DCS: F-15C Poll

[draconus]

32 minutes ago, killkenny1 said:

Yeah, I know, It's not as good as C in A-A and so on, but it still will be decent, and people who crave for F-15 will still buy it.

Yes, we will, but will also still wait for the C.

[statrekmike]

I voted "Yes" not because I personally have a lot of love for the F-15C (I really don't) but instead because it would fill a very important role in DCS's current aircraft list. Right now, we have 2000's era F-16, F/A-18, Harrier, and A-10C. When you look at that list, there is one very important role that isn't really represented and that is a modern, true, dedicated air superiority fighter. If DCS were ever to opt to do a modern F-15C version, it would slot in quite naturally with what we already have and fill a capability hole that isn't really being filled right now. 

 

  Now, before everyone jumps on me. I am aware that one could argue that the F-14 module kinda fills a similar role and in some ways, that is correct. That said, there is potential for a 2000's era F-15C while there really doesn't seem to be potential for a F-14D or something to that effect. 

 

  Again. I am not saying ED or a third party needs to stop everything and do this but I can see how it would fit very well with what we already have even if it isn't exactly my first choice as a purchase (personally speaking).

[henshao]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: there is something wrong with your flight sim when it features the entire Teen series and the one which is best at BVR is the F-16!

[bies]

12 hours ago, GGTharos said:

You can see from the charts that the -220 equipped eagle leaves the -100 equipped eagle in the dust above mach 1.  Not a small difference, literally eat-my-dirt sort of difference.

 

Is that true?

 

Do you have this charts?

 

What is more F-15C would have to deal with additional mass of the airframe.

I mean i would like F-15C engines to be more powerful than common figures for uninstalled thrust, but it's hard to believe. I would be really glad to be proven wrong.

[GGTharos]

5 hours ago, bies said:

Is that true?

 

Yes,

 

Quote

Do you have this charts?

 

Also yes.

 

Quote

What is more F-15C would have to deal with additional mass of the airframe.

I mean i would like F-15C engines to be more powerful than common figures for uninstalled thrust, but it's hard to believe. I would be really glad to be proven wrong.

 

About 1000-2000lbs more empty weight.  2-3000lbs more fuel when the tanks are full, but basically the empty weight isn't the end of the world.  There's no performance difference on the charts at the same weight for subsonic sustained g (but of course it means in the C you'd have that much less fuel compared to the A). 

Edited February 26, 2021 by GGTharos

[Berserk]

5 hours ago, bies said:

What is more F-15C would have to deal with additional mass of the airframe.

I mean i would like F-15C engines to be more powerful than common figures for uninstalled thrust, but it's hard to believe. I would be really glad to be proven wrong.

 

What real life F-15 pilot (not we - armchair generals drinking liquor) flying jets for 20 years, Squadron Commander flight in Gulf says about F-15A vs F-15C differences:

 

Quote

A--older radar (in days of old prior to upgrade), slightly less internal fuel, lighter overall weight. Better nose authority and rate in BFM. At one time, no CMDs or ICS (jammers).

C--more gas, newer avionics, bit more weight.

Lines got blurry when ANG got old As and radars and RWRs updated. Don't know for a fact but believe all combat coded Eagles have an ICS now. So...an updated A and a C are very similar. Much easier to transition between airplanes (basically transparent) than to a Viper guy going from block to block.

Fly safe,

Albie

 

[dundun92]

9 hours ago, bies said:

charts?

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/645686/

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/645693/

[Wizard_03]

On 2/25/2021 at 1:26 PM, dundun92 said:

the widespread ignorance on proper AMRAAM tactics and BVR employment really shocks me. If you think ARH BVR is simply about thowing AMRAAMs "from the other end of the map" without tactics, or that kinetics dont matter, you really have no clue what youre talking about.

 

This right here, I get the sense that a few people are disregarding the fact, that all the raw performance the F-15C offers, has a direct correlation to how far that missile goes and how deadly it is.

 

Even the FC3 version with its slew of low fidelity, and simplified systems model is still THE biggest threat in the game right now. It almost can’t be touched, in realistic conditions, with someone at a high experience level behind the wheel. 

Edited February 27, 2021 by Wizard_03

[jaguara5]

On 12/7/2020 at 6:39 PM, jaguara5 said:

Day 1 buy . 

Have already voted, it would be amazing to see a full fidelity F-15C module. But hasn't in the meantime ED said there will be no such module, because C version is not multirole capable ?

[henshao]

9 hours ago, Wizard_03 said:

This right here, I get the sense that a few people are disregarding the fact, that all the raw performance the F-15C offers, has a direct correlation to how far that missile goes and how deadly it is.

 

Even the FC3 version with its slew of low fidelity, and simplified systems model is still THE biggest threat in the game right now. It almost can’t be touched, in realistic conditions, with someone at a high experience level behind the wheel. 

 

 

I would say the F-16 with its datalink and superior radar range makes it the biggest threat in the game at the moment, as it isn't very far off in terms of kinematic performance

[bies]

11 hours ago, jaguara5 said:

Have already voted, it would be amazing to see a full fidelity F-15C module. But hasn't in the meantime ED said there will be no such module, because C version is not multirole capable ?

 

They said that but i think it's more a matter of priorities.

There is only one more multirole aircraft possible to model, F-4 Phantom, all other are single role. After Phantom ED will have to make single role modules.

 

F-111, F-117, F-104, F-106, Tornado IDS, Tornado ADF, Draken, A-6, A-7, F-8, MiG-29, MiG-23, MiG-27, MiG-25, MiG-31, Tu-128, Su-15, Su-27 etc. - all are single role, just like F-15A/C with it's rudimentary dumb bombs CCIP.

[henshao]

3 hours ago, bies said:

 

They said that but i think it's more a matter of priorities.

There is only one more multirole aircraft possible to model, F-4 Phantom, all other are single role. After Phantom ED will have to make single role modules.

 

F-111, F-117, F-104, F-106, Tornado IDS, Tornado ADF, Draken, A-6, A-7, F-8, MiG-29, MiG-23, MiG-27, MiG-25, MiG-31, Tu-128, Su-15, Su-27 etc. - all are single role, just like F-15A/C with it's rudimentary dumb bombs CCIP.

 

you know something I never realized I was curious about - how much ground attack capability was left over on the Tornado ADV? perhaps a question deserving of its own thread

[bies]

2 hours ago, henshao said:

 

you know something I never realized I was curious about - how much ground attack capability was left over on the Tornado ADV? perhaps a question deserving of its own thread

 

Yes, no point of going off topic, only thing I can say real life Tornado IDS and ADF Pilot stated Tornado was never much of a fighter and overall IDS was way better than ADF in what it was designed to do.

[Wizard_03]

14 hours ago, henshao said:

 

I would say the F-16 with its datalink and superior radar range makes it the biggest threat in the game at the moment, as it isn't very far off in terms of kinematic performance

It's quite far off, the F-15C is faster and can fly much higher. And it can stay in those states for a much more reasonable amount of time, with more missiles. It's stores, also are laid out better. Put bags, six missiles, and in the future an ECM pod on and the F-16 becomes something of a minivan. 

 

I will admit The F-16 is easier to fly and can still be max performed more or less by rookies. But just like the tomcat there's a huge difference with an experienced eagle driver at the controls. Someone that knows that jet really well can put themselves in situations where it's advantages start to stack and you end up defensive, pretty much the whole way up too the merge. No other fighter has that potential in the game right now. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 28, 2021 by Wizard_03

[GGTharos]

15 hours ago, henshao said:

I would say the F-16 with its datalink and superior radar range makes it the biggest threat in the game at the moment, as it isn't very far off in terms of kinematic performance

 

You haven't seen an F-15 doing its MiG-25 impression then I guess

[IkarusC42B Pilot]

40-45€

[Harker]

 
I would say the F-16 with its datalink and superior radar range makes it the biggest threat in the game at the moment, as it isn't very far off in terms of kinematic performance

The F-16's radar in DCS is vastly overperforming compared to the real APG-68(V)5 though. You can currently detect fighter sized targets at 80+ NM and even STT them as well. That number should be closer to 45-50 NM, according to public data.

It often has a better detection range than the APG-73 of the Hornet (in DCS), which shouldn't be the case.

[henshao]

1 hour ago, Harker said:

The F-16's radar in DCS is vastly overperforming compared to the real APG-68(V)5 though. You can currently detect fighter sized targets at 80+ NM and even STT them as well. That number should be closer to 45-50 NM, according to public data.

It often has a better detection range than the APG-73 of the Hornet (in DCS), which shouldn't be the case.

Yeah, funny that

 

 

[Harker]

41 minutes ago, henshao said:

Yeah, funny that

 

 

Ooof. I just tested and the F-15C, FA-18C, F-16C and JF-17. Two MiG-29s, hot, high alt. The Eagle is more or less on par with the Jeff for detection range (~55 NM), the Hornet hit 60 (which is more or less correct) and Viper 60-65 (higher than public numbers I've seen). The Eagle had the lowest tracking range, I couldn't get into STT before ~45 NM.

[kseremak]

Yes, yes, yes my favourite fighter of all times. But some earlier variant which actually made 104-0 record making his hands dirty, F-15A or C from Israeli-Arab wars or Operation Desert Storm when Eagle ruled the skies!

For sure not another 2005-2010 spAMRAAM when proud Eagle became only a cheap outdated brother of the F-22...

[reece146]

FWIW, full fidelity F-15C would be day one purchase for me.  Fox-1, Fox-3, whatever variant is practical to model, don't really care.

[nessuno0505]

The real F-15 is the C rather than the strike eagle. I'm not sure I'd buy a pure AA fighter (I'm more into AG) but I vote yes. Bluefor 4th gen are ending and ED has to find something else to sell, a 15c would be appreciated IMHO.

[MAXsenna]

Bring it on!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Furiz]

Gen 4 we only have US jets, and a Jeff which is Pakistan/China developed, lets se some EU stuff and Russain stuff, don't like them spending time on another US gen4 jet.

 

Rafale, Gripen, SU-27, MiG-29 (coming I believe) etc...

Edited June 8, 2021 by Furiz

[bies]

Even JA-37 Viggen, Gripen's predecessor, is impossible to model being classified, Heatblur tried.

 

Rafale will never be in DCS as full fidelity module. The heart of Rafale is strictly classified AESA radar and even more classified Spectra EW suite. ED stated EF is possible only because exEF pilot is making it - ED said they would never be able to negotiate the license.