Nahen

Firstly: There are quite a lot of women/girls flying at DCS. Quite a few of them kick "real macho guys" butts pretty well. Secondly: If someone wants to play "themselves" in a game, let them play RPGs, FPSs, or other CSs ... DCS is supposed to be a simulator - not a simulator of a man, woman, dog, stone or tree ... It's supposed to be a simulator of planes/helicopters !! Can someone show me a plane in the real world that speaks in the voice the pilot wants? Or maybe the Pilots in the F-15E can request that their WSO address them with the voice of Charlie Chaplin? Or Shrek? I see more and more people coming here who probably don't know what they're doing here... When are the force fields, lasers, flying boxes with "powerups" and "boosts"? Why don't you go play Warthunder or World of Warplanes instead of making up such nonsense here...

Still in BVR, the basis is speed and altitude. Still the F-15C is the most effective fighter of the era of jet fighters. And I'd venture to say that apart from the F-22 and F-35, no non-stealth fighter can surpass the F-15C/EX in air combat. And let me add that air combat is not same as dogfight. Dogfight - VvR - is panic, stupidity and imbecility. No one with the potential of the F-15C will enter a fight "for fun" where the odds are always 50/50. The F-15 was made for ranged combat. And since he's doing pretty well in a dogfight, well, none of the pilots in their right mind will be pushing to it.

The question is whether the A-G mode capabilities were "programmed" outside the tests or only the radar had such capabilities but on board the "operational" F-15C was not prepared to handle them? The lack of "extra" lines of code or algorithms may affect the work of the whole - e.g. on the speed of data processing. I don't know, I'm guessing/combine.

Which does not change the fact that the F-15C/E will kick ass of the F/A-18C/E

And it's not like a radar that is dedicated only to searching for flying targets has different characteristics of the beam and the antenna itself than a radar that is also supposed to search for targets on the ground? I do not know, but I assume that the algorithm of sifting interference, target selection, and their classification are completely different, and each "additional" element in the work or software slows down the operation of the device. If the AN/APG-70 - in its entirety and not its elements mixed with the AN/APG-63 - after switching from A-G to A-A mode bypasses everything related to A-G in its entirety, I can assume that it is the same. However, I bet that mounting the F-15E radar instead of the AN/APG-63 v.3 in the last F-15Cs was rather the result of saving money when it was known that these were the last planes with no prospects of maintaining them long enough to invest in further development and modernization of the AN/APG-63 I always assumed that if something is for everything - in this case for A-A and A-G, it is weaker than dedicated solutions. I'm probably wrong...

Subsequent versions of radars dedicated to the F-15C were specialized only for use against airborne targets. Which automatically puts them in a much better position than everyone else, where their work is "split" between A-A and A-G. The very issue of handling from the pilot's point of view is something definitely in favor of the AN/APG-63. Of course, if we are talking about air to air use.

From the very beginning, I argued that there should be no artificial WSO at all. Two-person option only. How many problems would that close before they would arise...

??? Max speed? Max altitude? Max range? Max loadout (in kg/lbs)? What do you mean by better performance? The F/A-18 and F-15E are completely different planes - none of them has "better avionics", each has a different one, dedicated to a given machine. And by the way: Someone mentioned that Strike Eagle doesn't have anti-radiolocation like HARM missiles. He doesn't need them, he has F-16s for that in USAF But I don't know how many they take on board :)

Get your ass off from your computers and go pick up girls on the F-15E. Let everyone pick up the girl WSO that suits him I do not see any problem

Somehow that doesn't appeal to me. I prefer to "fight" with a thinking man than with AI, even in the form of pixies dismantling my plane from the inside...

And I don't want Now what?

I think relase be in 202........

There was one that had a fuel leak problem, there was one that had a hydraulic problem, there was one that broke in half in flight... So what? Maybe let's make a bet - after how much time everyone who gets optional damage and failures in a module that flies will turn it all off to just keep flying. Since such a curiosity ... I will play a few times and then turn it off. In multiplayer PvE or PvP missions, it will always be disabled anyway. Why? because it generates problems, moreover, today there is such an option (random failures) in the mission editor, I wonder how many people use it? Sure, so be it, but at the very end of the list of other much more important issues.

Half of those flying in DCS complain that they have to do full aligment on publics servers, and You want to add failures to them

You can want it, you can't bend reality anyway... CFTs have INTEGRAL pylons for armament. They cannot be removed from the tanks. Is it hard to understand? F-15E sometimes fly without CFT - so far never in combat - but CFT without suspension points?? Some heresy... unless in F-16...

This module does, and there's nothing we can do about it.

TRUE...

Or maybe it is because fighter (Western) planes have been one of the safest machines in the world for several decades? For each hour of flight there are several to several hours of inspections, services, tests and verification of each of the systems. Maybe that's why it's not worth displaying in the game something that happens marginally, maybe in 0.1% of the flight time of these machines? Before we start out argue whether it is worth it or not, it may be worth checking how many failures important for the safety of the machine and the pilot in fighter planes such as the F-15, F-16, F / A-18, M- 2000 etc., may to take place in statistic year of use them. We put the number of hours flown example in the USAF during the year of such F-15s or F-16s and compare with the number of failures that threatened the machine and the pilot during the flight... Maybe that's why people want more weapons, more systems working, more paint options, more realistic airframe behavior, landing gear, etc than simulated failures which are completely negligible from a game point of view.

The "ground service" repairs everything except the damaged tires on the wheels. If you mean tire damage, unfortunately it is so and you will not do anything about it.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/the-drive-staging/message-editor%2F1517874182405-1280px-mcdonnell_douglas_f-15c_with_the_conformal_fast_pack_fuel_tanks_060905-f-1234s-017.jpg?auto=webp&optimize=high&quality=70&width=1440 https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/18259/its-back-to-the-future-for-u-s-f-15c-eagles-and-conformal-fuel-tanks

Ok now is OK. ;D

After today update i get this.... Please Help?

Autoexec " i made" but unfortunately apart from visual and sound effects still AWACS and its messages are completely broken ... It breaks off, is thrown out for a dozen at a time. Does not respond to inquiries. I am flying the F-15C, the question is whether it is only in the F-15C module or all FC3 modules or in general AI AWACS broke down after this helloween hit. ???

Thanks!