Nahen

Maybe you will enlighten me and show me what percentage of all F-15 kills is on the F-15E? And how much of a role did version E play during the Cold War when deterrence was the primary role of the weapon? It was then that the "legend" of the F-15 was created.

Despite what you wrote, I still support what I wrote above - the essence of a jet fighter is not the F-15E but the F-15A / C. If someone "sits" in the military aviation for a while, the fighter will answer the F-15C, never the F-15E in relation to this airframe. The whole legend of the undefeated F-15 was created by the single-seat fighter versions A and C and to the I versions exported to Israel, which largely contributed to the current result of kills and their ratio to "losses".

Definition of "fighter jet" make F-15A/C no E...

Since the F-15E is better at everything than the F-16C, it means that while RAZBAM releases the F-15E, the ED should remove the F-16C as a module ... If someone writes that AH-64 is better than OH-58 in the reality of DCS, I do not understand why there is such a Mirage, AV-8B, A-10 ?? After all, everything that these planes do can be done with the F-16, F / A-18 faster, from a greater distance, safer and not yet get shot down ... Why in the DCS Spitfire, P-47, P-51D, BF-109, FW-190? After all, it would be enough for the P-47 to do exactly the same as the rest ... And more seriously - if the creators of OH-58D assumed that they were making a module for cooperation with AH-64, they shot themselves in the knee. If they assumed that they are making a module that is to enable cooperation with UH-1, A-10, AH-64, F-16C, F-15E (in the future), then they have the only correct vision and can make the most useful module for today in DCS . Why? Because each of these modules has a problem with hitting a target covered with clouds and fog. And sending an attack helicopter to be "flashlights" for high-speed attack aircraft is stupid and unnecessary use of force - and basically a waste of his potential. I will not buy AH-64 - but I am waiting for Kiowa. Whereas UH-1 in tandem with OH-58 will finally be able to "see" threats and defend itself effectively - defending does not mean fighting.

As of today, only one game gives you the opportunity to combine ground forces - including infantry - with real support from aviation CAS where players are everywhere - i.e. infantry, vehicles, helicopters and airplanes. Unfortunately, the way of "scaling" the world, and thus the size of the maps, are insufficient to REALLY recreate the activities of aviation. And as for fun in DCS - those who are on the ground have something to do to reach the designated points and complete their tasks. Pilots who are to support them - if they want and like relane flying, they will also not be bored taking off at 10 o'clock, flying to the fighting area for another 40 minutes and then take the holding for up to an hour or two, waiting for a call from the ground. This is REALISM, not an hour long mission, including 60 minutes of continuous fighting with millions of enemies and attacking hundreds of targets on the ground. Sometimes missions lasting 3-4 hours in which you are not fighting are better than the "intense" ones. Therefore, there is no problem to combine it all in DCS, as long as the "engine" of the game - the development of ground units and their use by player would be properly elaborated. But I don't think it will happen too quickly, if it ever happens ...

Forget about "helping" AH-64 ... The AH-64 will do just fine on its own - especially when it gets a working radar. Kiowa will only disturb him. The Kiowa will be a great complement to the UH-1 during rescue missions. And only for this I will buy it.

If it is to be where it really is, it must be on the right panels in the place where in the F-15C - the right panel of the pilot, and exactly in the same place - the right panel of WSO Maybe everything is still under development. I mean, we will wait a long time.

Does the fact that the Bugatti Veron on the Ehra-Lessien circuit of Volkswagen AG reached 407.8 km / h and its owners run a maximum of 200 km / h on a daily basis mean that its maximum speed is 200 km / h? If you understand it, it's nice if not, well ... F-15E is able to reach over 3000 km / h If you think otherwise, your problem. Since the regulations say that you cannot drive faster than 140 km / h on the highway, it means that all cars have a maximum speed of 140 km / h ?? Nice idea...

Where have the "oxygen" clocks/indicators on the right front and rear panels gone?

Show me RELIABLE technical data according to you? Link to a RELIABLE page. I'm waiting. You are a F-15E pilot, I will ask for data to confirm this unequivocally. Because I'm a death star pilot ...

https://www.boeing.com/defense/f-15/#/technical-specifications

I assume that the current patch, which influenced the "behavior" of the AiM-120 in the air, did not so much change the behavior of the AiM-120 as it changed the air effect on them - and thus the air effect on all objects. Yesterday we flew with my mate MiG-29S and my F-15C and in total the speed of MiG was also very good at altitudes above 34,000 and speeds close to Mach 2. I realize that now "something is wrong", but it does not change the fact that earlier the F-15C also accelerated without any problems (after dropping the tanks) to 2.4-2.5 Mach and was still deadly, being able to successfully shoot at a distance of over 60-65 miles. AiM-120C often times hit a fighter unable to effectively outmaneuver the rocket. The rocket at these speeds flies half its "path" above 6Mach - like the AiM-54 - and when it enters in pitbull it still has a reserve of speed and altitude that it can convert into kinetic energy. Condition - a shot at a target that is fly about 10,000-15,000 feet lower. Yesterday also, for example, on one of Growling's servers, this way I shot down "live" F-16s, JFs, F-14s without any risk for myself. I am sure that even a medium-quality F-15E module with CFT should easily reach 45-50,000 feet and accelerate to Mach 2-2.3, and that's enough. As far as I remember, the actual maximum speed for the F-15E at an altitude of 50-60,000 feet (from producers technical info - "at high altitude") is over 3,000 km / h (that's about Mach 2.9) - I emphasize - in fact. That's a good 300 km / h more than the F-15C. Producer technical info (Boeing earlier McDonnellDouglas) - "at high altitude" - "service ceiling" is to 65 000 feet for F-15C and 60 000 for F-15E. But this is no maximum ceiling for both planes.

But you know that you are writing about what has been written about many times? The F-15E is heavier "structurally", has much more powerful engines, is much faster than the F-15C, has greater inertia and therefore it has no chance against the F-15C in maneuvering combat, but in BVR it has much more possibilities because of achieving much higher speed and, consequently, can significantly extend the effective range of the AiM-120 missiles. In DCS, removing or not CFT will not change anything completely. As far as we know, it will not be possible to take them off. But it will not be a problem at all, because I'm confident that with them he be will calmly climb 34-50 000 feet and will be accelerate to a minimum of Mach 2.2-2.4 - and this will make him an unbeatable machine in the BVR - like now F-15C is.

Have you ever flown the F-15C in DCS? I dare to doubt ... Currently it is able to easily climb 45-50,000 feet with two fuel tanks and accelerate to Mach 2.2. Without tanks yesterday I was at 130,000 feet - of course with almost zero speed - but yesterday, in order to check the "speed limit" without tanks, I accelerated the F-15 C about 40,000 feet to a speed of exactly 2,643 Ma. Are you still saying "it won't happen"? I invite you to one of the two severs of "304th Virtual Fighter Wing" and see what the F-15C can do in terms of speed and BVR combat - as of today there is no aircraft that can stand against it. Ah, I forgot everything I write about is with 6 AMRAAMs and 2 Sidewinders under the wings. And I'm not writing about reality but about DCS, earlier I also wrote about DCS.

I want FULLY OPERATIONAL MODULE or nothing. I am waiting so much time that I can wait another 5 years.

It's a great idea to relase an F-15E with F-15C functionality ... in fact, it is possible to destroy the UAZ with a Sidewinder or AMRAAM ... Nobody will be disappointed ...

Let's start with the fact that 99% of the CSAR missions in DCS are a lone UH-1H / Mi-8 helicopter flying and looking for pilots ... CSAR is a powerful undertaking in combat conditions - airplanes securing the airspace, CAS support planes and finally helicopter / helicopters pulling the pilot out of the enemy area. For me, the current CSAR is just a substitute. A decent CSAR would be if: 1 - For example, UH-1H with four crewman + 2-4 additional players, flies to the place marked by smoke by the PLAYER who catapulted, In this area disembark additional players for secure the place of with downed pilot, 2 - A shot down pilot would be able to move freely and find a suitable and safe place to take him, 3 - Scripts would generate the movement of enemy AI ground units with the task of finding the downed pilot - hence the need to be able to move it and change the place of taking it to a safe one, 4 - The shot down pilot would have to conduct radio communication, mark the place of pickup with smoke, flare, place a mark on the ground, etc. This is the absolute minimum. And on top of that, an organized operation with support for helicopter. If you fly cyclically in a group of players once or twice a week, different missions, then once in a while when the mission has to be interrupted or you can manage to carry it out relatively efficiently and quickly and someone will be shot down, some people would certainly be happy to take part in something like this. But I do not believe that DCS will go in this type of direction ever, sooner we will see a new game that will connect it and make it available to us. Besides, the very approach and the possibility of getting into the helicopter after being shot down would be something nice, and not walking around a man that no one can see and who can not interact with the environment or even a rescue helicopter in any way ... Such a situation - a plane shot downed over enemy units (tanks, APC, triple A batteries), the helicopter must fly there to pick up an AI man, and at this time the player walks around somewhere ... Maybe let the player, after catapulting, have the option to "generate" a "AI-man" where he deems it appropriate, and not in the middle of a river, forest or between enemy vehicles ... He can go to a safe place and then" generates "the figure" to be taken by the helicopter ... since he cannot wait and get into him...

As I can see, you have a monopoly on what someone can and does not, likes ... I don't know if you know, but there are people who play chess, catch fish and I can assure you that they have as much fun with this as You do flying in DCS ... So maybe learn to speak on your own behalf and not "judge" what someone might like. So I repeat, there are a lot of people who would be happy if ever a game was created combining a decent simulator of bomber planes, fighter planes, multirole planes, helicopters, ground vehicles from a stupid truck and UAZa0469 / Humvee to tanks and SAMs, and to a infantry soldier. And I am sure that someone who will do such a game one day - will earn at least 3 times as much as on DCS or ARMA. I will be one of the first to buy this, plus any modules be that be interest me. Nobody tells you to wait 5 hours for a CSAR mission that will fly for you, but why shouldn't others have a great time, because that is what they would like to do? Because you don't feel like it, others can't? Enabling in DCS to carry out CSAR missions similar to what can be done in ARMA would be something incredibly interesting and playable to play. Of course not for everyone. But for those who think about it for sure. In the community where I have flown quite intensively and sometimes still fly, successful missions - take off - RTB was / is an important element. If you could link CSAR missions with DCS missions in a way that would make the KIA / MIA / RTB pilot status dependent on their success, it would be great.

The fact that some plane has been designed to be able to operate with other than concrete / asphalt - the so-called paved airfields - it never meant that it was about grass ... Already during the Second World War, the "ground" runways and taxiways airports were completely covered with either steel mesh or steel trusses. And only from something like this, for example, Viggen can take off and land on something like that. Even a Spitfire or P-51D will not land safely on an ordinary meadow or field, let alone a jet fighter weighing 5-10 times more ... This is the domain of only properly prepared planes - usually transport ones - but they always land on properly prepared / paved surfaces.

In 2025, the repricing/sale of these modules will be a more realistic date...

Hmm, how long will you fly and attack infantry in your Hornet, when on the ground the operator of the S-200 or S-300 will be me and my colleagues? Already, thanks to CombinedArms, the "balance" of the battlefield is completely changed when someone operates SA batteries.

Mix DCS with Arma would be the most beautiful multiplayer game that could be created. Servers that would work "non-stop" on which would take place endless wars with the use of infantry, vehicles and aviation ... ehhh you can dream ... In fact, Arma already gives a substitute for something like this - unfortunately it "too small" terrain for use of jet airplanes. I am sure that there would be thousands of players who would fill these hundreds of square kilometers of maps by doing what they enjoy the most. Some would fly fighters, others drive tanks, transporters, jeeps, fighting with each other and calling for A-10 / Su-25 support when they needed it. Special forces transferred by helicopters would do their job, being able to count on the support of artillery, aviation and vehicles. There are many people who can walk for hours in Arma3, so they would be happy to do it here as well. A shot down pilot, if he only wanted, could wait for the CSAR mission - if no, cant be forced it- but surely there would be as many people willing to wait for the rescue as those who would like to respawn in the cockpit in three seconds. Maybe in 100 years my grandchildren will see such a game;)