F-15E?

I don't know what you think you're accomplishing with this childish condescending attitude of yours, but it's tiring. You could have done this "research" of yours already in the time spent on repeating the same thing over and over.

 

For the fifth time in this thread, in the USAF, the Sparrow was only carried by ANG-specific F-16 ADF variants (with CW illuminators added to their older AN/APG-66 units) which were used in the air defense of the continental USA only. The F-15C units provided CAP in DS.

 

While some foreign operators (e.g. like Taiwan) did use Sparrows on their F-16 variants (In Taiwan's case, this was post 1992) and the later US variants (Block 25+ with the AN/APG-68 ) were probably technically compatible with AIM-7M (or later variants), they were never equipped operationally. From the references on foreign F-16 variants, I presume some updates on the USAF operational units would be required (like e.g. WCS to force HPRF in STT when Sparrow is armed, pylons, etc.) to provide them with this capability.

Dudikoff, First of all, I am not the issue, so whatever you think about me personally, it doesn't belong on the forum where we discuss airplanes and not your opinion of me. Second, it may very well be the case that the AIM-7 was not carried by any F-16's used in the First Gulf War, but simply stating that it was not does not demonstrate that it was not used. Just as I do not rely upon the sources of information I have found suggesting that it was used, I am not simply gong to take someone's word for it. We are closing in on 2016, in the Twenty First Century. A lot of time has past between the First Gulf War and now. Misrepresentations of fact about what happened in the past, even the very recent past, are common enough. Misrepresentations told over and over can take on a life of their own, then be treated an indisputable truth. It may very well be a misrepresentation of fact that the AIM-7 was carried on F-16's during the Gulf War and it may very well be the case that sources indicating that it was used are in error, then again maybe the AIM-7 was used.

I have to research the matter. I am not presently in a position to know one way or the other. I have come to the conclusion that I can not presently represent that the AIM-7 was or was not used on F-16's in the First Gulf War, without doing so in reckless disregard as to whether or not this is the case. I lack sufficient authoritative information and I am not in a position to know such matters, so I cannot currently come to a well reasoned determination on the matter. I will research the matter of the ANG F-16's and whether or not it was the actual case that the AIM-7 was not used on at least some F-16's used int he First Gulf War. Thank you for your assistance. I appreciate your contribution to my inquiry, Dudikoff. :thumbup: MJ

One thing I wonder is the fascination or many of us with multi seat complex aircraft. If they model F-15E, F-14, A-6, F-111, etc, You need that second guy to do a lot to properly employ the aircraft. How many of us played games like ArmA 1 to 3 that allow multi seat helicopters and it was/is awful. The lag always gets in the way, you would be trying to shoot at something as the gunner but can't because pilot can't see what you see and vice versa. The AI is terrible as a pilot/gunner,/WSO/GIB.

I'm not looking forward for any multi seat aircraft, hope I'm wrong and you guys can tell me how awesome it is.

One thing I wonder is the fascination or many of us with multi seat complex aircraft. If they model F-15E, F-14, A-6, F-111, etc, You need that second guy to do a lot to properly employ the aircraft. How many of us played games like ArmA 1 to 3 that allow multi seat helicopters and it was/is awful. The lag always gets in the way, you would be trying to shoot at something as the gunner but can't because pilot can't see what you see and vice versa. The AI is terrible as a pilot/gunner,/WSO/GIB.

That's certainly something to keep in mind, but in the past simulation games, you could have gotten by by switching manually between positions while leaving the plane flying straight and level or using the autopilot for that when possible (e.g. F-14B on a long range intercept, F-15E or Tornado on a TFR controlled low level approach to target, etc.). I'm convinced something similar can be done in DCS even if the same operations will be more complex and time-consuming than in the older sims (especially with some level of assistance by the AI).

TBH, I enjoyed flying those three twin-seat planes that way 20 years ago more than any other sim since, so I'm convinced I'd manage to enjoy them in DCS as well, with an added bonus option of flying them with a friend.

mjmorrow, thing is, whether the AIM-7 used or not in ODS doesn't really change much here since, it is certain that unlike the case with Mirage 2000C, there is no F-16 version that is only SARH capable and wasn't later upgraded to include ARH as well. SARH F-16 and F-15E are contemporary at least. So if we get F-16 module, it will almost certainly be the SPAMRAAM you fear. At most, it can be also AIM-7 compatible and missions can be built without AMRAAMs, but, this would be exact same possibility we already currently have with F-15C anyway.

Even if F-16s with SARH only turns out to be thing in ODS, this would still mean they got upgraded to AIM-120 2 years later anyway.

Early-Mid 80s F-16 is IR only without any BVR capability and I really doubt a development studio will do that if we get a F-16. May be with multiple variants, or, as we already can with F-15C, mission restricted loadouts. But I would be very surprised if anyone publish a F-16 without AMRAAM for DCS.

With apparent speculation that EDs F/A-18C Hornet could be released next year.I think Razbam needs to focus on the T-2 Buckeye and A-7 Corsair II next before we get the Strike Eagle.

Have you seen the videos where the team is testing the T-2 Buckeye? The videos aren't even that new, but the T-2 Buckeye really looks sharp. The T-2 Buckeye ought to be a really cool DCS add-on. I totally agree with you on the F-15E, too.

I have to say though, I am encouraged by the fact that the Razbam team modeled the Mirage 2000 they could get the best information on, rather than modeling the best Mirage 2000. The version they modeled is SARH only in BVR. I am really thankful for that. I intend to sim fly the Mirage a lot and SARH requirements are going to make BVR kills much more challenging than launch, run away, repeat.

I am also going to sim fly against the Mirage some times. If I am using the F-14, I don't want to be spamraamed. I am just not interested in being target practice for droves of players chucking dozens of AIM-120's to and fro with glee and reckless abandon. In a multiplayer environment, featuring out of date Mig-21's, A10c, and SARH only Mirage and F-14 fighters, fielding the AIM-120 is just not going to be that engaging, interesting, or sportsman like, from my point of view. SARH only makes planes, like the Mirage or the F-14, are more of a challenge, for me and for my opponents, when I am sim flying against the Mirage or F-14. SARH only also gives players taking on the unenviable challenge of sim flying planes like the A-10 or the Mig-21 a little more wiggle room. Their allies can defend them from SARH only fighters. If a SARH only fighter wants to down a A10 or a Mig-21 in BVR, that player will have to support that SARH missile. Escort fighters can force the attacking fighter to give up supporting that missile and save the A10 or Mig-21. With the AIM 120, the escorts might kill the attacker, but lose the A10 or Mig-21 all the same.

I would be much more enthusiastic about a possible F-15E, if I knew for sure that the team was going to introduce a SARH only version of the F-15E and keep the AIM-120 off the table. :thumbup: MJ

The F-14A is not SARH only, if you are referring to the AIM-7 missile.

 

I would be much more enthusiastic about a possible F-15E, if I knew for sure that the team was going to introduce a SARH only version of the F-15E and keep the AIM-120 off the table. :thumbup: MJ

Why do you hate AIM-120s? :(

I'm sure you know, but...you can restrict weapons through mission design.

I have to say though, I am encouraged by the fact that the Razbam team modeled the Mirage 2000 they could get the best information on, rather than modeling the best Mirage 2000. The version they modeled is SARH only in BVR. I am really thankful for that. I would be much more enthusiastic about a possible F-15E, if I knew for sure that the team was going to introduce a SARH only version of the F-15E.

One of the reasons I am so enthusiastic about getting the F-14 into DCS is that it won't carry the AIM-120.

Why this stubborn insistence on SARH-only variants when it's something which can be easily limited by the scenario designer?

Why this stubborn insistence on SARH-only variants when it's something which can be easily limited by the scenario designer?

...And the AIM-120 can just as easily be added by the scenario designer. I have seen the AIM-120 employed against an Mig-15, without provocation, on free flight server, where the server operator expressly forbade the use of weapons in writing. Express written bans on the employment of the AIM-120 does not prevent the use of the AIM-120. Show me the populated DCS multiplayer servers where the AIM-120 is consistently left out of missions. If the AIM-120 is available for the F-15E in a mission, you are going to guarantee me that F-15E players are going to stick to the AIM-7, so the mirage sim pilots and F-14 sim pilots can have a word in edgewise? They will part with an available advantage sanctioned in game, just to be nice guys and gals? if I don't carry my 520D, so players like Hadwell can have a better chance of getting in close and making a kill, the other players on my team are going to likely do the same, follow my lead, or are they going to tell me that they paid for their Mirage 2000c add-on and will do as they please, within what is permitted in the mission, including use the 530D on a parakeet, if they can do so? I can count on uniform sportsman like behavior, in an environment where that behavior is not required? As the saying goes, "Opportunity makes the thief and the thief without opportunity is resigned to a life of an honest person. " I like my mission planners and multiplayer players resigned to a life of SARH only DCS level ASM/ PFM and ASM/EFM add-ons. :smilewink:

No, if the devs leave something off the aircraft, its a PITA to put a weapon on (E.G. AIM-54 on F-15C). Edit: It takes a lot of lua editing, I mean...and I really don't feel like doing that on a strike eagle, you've seen how many pylons they have, right? :D

If that wasn't an AIM-120 on a Fagot, it could have been a Sparrow, or a heater, or guns, or an RN-28...that comes down to a player being a jack-you-know-what and bad mission design. Its pretty easy to disable all weapons (besides guns, IIRC) at all airfields...

Edit 2: To clear up that first sentence, I DID NOT mean that AIM-54 was somehow left off an F-15, that was an analogy and i probably could have worded that a bit better. A better analogy would have been AGM-65E on A-10C, for example...although that was removed back in 1.2.4.

No, if the devs leave something off the aircraft, its a PITA to put a weapon on (E.G. AIM-54 on F-15C). Edit: It takes a lot of lua editing, I mean...and I really don't feel like doing that on a strike eagle, you've seen how many pylons they have, right? :D

 

If that wasn't an AIM-120 on a Fagot, it could have been a Sparrow, or a heater, or guns, or an RN-28...that comes down to a player being a jack-you-know-what and bad mission design. Its pretty easy to disable all weapons (besides guns, IIRC) at all airfields...

If the whole point is to just to get a F-15E into DCS, what is the difference? If we have a high fidelity ASM/ EFM F-15E that is SARH only, why is that a big issue or problem for players supporting the introduction of the F-15E? I wanted a Mirage 2000. We have one. it is not the most advanced version, but that is good, it will better complement and fit into the big picture, better fit in with other 4th generation rides being introduced into DCS World. We have a SARH only DCS F-14, a SARH only DCS Mirage, so why is it a big issue if we have a SARH only F-15E? Why would we need the AIM-120 to be on the DCS F-15E? :thumbup: MJ

What's your problem with the 120? The plane should have the weapons it can use in the real world. You shouldn't leave on out because 1 person (you) doesn't want it.

fidelity comes first in DCS, at least that's why I am personally here. I hate SPAMRAMs but if an aircraft has it in real it must have it in DCS. If you dont want, you can script your missions not to have them. There are servers where certain weapons are disabled.

By that argument, why not have an F-15E with guns only? :D

Having AIM-120s is very realistic on an F-15E, they only went ~2 years without it (1990-late 1991, IIRC). Your F-14 and M2KC analogies are irrelevant, IMO, because the F-14 had Phoenixes (yeah yeah, midcourse SARH :))...and Mirage 2000C never had ARH weapons, ever...unless you count that anti-ship missile that people talked about or something...

While having a SARH-only F-15E wouldn't stop most of us from flying it, it reduces your survivability BVR, trade rate goes down, and taking a Strike Eagle into a BVR slugfest with Sparrows wouldn't be regularly enjoyable ** see my note below**. I would much rather have 2 AIM-120x than 2 AIM-7 for self escort on a ground attack mission, and with some loadouts you might not even be able to carry Sparrows, so having 2-4 AIM-9s for self defense? I've done that enough in the A-10!

I suppose that the SARH-only debate comes down to what you're looking for in a sim: realistic-ish gameplay or simply enjoying the aircraft...I like both, and I think having more options is definitely the way to go for that! :thumbup:

**That said, I do take 044 loads (4 -7s, 4 -9s, that is) sometimes in the F-15C...but I also find myself in more merges than I'd like to be in, with lower KDR, less successful missions, etc...add that with a reduced G-limit on a loaded Echo, not going to be fun.

If the whole point is to just to get a F-15E into DCS, what is the difference? If we have a high fidelity ASM/ EFM F-15E that is SARH only, why is that a big issue or problem for players supporting the introduction of the F-15E? I wanted a Mirage 2000. We have one. it is not the most advanced version, but that is good, it will better complement and fit into the big picture, better fit in with other 4th generation rides being introduced into DCS World. We have a SARH only DCS F-14, a SARH only DCS Mirage, so why is it a big issue if we have a SARH only F-15E? Why would we need the AIM-120 to be on the DCS F-15E? :thumbup: MJ

The F-14A is not SARH only, if you are referring to the AIM-7 missile.

The F-14 is not AMRAAM capable. The USN chose to fund the FLIR instead of the AIM-120 upgrade, so the only ARH missile the Tomcat has is the Phoenix. The Phoenix wasn't carried when knowingly going up against fighters because the palettes reduced the maneuverability of the F-14.

What's your problem with the 120? The plane should have the weapons it can use in the real world. You shouldn't leave on out because 1 person (you) doesn't want it.

The F-15E did not always carry the AIM-120. Sure, some Mirage 2000s can carry the Exocet, some Mirage 2000's can carry active homing air medium range missiles, but not the Mirage 2000c modeled in DCS World. ecause a Mirage 2000 can carry any of the above does not mean that the one modeled in DCS should do so. We were not given the best Mirage, with the best weapons, the best of everything, we are getting a high fidelity simulation with ASM/ EFM, and SARH only capabilities.

Even the Mirage 2000 modeled in game, though not nearly the newest version of the Mirage 2000, required the team to sometimes make educated guesses about the plane's systems. I think it is reasonable to assume that the newer the F-15E version modeled in DCS, the harder it will be to achieve a high fidelity simulation of systems in the F-15E. The SARH issue not withstanding, if we get a DCS F15E. What I would want, a high fidelity ASM/ EFM F-15E with the minimum of guesswork put into F-15E systems modelling, and SARH only capabilities, does not require stripping a DCS F-15E of any weapon that it actually did carry.

As for the (you) stuff, please. If I was out for just me, all about team me, myself and I, I would ask for a Razbam F-22 Raptor, Kayos. :megalol: I am considering how the use of the AIM-120 impacts the big multiplayer picture. I am not looking at the F-15E as an isolated matter that exists in a vacuum and I am certainly not just out for me. Have you noticed DCS players, like Hadwell, asking for others to kindly leave the AIM-120 at home? He could use a AIM-120 capable machine and rack up crazy kills, but he takes a really hard plane, the Mig-21, and voluntarily disadvantages his own person. He might not agree with my conclusions, he may not agree with me on introducing a SARH only F-15E, but I did I consider his interests, I did consider his Mig-21. I come to my own conclusions. Rather than kindly ask future F-15E pilots to leave the AIM-120 at base, I support a SARH only F-15E. This is not necessarily what Hadwell would suggest doing, but I do my own thinking, just as he does his own thinking, and so on. I am thinking about me and I am thinking about other DCS players, though I ultimately speak only for myself and no other person, kayos. Agree or disagree with my conclusions on introducing a SARH only F-15E, but let us not get into this silly business about (you)... :smilewink:

:thumbup: MJ

mjmorrow.

i don't understand your obsession really. You are alianeting everybody against you and making it personal. The F15E can carry AIM-120 in real and so it should in DCS. The M2000C cant carry MICA in real and so it is in DCS, you said that yourself. So your comparison is totally wrong.

If you find kills with AIM-120 too easy and no fun like I do, then dont fly in servers where they have them.

We want mod as close to real as possible, dont hijack the community just because it annoys you to be shot by AMRAAMs.

The F-15E from ~1992 and up should be well capable of using AIM-120s. And this guesswork business? lol, there will always be guesswork in any DCS module.

No, if the devs leave something off the aircraft, its a PITA to put a weapon on (E.G. AIM-54 on F-15C). Edit: It takes a lot of lua editing, I mean...and I really don't feel like doing that on a strike eagle, you've seen how many pylons they have, right? :D/

 

If you're talking about weapons normally used on the F-15E being omitted, there are easier ways to have it added.

 

If you are actually talking about loading an AIM-54 on an F-15...well not to put too fine a point on it but...that's cheating.

 

I can tell you for FACT I kick people from our server for stupidity like that. The AIM-54 was designed and carried by 1 aircraft - The F-14. You are free to do as you wish in your own games but complaining you cant add a fictional weapon to the aircraft because the DEVs made it too difficult is a little silly.

You might be missing my point there.

I'm pretty sure I meant that theoretically adding an AIM-120 to a flyable F-15E would be annoying. AIM-54 on F-15C was an analogy, I fully agree about using that crap on servers.

It does make one hell of a private BVR practice mission, though! :)

**Edit**: BTW, your slash is outside the brackets on the end of the quote.

You might be missing my point there.

 

I'm pretty sure I meant that theoretically adding an AIM-120 to a flyable F-15E would be annoying. AIM-54 on F-15C was an analogy, I fully agree about using that crap on servers.

 

It does make one hell of a private BVR practice mission, though! :)

 

 

**Edit**: BTW, your slash is outside the brackets on the end of the quote.

Yeah... Sorry, I thought you were condoning unrealistic loads. My apologies sir!

**Yeah... just saw THAT too..."Phfat Phfingers"

mjmorrow, I like old fighters with no active radar missiles probably more than you do. And I really wish DCS having many 3rd generation fighters so such battles can be had with variety in period servers.

However, this doesn't mean we should say "lets cut all of the active missiles". This really is no different from the attitude saying "no more old junk planes, no more useless props, no more lame trainers". It is the same disregard for what DCS can be, and what other people may enjoy, even if you or me won't.

Mirage sample really does not work since it really is another version and said version, to this day, still does not have MICA missiles, and will not. But almost all F-15,F-16 and F-18 versions got AIM-120 as soon as it became available. As for the F-14, you know, 200km ranged Phoenix, while may not be the most agile missile, is an active radar guided missile like the AMRAAM. I am pretty sure RAZBAM did not choose Mirage 2000C RDI S5 for balance, no... if I recall correctly they have stated this is the only version they could find enough info, and like you have said even then they had to apply quite a bit of guesswork. French are particularly notorious about secrecy when it comes to fighter aircraft. If they could, I'm pretty sure they would have done a Mirage 2000-5 instead. That is the price to pay for 4th gen fighters apparently, some guesswork creeping into module.

However, we WILL still get many more fighter modules with active radar guided air to air missiles equipped : F-18C, Eurofighter Typhoon. Especially the Typhoon will most likely make almost all other aircraft hug the mountains like a MiG-21 in servers.

I am one of the people who pretty much fight on forums so that unrealistic / never serverd on version weapons will not be added to modules for gameplay's sake just because people ask them. I stand by that point of view. In my opinion, if people want Exocet and ARMAT on Mirage 2000C RDI, or they want Skyflash on AJS-37, or AMRAAM on F-14, well they should mod them in, but these shuouldn't be allowed on default integrity check / servers. On the same way, I can not justify asking for realistic weapons that were equipped on an aircraft version in real life be cut out of game for same gameplay reasons, if F-15E and F-16C had AMRAAM, they should have it in a hypotethical DCS module as well.

As a matter of fact, F-18C and F-16C are some of the 4th gen aircraft that are ARH missile capable and are fairly declassified and possible to simulate pretty deep. We are getting one, and there is another high fidelity sim for the other, and we will most likely get that one in DCS too some time in future. Than again, some studios can apparently earn permissions and access to even 4.5 gen aircraft like Typhoon sometimes, as in VEAO's case. Those aircraft did not even exist without some form of active radar missile in service.

So, these missiles are coming, and will come to DCS no matter if everyone likes them or not. And they should, this is a sandbox sim. Not every one likes WW II birds or old jets either but, hey, they are coming and I hope they will keep coming!

As I have said, unlike with Mirage 2000C, you just can't say "this is a SARH only version" for F-16C, F-18C or F-15E. So, should we than not have these aircraft at all? I mean I can justify "please no made up über-ufo 5th generation modules", I say that myself. But a pretty well done F-18,16 or 15E is possible, so why neuter them for gameplay's sake, unrealistically ?

Everyone seems twisted up over what variant of F-16s used AMMRAMs...I'm not that worried about OCA/DCA because the Air Forces uses F-16s for SEAD and strike more than CAP.

I'm looking for ANY version of the with the Harm Targeting System (HTS) and associated goodies. Block 52 one would be nice but I just don't care as long as we can get the HTS.

I'm gonna toss this out there for everyone to noodle while I am at work. DCS is about fidelity, realism, simulating the real thing. it's not an "Arcade game" in the traditional sense of the word.

If you want an idea of what might be coming to DCS in the future...I'd look at what AI Aircraft have the nicest exterior models...Compare the level of detail of the F-15 / F-16 / F-18 with some of the planes NOT being talked about on wish lists.

Some are pretty detailed for just an AI aircraft. Just my 2 cents.

Sierra

-snipped out-

Fully agree! HARMs + HTS would be amazing if (well, more like when) we get a Viper!

BTW, Razbam, any chance of GBU-15/AGM-130? :D

Everyone seems twisted up over what variant of F-16s used AMMRAMs...I'm not that worried about OCA/DCA because the Air Forces uses F-16s for SEAD and strike more than CAP.

 

I'm looking for ANY version of the with the Harm Targeting System (HTS) and associated goodies. Block 52 one would be nice but I just don't care as long as we can get the HTS.

 

I'm gonna toss this out there for everyone to noodle while I am at work. DCS is about fidelity, realism, simulating the real thing. it's not an "Arcade game" in the traditional sense of the word.

 

If you want an idea of what might be coming to DCS in the future...I'd look at what AI Aircraft have the nicest exterior models...Compare the level of detail of the F-15 / F-16 / F-18 with some of the planes NOT being talked about on wish lists.

 

Some are pretty detailed for just an AI aircraft. Just my 2 cents.

 

Sierra

I want the Harm Targeting System too !! I'm assuming that the F-18 will be able to carry the HARM as well. That should get me through until we eventually get a F-16.