Su-7/22 speeds are stupidly unrealistic

Alex18762
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 532
Joined: Wed 25 Apr 2012 19:14
Location: Narodna Republika Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: Su-7/22 speeds are stupidly unrealistic

Postby Alex18762 » Sat 1 Nov 2014 22:04

wargamer1985 wrote:
All aircraft speeds are abstracted, otherwise a MiG-29 wouldn't be flying at 900kp/h, also remember that any speed buff comes with a hefty Rate of turn Nerf, and I don't know about you but I prefer a good rate of turn to a good speed, also I love my Su-22 and Su-7 lines, don't touch them (except maybe a payload buff)



Then It would be even more unrealistic since Su-7/22 werent designed to be maneuverable.
If I wanted a good turn rate I'd choose the Su-25 and no the Su-22 as it is doesn't come with good turn rate. Besides These aircraft served a different purpose by design. One is FAST, while the other(Su-25) is SLOWER AND ARMORED. There's no logic in making an aircraft designed to be supersonic the speed of something designed to be subsonic and maneuverable.

If the tornado will be much faster than the A-10, then so shouldthe Su-7/22 be much faster than the Su-25.

User avatar
Darth-Lampshade
Captain
Posts: 1680
Joined: Thu 10 May 2012 20:12
Location: CT, USA
Contact:

Re: Su-7/22 speeds are stupidly unrealistic

Postby Darth-Lampshade » Sat 1 Nov 2014 22:31

High speed at altitude doesn't necessarily mean high speed at low level.

See the Starfighter with its pathetic speed at Wargame altitudes. Or the MiG-25 which couldn't break Mach 1 at sea level IRL.

So speed doesn't necessarily have to make sense in Wargame.
When in doubt blame UGBEAR.

User avatar
RedDevilCG
Colonel
Posts: 2687
Joined: Thu 30 May 2013 20:58
Contact:

Re: Su-7/22 speeds are stupidly unrealistic

Postby RedDevilCG » Sat 1 Nov 2014 22:46

On aside, for some things low speed is even better. Planes with Multiple ATGMs benefit from a slower speed when you command an EVAC. If you're trying to shoot down helicopters, slow speed lets you get more shots off.
Image

User avatar
panzersaurkrautwefer
Major-General
Posts: 3906
Joined: Fri 15 Feb 2013 16:48

Re: Su-7/22 speeds are stupidly unrealistic

Postby panzersaurkrautwefer » Sat 1 Nov 2014 23:10

Re: Silliness.

The F-111 was a better platform in all measurable ways to the SU-22 in performance, and markedly faster at all altitudes. It also possessed a wide array of low altitude flying equipment which allowed it to operate effectively at very fast speeds, flying NOE.

Both the SU-7 and SU-22 were okayish bombers that are more comparable to the F-4 in a bomb only role.
Do I look like a reasonable man to you, or a peppermint nightmare?

User avatar
Woozle
Captain
Posts: 1603
Joined: Sat 1 Feb 2014 09:22
Location: Heierlark Base, North Osea
Contact:

Re: Su-7/22 speeds are stupidly unrealistic

Postby Woozle » Sun 2 Nov 2014 00:16

panzersaurkrautwefer wrote:Re: Silliness.

The F-111 was a better platform in all measurable ways to the SU-22 in performance, and markedly faster at all altitudes. It also possessed a wide array of low altitude flying equipment which allowed it to operate effectively at very fast speeds, flying NOE.

Both the SU-7 and SU-22 were okayish bombers that are more comparable to the F-4 in a bomb only role.



You do realize the F-111 is in a completely different class of aircraft? Its more comparable to the SU-24M.

User avatar
panzersaurkrautwefer
Major-General
Posts: 3906
Joined: Fri 15 Feb 2013 16:48

Re: Su-7/22 speeds are stupidly unrealistic

Postby panzersaurkrautwefer » Sun 2 Nov 2014 00:19

You do realize the F-111 is in a completely different class of aircraft? Its more comparable to the SU-24M.


I do. But the OP complains about it being faster than the SU-22, and then remarks it's only superior statistic is better bombload.

So my point was to articulate he's making a bad comparison, which is something you apparently agree with.
Do I look like a reasonable man to you, or a peppermint nightmare?

User avatar
Woozle
Captain
Posts: 1603
Joined: Sat 1 Feb 2014 09:22
Location: Heierlark Base, North Osea
Contact:

Re: Su-7/22 speeds are stupidly unrealistic

Postby Woozle » Sun 2 Nov 2014 00:38

panzersaurkrautwefer wrote:
You do realize the F-111 is in a completely different class of aircraft? Its more comparable to the SU-24M.


I do. But the OP complains about it being faster than the SU-22, and then remarks it's only superior statistic is better bombload.

So my point was to articulate he's making a bad comparison, which is something you apparently agree with.


Well I guess OP does not know what he is talking about.

User avatar
Drang
Major-General
Posts: 3725
Joined: Sun 3 Feb 2013 04:20
Location: Fighting on the edge of the world
Contact:

Re: Su-7/22 speeds are stupidly unrealistic

Postby Drang » Sun 2 Nov 2014 01:32

Alex18762 wrote:Tornado variants of the time didn't have superior loadout options to the Su-17M4.


A Tornado of the time can carry an ordnance payload the same as the Su-17s entire damn load weight.

Alex18762 wrote: The only thing superior about the F-111 is it's larger payload.


And ability to go supersonic at low altitude, better avionics and countermeasures.

User avatar
REDDQ
General
Posts: 6906
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2012 03:13
Location: przy stole.
Contact:

Re: Su-7/22 speeds are stupidly unrealistic

Postby REDDQ » Sun 2 Nov 2014 03:39

Image

Image

Most planes (few exceptions) clocks out at 1,2 Mach (with Mach h=0 being 1,225km/h) on the sea level, afaik, F-111 and F-4 included.


So... 900km/h for Su-7 and 1000km/h for Su-22 fully deserved.

User avatar
Drang
Major-General
Posts: 3725
Joined: Sun 3 Feb 2013 04:20
Location: Fighting on the edge of the world
Contact:

Re: Su-7/22 speeds are stupidly unrealistic

Postby Drang » Sun 2 Nov 2014 13:47

^Hey, Red, could we get a bit more information on your source? What is it? What year was it published, by whom, also, a like-for-like comparison from the same source on the F-111 and the Tornado and the F-4 would be excellent.

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 36 guests