flight manuals, and proves its abilities as well.
1 Like
A plane designed to intercept, be as fast and maneuverable as possible, have an insane engine, and take off from “improvised,” if you can even call it that, runways in maximum efficiency, with a 15 turn around time on the ground with a prepared ground crew.
The gripen has a turn around time of 10 minutes, with the same exact doctrine in mind.
Yeah, I’m getting ~490 meters for Viggen with a missile load.
I just know Gripen’s accurate, I can’t speak on Viggen.