F-15E?

Hey, couldn't find any answer on this..

According to Razbam there won't be an AI Jester, so how when you are playing SP will you be able to launch weapons and attack targets...?

 

You then have to switch seats mid-air and then who's flying the aircraft, or is there something i am missing...

In Janes F-15E a decade ago you could switch front and back. There is no problem with that, you can fly the aircraft from both stations; you can also use all the weapons from both too. Switching to the backseat on the other hand allows a single player the benefits of having a few extra MFDs to play with: very useful.

That's some BS, they can use ED's radar API for both AA and AG radar, so it should be pretty good they just have to intergrate it...

Well maybe, in his interview prowler stated that the AV8+ radar was the same as used on the ED F18 which is absolutely incorrect One uses APG-65, the other APG-73...

Also, given the low fidelity with which the ARBS is modeled on the harrier I don't expect all that much for the F15E.

Hey, couldn't find any answer on this..

According to Razbam there won't be an AI Jester, so how when you are playing SP will you be able to launch weapons and attack targets...?

 

You then have to switch seats mid-air and then who's flying the aircraft, or is there something i am missing...

Yes. "highly realistic" high quality work that we've all come to know and love.

Well maybe, in his interview prowler stated that the AV8+ radar was the same as used on the ED F18 which is absolutely incorrect One uses APG-65, the other APG-73...

 

Also, given the low fidelity with which the ARBS is modeled on the harrier I don't expect all that much for the F15E.

That is true, but youd be surprised how similar they are in operation ( IF i showed Av8b plus excerpts of MFD Radar page/modes and claimed it as APG73 illustration from the Hornet i bet id be able to fool a fair bit of people) . Utilizing an API doesn't mean 100% exact copy paste.

TBH i can't help but think think the APG73 designations was more marketing. ITs honestly more like an APG65 V2.0. Its not a new radar design. Its basically the same antenna but upgraded digital components like more processing power and memory storage etc.

LIke genuinely if you compare photos of APG65 radar and APG73 radar, There are probably only very subtle differences.

I mean same way he F16c's went through upgraded iteration of the same radar family IE APG68 V1-V9

Quick question: Are HARMs and Harpoons integrated on USAF F-15E?

Quick question: Are HARMs and Harpoons integrated on USAF F-15E?

This is the worst place to ask such a question. Look for books or other sourced material, otherwise all you're gonna get is non-real-life-experience-think-know-better-people that give all kinds of answers with dubious references.

This is the worst place to ask such a question. Look for books or other sourced material, otherwise all you're gonna get is non-real-life-experience-think-know-better-people that give all kinds of answers with dubious references.

Or you'll get a response from one of the many helpful guys around here with real life mudhen experience.

https://lmgtfy.com/?q=f-15e+flight+manual+pdf

Quick question: Are HARMs and Harpoons integrated on USAF F-15E?

No these are not integrated on USAF F-15E's, only on (some) export versions.

TBH i can't help but think think the APG73 designations was more marketing. ITs honestly more like an APG65 V2.0. Its not a new radar design. Its basically the same antenna but upgraded digital components like more processing power and memory storage etc.

It uses APG-70 components, thus APG-73.

That is true, but youd be surprised how similar they are in operation ( IF i showed Av8b plus excerpts of MFD Radar page/modes and claimed it as APG73 illustration from the Hornet i bet id be able to fool a fair bit of people) . Utilizing an API doesn't mean 100% exact copy paste.

 

 

TBH i can't help but think think the APG73 designations was more marketing. ITs honestly more like an APG65 V2.0. Its not a new radar design. Its basically the same antenna but upgraded digital components like more processing power and memory storage etc.

 

LIke genuinely if you compare photos of APG65 radar and APG73 radar, There are probably only very subtle differences.

 

I mean same way he F16c's went through upgraded iteration of the same radar family IE APG68 V1-V9

I mean I get it, but he could have at least got the designation right. Its one of those attention to detail things.

No these are not integrated on USAF F-15E's, only on (some) export versions.

Roger thanks! That was my understanding as well

This is the worst place to ask such a question. Look for books or other sourced material, otherwise all you're gonna get is non-real-life-experience-think-know-better-people that give all kinds of answers with dubious references.

Funny that of all the people here it is you who's telling me that. You, who doesn't understand that there have never been Sparrows on the USAF F-16C...

It uses APG-70 components, thus APG-73.

and the APG70 is really just an improved APG63 PSP.

although there are some component,s but the way they are integrated and the way the software works and installed it still has fare more in common APG65 than APG70. TBH the APG71 is far closer to being a mirror of the APG70 than the APG73 is.

Initially even the APG79 AESA was known as the APG73 Phase 3.

Again marketing. Just like a T90 tank is really just a rebranded T72BU

take for example APG63 series. APG63 V2 is an AESA radar. It really aught to have had a totally different nomenclature since its literally is a new radar relative to the APG63 PSP or even to the APG70. APG63V1 with new components. relative to the APG63 PSP. or apg70. Although APG63 v2 had a new antenna it kept lots of V1 tech . APG63 V2 APG63 V3 are Both are AESA. however some components changed. the Antenna is a totally new one, with technology derived from APG79 AESA. Yet APG63 V3 didn't get a APG7X designation. even though all APV63 V1 and later are superior to APG70 and APG63 V3 utilized some APG79 tech.

The in turn kept the APG63 designation purely to give congress the illusion that this was a minor modification than significant change to encourage funding for the program.

Same for Super Hornet program keeping F/A18 in the nomenclature. even though its a totally new airframe.

In Defence industry has a history of changing designation for modest changes when it suites them for marketing, and not changing them for more significant changes in others instances when they feel it will help encourage funding by implying a mere improvement or sub variation of the same radar family, when one looks at the finer print you realize its not the case.

Roger thanks! That was my understanding as well

 

 

Funny that of all the people here it is you who's telling me that. You, who doesn't understand that there have never been Sparrows on the USAF F-16C...

You went off-topic again pal, please use the appropriate thread.

So, will the be able to do the FPM math and draw dotted lines, or we need to pay another 80 bucks so they keep learning?

This is the worst place to ask such a question. Look for books or other sourced material, otherwise all you're gonna get is non-real-life-experience-think-know-better-people that give all kinds of answers with dubious references.

Like you then?

we gonna be able to take the conformal tanks off?

(cleanest F-15E I've ever seen below):

we gonna be able to take the conformal tanks off?

 

(cleanest F-15E I've ever seen below):

 

Of course. It will make the f15 more uber in MP.

Of course. It will make the f15 more uber in MP.

care to share how you know this? (source?)

care to share how you know this? (source?)

He's just trolling...as usual. No use worrying about it.

He's just trolling...as usual. No use worrying about it.

LOFL...

What? I mean the F15 CFT's could be taken off sure. Though were almost really ever taken off IRL. And the 15E wasn't used as primary A/A fighter. But I have no doubt that razbam will go out of their way model that to make it "better" than it was IRL. Just like they won't bother modeling the WSO/pilot interactions and the benefits/downsides therof. Just like many limitations of harrier systems aren't modeled.

But I'm sure there is a "good" reason, that the USAF since 1987 didn't bother to fly with WSO, since he's just dead weight, since the guy in front could "just do it all" per Raz…

we gonna be able to take the conformal tanks off?

 

(cleanest F-15E I've ever seen below):

 

You won't need too, ;) with 229s it'll smoke everything in the game, until the eurofighter comes out. Even then maybe

You won't need too, ;) with 229s it'll smoke everything in the game, until the eurofighter comes out. Even then maybe

Best case It will likely be barely on par powerwise with the op F-18, so all good;-)

Best case It will be likely barely be on par powerwise with the op F-18, so all good;-)

Uh. It can fly a whole lot higher and a whole lot faster, and it's radar is a whole lot more powerful...best case is the bug will be completely defensive at the merge if it hasn't be squashed already.

I was not talking about FM, not tactics.