F-15E? - Page 7 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-10-2015, 04:46 PM   #61
JazonXD
Member
 
JazonXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Canada, Onatrio, Milton
Posts: 448
Default

Basically what we need is a multi-role fighter that's decently modern. The thing with the F-16 is that we need a pretty decent variant that's kinda new. Like mentioned before, not many people are going to be too happy with the A variant, and since the later variants (C and blocks xx) are in the 90s and later, it'll be harder to simulate them because of the mil restrictions. That's why I really want the 15E because it's a really upgraded and developed aircraft variant already but still in the same decade (80s to 90s) and I think it'll be a bit more worthwhile to do the 15E? Please correct me if all of this is wrong, just my personal opinion though.
JazonXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2015, 05:21 PM   #62
mjmorrow
Member
 
mjmorrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JazonXD View Post
Basically what we need is a multi-role fighter that's decently modern. The thing with the F-16 is that we need a pretty decent variant that's kinda new. Like mentioned before, not many people are going to be too happy with the A variant, and since the later variants (C and blocks xx) are in the 90s and later, it'll be harder to simulate them because of the mil restrictions. That's why I really want the 15E because it's a really upgraded and developed aircraft variant already but still in the same decade (80s to 90s) and I think it'll be a bit more worthwhile to do the 15E? Please correct me if all of this is wrong, just my personal opinion though.
Personally, I see nothing Universally or inherently right or wrong with your personal preference. At the end of the day, you like the idea of a DCS F-15E. What is Universally or inherently wrong with that? For me, nothing. Your interest in a F-15E doesn't make you absolutely wrong or the root of all evil in my book. The way I see it, you and the other flight simmers advocating for the F-15E are a bunch of cool dudes and gals sharing my passion for flight simulation. It is just that you are into an awesome ride that I could happily live without. I would much rather see Razbam make a SARH only F-16, than make a F-15E, for a variety of reasons, but, at the end of the day, so what? How does that reflect on you, the validity of your preferences, the, so called, rightness and wrongness of your preference or the rightness or wrongness of anyone's preferences?

I don't see how I or anyone else could reasonably hold out to the DCS community that we have the one and only true and worthwhile point of view on the matter of whether or not to make a DCS F-15E, without resting selfishly on our subjective opinion and personal preferences. I'm not advocating for the introduction of the F-15E, but at the end of the day, that doesn't make you right or wrong, doesn't make me right or wrong. There is no DCS World politically correct ride choice. Some players are going to like the idea of a DCS F-15E and some players will not like the idea. It is an issue of preference, reasonable minds can and do differ. There is certainly no absolute undeniable truth coming out of my corner, here. MJ
__________________
http://i688.photobucket.com/albums/vv250/mjmorrow76/SPAD%20of%20a%20new%20generation_zpshcbftpce.png

Last edited by mjmorrow; 12-10-2015 at 06:19 PM.
mjmorrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2015, 08:20 PM   #63
Dudikoff
Senior Member
 
Dudikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Croatia / Lebanon
Posts: 2,487
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmorrow View Post
It would be important to model a version of the F-16 that would carry a SARH BVR capability, in order to best match a DCS F-16 to the DCS Mirage 2000c, future DCS Mig 29, and other future 4th Generation DCS rides. MJ
I answered this two pages ago already:

"You can stop right there as this doesn't exist apart from the ADF one which entered service AFTER the F-15E."

If you had read more about the ADF variant, you would have found out it only served in the continental ANG units so not really a flexible multirole choice for the DCSW. And besides, two years later AMRAAM came into service so, again, this whole F-16 + BVR - AMRAAM matchmaking idea you keep pushing through is completely pointless.
__________________
i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Last edited by Dudikoff; 12-10-2015 at 08:25 PM.
Dudikoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2015, 08:57 PM   #64
blkspade
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,127
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmorrow View Post
Thank you and understood. It is a great good for me to be ever mindful of the distinctions in national modifications and requirements for the F-16, from nation to nation, block to block, etc. Our DCS Mirage 2000c is a great example of this. Our French Mirage 2000c won't have the capacity to launch the Exocet, but the Greek version of the Mirage 2000 does. Some 1990's F-16s may have had the SARH BVR capability, but not other 1990's F-16's. It would be important to model a version of the F-16 that would carry a SARH BVR capability, in order to best match a DCS F-16 to the DCS Mirage 2000c, future DCS Mig 29, and other future 4th Generation DCS rides. MJ
If you further click through that site you'll find AIM-120 was always something intended as part of the BVR package for the F-16, at least for the US. Further more it was the first aircraft to actually use it in combat, and score a kill. They mention certain at least block 10s being structurally sound to carry the 120, which I find interesting considering considering its lighter than the Aim-7. As much as you seem to be against it, any F-16 released for DCS with BVR capability will have 120s.
__________________
http://104thphoenix.com/
blkspade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2015, 08:58 PM   #65
Sweep
Senior Member
 
Sweep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: South 'Jersey, USA
Posts: 1,283
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moos_tachu View Post
+1

I really don't understand why people are so much into the F-15E.
Let aside the look and the number of bombs it can carry, there's not a single thing it can do that the F/A-18C cannot.

Plus the Hornet is truly multirole, and carrier capable.
Once ED's Hornet is released, from a gameplay standpoint the Strike Eagle will be pointless.
The F-15E is multi-role also, the USAF -15E might not have an ARM or proper anti-ship missile, but its still the best strike fighter one can get.

Its not the number of bombs it can carry...but the strike radius with that number of weapons or less than that number of weapons...you put 2 Mk-84s, CFTs, and 2 600 tanks on a Strike Eagle and it goes far...now put 2 mk-84s, and 3 330 tanks on a Hornet...

While range to target may not be a problem in most scenarios in the sim currently, it'd be darn cool if it were...

The F-15E is the ultimate tactical bomb truck, and while a Hornet will be cool too...the Mud Hen really needs to be represented here!
__________________
"Salt Shaker" - Long live v1.2.2, home of the 10 minute flight
Sweep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2015, 09:16 PM   #66
TomOnSteam
Member
 
TomOnSteam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Posts: 685
Default

Well we are getting the C hornet, while the F-15E is multi-seat, so even though their missions are similar, I'd still be getting both because flying solo, and flying with a friend will be two different reasons to play
__________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cockpit Spectator Mode
TomOnSteam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2015, 04:44 AM   #67
mjmorrow
Member
 
mjmorrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dudikoff View Post
I answered this two pages ago already:

"You can stop right there as this doesn't exist apart from the ADF one which entered service AFTER the F-15E."

If you had read more about the ADF variant, you would have found out it only served in the continental ANG units so not really a flexible multirole choice for the DCSW. And besides, two years later AMRAAM came into service so, again, this whole F-16 + BVR - AMRAAM matchmaking idea you keep pushing through is completely pointless.
During the First Persian Gulf War the AIM- 7 was not carried on any F-16s used in combat? Look, I am going to research this point, so if you don't know for sure, just say so. There is no shame in your lacking sufficient information to come to a well reasoned determination as to whether or not the AIM-7 was actually used on F-16's during the Persian Gulf War. I have sources claiming that it was, but I would not simply state that this must have been the case, because I am not confident in the sources I currently have Based on the information I do have, I would not claim to know for sure, one way or the other.
__________________
http://i688.photobucket.com/albums/vv250/mjmorrow76/SPAD%20of%20a%20new%20generation_zpshcbftpce.png

Last edited by mjmorrow; 12-11-2015 at 05:11 AM.
mjmorrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2015, 04:48 AM   #68
mvsgas
Veteran
 
mvsgas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Phoenix AZ
Posts: 8,376
Default

I agree with Dudikoff. AFAIK, No F-16 carried AIM-7 in first desert storm. Not the F-16 mission to fly cap, sweeps or other air interdiction unless it require ground attack. I think only 42 F-16A where in combat operation during desert storm, 24 of which where from 138 TFS deployed to Al Kahjr AB. 18 belong to the 4401 MMS(P) both under the 4 TFW(P)

http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5437
__________________
Quote:
Q:The internet says...
A:The internet is wrong.
EvilBivol-1
https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php...2&postcount=51


CPU=AMD Ryzen 5 3600, Mo/Bo= Gygabite X570 AORUS Elite, Memory Corsair vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 32gb, 500g Samsung 970 evo pro, WD blue 3D NAND 2 TB SATA III, video card=Gigabyte RTX 2070, 8gb gddr 6, EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G+, Cooler Master NR600 Masterbox, Joystick=Thrustmaster T-flight Stick X, Track IR, Win10 64

Last edited by mvsgas; 02-01-2019 at 08:17 AM.
mvsgas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2015, 05:09 AM   #69
Kayos
Senior Member
 
Kayos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,064
Default

Since I think DCS is going to do the F-16 after the F-18 I would love to see the F-15E.
I think another multi-crew would be awesome and there aren't many of any better bomb trucks than the F-15E.
If DCS does do a F-16 it should be the C version, block 50+ and obviously have the 120's.
That is what everyone wants. No one wants a F-16A that only can carry Aim-9's

Last edited by Kayos; 12-11-2015 at 05:17 AM.
Kayos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2015, 05:20 AM   #70
mvsgas
Veteran
 
mvsgas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Phoenix AZ
Posts: 8,376
Default

One thing I would like to point out is the F-16 progression is not linear. What I mean is there are A model F-16 block 15/20 with more capabilities (in terms of avionics and special weapons carried, pilot training ,etc) than newer F-16C block 52. It all depends on many factors. F-16A does not mean less capable unless referring to a specific time period.
__________________
Quote:
Q:The internet says...
A:The internet is wrong.
EvilBivol-1
https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php...2&postcount=51


CPU=AMD Ryzen 5 3600, Mo/Bo= Gygabite X570 AORUS Elite, Memory Corsair vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 32gb, 500g Samsung 970 evo pro, WD blue 3D NAND 2 TB SATA III, video card=Gigabyte RTX 2070, 8gb gddr 6, EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G+, Cooler Master NR600 Masterbox, Joystick=Thrustmaster T-flight Stick X, Track IR, Win10 64
mvsgas is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:00 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.