FC 2.0?? su27 vs f15???

Hello gentl. this my new thread is about unbelievable strange and non acceptable flight caracteristics of this two jets. In dogfight where su27 is a king(in reality), f15 get`s win so easy in close visual guns DOGFIGHT, of course if player with f15 knows all the tricks. So how is that possible?!

In last tournament on TCL 1 vs 1 gunsonly, f15 has taken the won and in finals both were flying with f15 which make things even more sad.

In LOFC su27 vs f15, in tight turns su27 need to be more agile, but f15 is so strong and when we fly circle with 500kmh speed, f15 get`s on 6 to su27, this is so funny, i mean wtf???

So many airshows where su27 showing all his dogfight power, and in this, how you like to call it "flight simulator" he is so slow versus f15.

So why are you guy`s doing this, is it cos of Americans and there jet, and there BUCKS???...this is not realistic, f15 can only go for energy menagment and nothing else...mig29 very good on airshows, and in game in dogfight that jet sucks, you need to be real ACE like PIRKE:) from Serbia to fly this thing in dogfight...

Soo at the end of my short thread, i would like to say "don`t go for FC 2.0" if this things stay as they are right now, or i will give you money for nothing, same sh*** all over again.

Good project, but make it more realistic in flight.

 

I am bad english spokeman so cheers!

WTF? :huh:

 

I guess I'll disobey your order and give my money for nothing (chicks for free!) :music_whistling:

you simply didn't get the point about FC2.0 i guess...

Did you think that airshows = air combat?

 

You're talking as if an F-15 wasn't capable of dogfighting. Ideally you don't want to get into a close fight with a MiG or Su, but guess what - the performance is close enough that even though the flanker and mig should have an advantage, it isn't going to be a 'zomg I just pull into your tail and lolz' ... if you make a mistake - not even a very big one, an F-15 can come around and shoot you down as long as he doesn't make the same mistake.

 

Relative performance at slow speed is being looked at, but you really don't know what you're talking about. The Su-27 is not the king nor god of dogfighting - an F-18 will out-turn it so long as it doesn't have to do too many turns ;)

An F-15 on the other hand can do a -lot- more turns thanks to that insane TWR ... ie. it can sustain its turns much better (...than an F-18, and even a Su-27). The reason for what you are seeing is nothing else than the F-15 having significantly greater TWR when in a similar confiuration as the flanker.

 

But again - the slow speed performance is being looked into. Just in case ;)

Bob feels many pages :D

FC2.0 = F-15 Strike Eagle simulator...

 

Looking more and more like that... 380+ pages on the Russian speaking forums arguing with ED about numerous changes that are completely biased. So, just get used to it... or don't buy FC2.0.

 

its sad.

For the love of all that is holy and sacred in this world, DON'T FEED THE TROLL!!!

 

A simple "Cool story, bro" or "lol wut" is acceptable, however.

FC2.0 = F-15 Strike Eagle simulator...

 

Looking more and more like that... 380+ pages on the Russian speaking forums arguing with ED about numerous changes that are completely biased. So, just get used to it... or don't buy FC2.0.

 

its sad.

 

A rumor has it that they first called it FC 1.5 but because it was too obvious we know it now under 2.0

FC2.0 = F-15 Strike Eagle simulator...

 

Incorrect.

 

Looking more and more like that... 380+ pages on the Russian speaking forums arguing with ED about numerous changes that are completely biased. So, just get used to it... or don't buy FC2.0.

 

its sad.

What biased changes? The F-15C in FC was ridiculously undepowered in MIL power - this was one adjustment that was made, and it now matches the performance of the REAL aircraft - you know, the C model, from the actual F-15C flight charts that pilots whose lives depend on knowing those parameters study. Those flight parameters are from 1986. A Strike Eagle would perform better.

 

The other adjustment was adding an IFF cue to the HUD.

 

Data for the -220's may have been taken from the Strike Eagle manuals, but the F-15C's have had those engines since '86. Very few, if any aircraft ale left with the -100's. Those engines were relatively unreliable. Their performance in MIL power is very similar to the -100 anyway, and the FC F-15C is underpowered for both engines in the MIL setting. The -220 has different supersonic performance - better and more reliable than the -100, but again it does not actually overmatch the -100 by a lot when it comes to acceleration and top speed etc. The main difference is that it can provide a little more thrust at supersonic speed without self-destructing (think of it as safe operation of V-Max switch).

 

By the way, the F-15E is heavier than the C, so it would actually perform slightly worse than a C when both are fitted with -220's.

 

The FC2 F-15C has not been fitted with simulated -229's. If that was the case, I would certainly not blame you for complaining, as that would have been unrealistic.

 

So yes, actually - the F-15C performance really is that good.

Edited February 4, 2010 by GGTharos

There are many features that could have been added to the Russian planes to make them more "realistic" as well. Yet, those changes are ignored and not taken into account.

 

For example, count down to missile impact that is displayed on the HUD when firing a missile on the SU-27 is not there. Has been there and is documented in the manual for the SU-27SK (export version!) not even talking about the Serial version used in the VVS. Another example is MiG-29S being able to fire on two targets simultaneously. Another example is SU-25 not being able to properly bomb a target due to the way the HUD is static and can not be adjusted at an angle, so the only way to bomb is to dive bomb...

 

What is disheartening is not the attempt to make F-15 more realistic but ignoring the improvements that could have been brought but chosen to be ignored to the other planes in the game.

 

-Sov13t.

There are many features that could have been added to the Russian planes to make them more "realistic" as well. Yet, those changes are ignored and not taken into account.

 

For example, count down to missile impact that is displayed on the HUD when firing a missile on the SU-27 is not there. Has been there and is documented in the manual for the SU-27SK (export version!) not even talking about the Serial version used in the VVS. Another example is MiG-29S being able to fire on two targets simultaneously. Another example is SU-25 not being able to properly bomb a target due to the way the HUD is static and can not be adjusted at an angle, so the only way to bomb is to dive bomb...

 

For example, the F-15C could have had simple radar antenna centering on PDT at least in TWS mode, be capable of selecting bar scans, and have a better working radar MEM mode, as well as a working MPCD.

 

What is disheartening is not the attempt to make F-15 more realistic but ignoring the improvements that could have been brought but chosen to be ignored to the other planes in the game.

 

-Sov13t.

What is disheartening is the fact that people are jealous of a couple of very simple changes which in fact brought more realism to the whole game, and failing to realize that the red birds were the ones of the receiving end of a huge avionics update in FC.

 

You keep accusing the devs of bias, but there really isn't anything like this happening. Seriously, you are complaining about F-15 engines being corrected in thrust - something that led to review and correction of certain properties on ALL fighters ... and the addition of an IFF cue.

 

Don't tell me how much stuff was ignored on the red birds, because I'll tell you how much more is ignored on the blue side. Did I mention we don't even have a working MPCD? What about the waypoint steering cue and ILS? Neither of those work 'by the book' either. But let's forget about those - the radar isn't even modeled with more than 10% the capablity it should have, while on the russian birds you get more mileage out of radar than you ought - noted, with the one exception of not being to address two targets with some little used version of the MiG-29S.

 

And then you essentially blow this up to a 'This is a Strike Eagle simulation!' accusation - it is an entirely biased statement aimed at making Mars' Mt. Olympus out of a molehill. Get a grip - FC2 did nothing more than a single avionics tweak to the F-15C - an IFF cue. That was it.

Edited February 4, 2010 by GGTharos

For example, the F-15C could have had simple radar antenna centering on PDT at least in TWS mode, be capable of selecting bar scans, and have a better working radar MEM mode, as well as a working MPCD.

 

What is disheartening is the fact that people are jealous of a couple of very simple changes which in fact brought more realism to the whole game, and failing to realize that the red birds were the ones of the receiving end of a huge avionics update in FC.

 

You keep accusing the devs of bias, but there really isn't anything like this happening. Seriously, you are complaining about F-15 engines being corrected in thrust - something that led to review and correction of certain properties on ALL fighters ... and the addition of an IFF cue.

 

Don't tell me how much stuff was ignored on the red birds, because I'll tell you how much more is ignored on the blue side. Did I mention we don't even have a working MPCD? What about the waypoint steering cue and ILS? Neither of those work 'by the book' either. But let's forget about those - the radar isn't even modeled with more than 10% the capablity it should have, while on the russian birds you get more mileage out of radar than you ought - noted, with the one exception of not being to address two targets with some little used version of the MiG-29S.

 

And then you essentially blow this up to a 'This is a Strike Eagle simulation!' accusation - it is an entirely biased statement aimed at making Mars' Mt. Olympus out of a molehill. Get a grip - FC2 did nothing more than a single avionics tweak to the F-15C - an IFF cue. That was it.

lol pwn, BUT you all have to remember that this is A SIM! Not RL, but a SIMULATION. Now a simulation's goal is to be as realistic as the sim will allow. But honestly how long do you all think it will take to make it as RL as possible while there are people who are going "I WANT FC2.0 NAO!!!!! AND SUPERFANTABULOUSLY REALISTIC TOO!!!!!" Sorry, but IF it was made as RL as possible we probably wouldn't get FC2.0 for another year! So I say if you don't like it don't buy. Have a nice day people.:)

Yes a Fulcrum is an underdog in gunzo vs Eagle (I believe this is IRL too), it has a smaller turn Radius but Eagle covers more degrees per second (better turn rate) and if it's pilot has some brains left in sustained 6G turn he'll take vertical maneuvers into account and appear on your 6 or create snap shot chance to rip you open.

 

He can't maintain slow speed of a MiG w/o stalling so he'll probably go for snap shots. What you can do is take advantage of Fulcrum's better acceleration (at least in LOFC) by flying slowly and when he makes a pass you should accelerate after him.

...the other planes in the game.

-Sov13t.

 

Don't forget::pilotfly: pilots (brains) win dogfights not aircrafts :ermm:

Well you guy`s could make f15 to fly with 1 wing, like that video on you tube, USAF say it`s possible, guy has landend with 1 wing(omfg:doh:), so when i take f15 in game and when something hit me, i still wanna fly even if i have 1 wing:pilotfly:...that plane is a crap, he just have strong support from every freaggin side...

Crap as in LOFC or crap as in RL?! There's a difference!

Excuse me?

 

Do you have a point? F-15C was adjusted to match real flight data. If you don't have something useful to add, like perhaps pointing out a mistake in how the data was applies, then I suggest you take your ranting elsewhere.

I'm sorry that the F-15 is better than you think it should be.

 

Well you guy`s could make f15 to fly with 1 wing, like that video on you tube, USAF say it`s possible, guy has landend with 1 wing(omfg:doh:), so when i take f15 in game and when something hit me, i still wanna fly even if i have 1 wing:pilotfly:...that plane is a crap, he just have strong support from every freaggin side...

Well, I can land an Su-25 with only one wing (actually, almost made it with no wing, but this might be a bug or something :D), never tried it with an F-15, though.

Everybody on this earth knows that su27 is better than the any USAF jet in tight turns(maybe not from f22, that plane is manuwerable) he can out turn any plane, but not in LOFC, i belive the reason is cos of big USA market, they rulzzz ;)

Excuse me?

F-15C was adjusted to match real flight data.

 

:huh:

Which F-15C? FC 1.12 one or FC2.0 version?

Is it true that the su-33 has a emergency power feature that gives you more thrust for a few seconds?

Everybody on this earth knows that su27 is better than the any USAF jet in tight turns(maybe not from f22, that plane is manuwerable) he can out turn any plane, but not in LOFC, i belive the reason is cos of big USA market, they rulzzz ;)

 

Obvious troll is obvious :huh:........

The Flanker myth is over - and FYI, the F-18 and F-16 can and will out-turn a flanker - the F-18 more so.

The F-15 and Flanker are very closely matched in turning ability, with the Flanker having a slight edge, moreso at low altitudes - but this is only when the SPEED is the same. If the F-15 is faster, it WILL rate faster.

 

What did you think? That you can pull on the Su-27's stick and magically end up on any USAF fighter's tail?

The Su-27 has maybe a couple DPS superiorty over an F-15 .. that's 10% ... not 100%. The idea that you will win a dogfight just because you're in a flanker is a myth. If you don't actually understand what these turn rate graphs mean, and I don't think you do, then you're not really qualified to judge performance ;)

 

And I'll note ... the graphs from RUSSIAN intelligence show relative parity between F-15C and Su-27S. Yes, they overestimated F-15C a little according to USAF charts ... but ONLY a little.

 

Are you saying that you know better than ED developers, who actually have access to material provided from VVS and USAF as well in some cases?

 

@Vekkinho: FC2.

 

Everybody on this earth knows that su27 is better than the any USAF jet in tight turns(maybe not from f22, that plane is manuwerable) he can out turn any plane, but not in LOFC, i belive the reason is cos of big USA market, they rulzzz ;)

Edited February 4, 2010 by GGTharos

This seems to have been a common feature on a lot of old engines, but it is also an often misunderstood feature ... on the F-15 for example, it was only available for supersonic flight. This feature was elimitated (IIRC) with the -220 because it was made of better materials.

 

Is it true that the su-33 has a emergency power feature that gives you more thrust for a few seconds?

Well i hope they will make some dogfights at airshow or some where else, cos now all have stealth planes the newiest gen. and than we will see wtf are we talking about here ;)