No, the J-10’s linear acceleration at high is very slow. This is almost the opposite of the Rafale, which has a similar IAS. The Rafale can go from ground level to high altitude and then reach Mach 2 in almost 2 minutes and 10 seconds, while the J-10 takes 3 minutes and 30 seconds, and this is under conditions without any weapon payload.
Actually, the J-10’s IAS in the game is 1500. During the development server period, an issue to reduce the J-10C’s VNE was approved. The maximum permissible indicated airspeed calculation is 1350 × 1.05 = 1417. If its VNE is indeed reduced, wouldn’t that just make the J-10 even worse in the game?
Not that the Super Hornet is bad, it’s just a support fighter, a missile bus support.
Now, if we were to analyze pure overall performance, the worst fighters in the patch are indeed the F-18E and J-10C.
But the difference between the F18 and the J10C is that the F18 fulfills the function for which it was designed.
What does it mean to be a multirole support fighter that fights at subsonic speeds and carries large payloads.
The J10C was intended to be a medium-to-light fighter jet, with average electronics (it’s not a Gripen E or a Rafale in terms of embedded electronics), but its distinguishing feature is its flight performance.
The J10C is known for its flight performance (pure brute force).
In the game, the way the fighter jet came to the live server, it doesn’t fulfill its function.
Really pathetic if you think about it. If the Devs literally opened their eyes since the days the bug report was made it really wouldn’t have been a problem. Never the less here we are with a gimped aircraft that isn’t all that impressive.
Oh for sure no denying that. All of the new aircraft have been released gimped. However from my experience I think the J-10C this update took the biggest hit.
I have a feeling that they focused way too hard on the upcoming infantry test and genuinely just ignored fleshing out the actual additions to the game, why the J-10C was particularly neglected this update, I don’t know. Datamines suggest some work is being done, but nothing so far on any of the major problems.
Pretty sad to see one of China’s most impressive aircraft in such a depressing state.
Do you have any idea how big an SU-30 is?
I found an image of a J16 next to a J10.
Another shocking image is the Tejas next to a Su30mki.
The Su30SM/SM2 isn’t just huge; it has canards and wings with positive sweep.
configuration that prioritizes lifting over drag.
And even so, it has less drag than a J10C in the game.
maybe you shouldnt look at the drag coefficent without knowing what that actually means and you should also stop cerry picking it to make this absourd point
i know that you switched to the fuelsalage values becasue showing them for the wing wouldnt have supporeted your rederick
The graph we are showing is about the Mach coefficient, that is, the total drag of the fuselage. The fuselage drag coefficient is a dimensionless number that quantifies the aerodynamic efficiency of the fuselage in relation to its shape and size.
You’re showing completely different graphs. Your first graph is about engine performance as a function of speed, and the other graph is about lift/drag polar, which shows drag based on AoA and speed.
