Nahen

Any sources?

In the former Yugoslavia, MiG-29 pilots tried to fight the F-15. They tried to find them and flew towards them. They had no chances anyway. If I remember correctly, they even managed to launch a rocket towards the F-15C. During the desert storm, no Iraqi MiG tried to engage in combat with the F-15. None of them even turned the beak towards the F-15 ... I'm not going to discuss one case of the MiG-25 that reportedly shot down the F-15 near Saudi border... All of them were shot down shortly after take-off or while trying to escape to Iran.

>>>"relatively equal"<<< Do you know what the quotation marks mean? Maybe then show me some "more even" F-15C fight??

Any module who can on 35000-45000 feet accelerating to speeds over 2 Mach armed with AiM-120C-5 rockets or similar, in the BVR will be deadly.

Inertia - E is faster, but greater inertia results in much weaker maneuverability. The F-15 was not made for maneuvering fighting, but the A / C versions turned out to be quite good dogfighters aircraft. Unfortunately, the E version differs significantly in this matter. Not a chance in maneuvering fight with the C version. And thus also with the MiG-29, Su-27 with which the F-15C is able to cope with. Its all in this thema.

Have you heard about something like inertia in motion? Do you think that 50,000-ton ship on sea with twice as powerful engines as the 10,000-ton ship will be just as agile and maneuverable? Congratulations...

Is the same question again? Maybe sometimes it is worth checking in the forum before asking the same question again? We make bets, how many more times will there be questions about this in the newly created threads until the module exits? My type 550 times. Not necessarily. The airframe structure itself in relation to the A / C version has been strengthened so much that there is already a difference of almost two tons in mass

Apache will be a much easier helicopter to learn than the Hind - when it comes to the pilotage itself. As for the systems, it will be at the A-10, F-16 or F / A-18 level

But please, before retirement ... when I will still have the strength to hold the joystick in my paws ...

Seriously? Strange, because every time I fight in the F-15C I shoot EVERY rocket above Mach 1.2-1.3. I never (except for my mistakes) allow myself WVR to fight. When I know that I fight against another F-15C or F-14 with AiM-54 I ALWAYS accelerate to 2.2-2.5 Mach and at least 35-40 ooo feet before launching the rocket and often higher, and surprisingly always ( almost always) I go back to the airport ... The average time of my "mission" in the air is 1.5-2 hours. So exactly the same will be with the F-15E module. The AiM-120 can easily be launched from 50-60 miles before it "reaches range" from a height of 45 ooo feet and at Mach 2.3-2.5. In most cases, the opponent has no idea that a rocket is flying towards him, despite the fact that he has me on the radar - he assumes that 120 must be launched from 20-30 miles.

Maybe let's decide out what is WVR? Because in sight, the AiM-54 can be fired. The sidewinders are usually shot from the BVR. I will repeat again what the "quarrel" started - if you are flying a fighter such as the F-15C and you see the enemy with your own eyes, you have screwed up something and there is no explanation for it. F-15E - this is another matter, it can happen attacking planes taking off from or returning to attacked airports. But these are "random" air fights, and not actually fights but executions. Just because you see a rocket explosion and a falling target you hit with a Sidewinder fired 4-5 miles (7-9 km) doesn't mean you're fighting in WVR. In WVR you know the result at most. Short-range missiles are intended to be self-defense weapons for today or the so-called weapons of the last chance. Not a strictly offensive missile, but just a defensive missile. Again, for 30 years (or more) there has no been virtually REAL air combat between planes and their supports at a similar technological level. This is best seen in all the wars waged by Israel. Either more than average trained pilots flying against similar machines but with poor pilots, or, as we get closer to the present day, perfect pilots on much better airplanes armed with much better radars and rockets. If you are fighting with a gun against a knife, you can afford to try let him come closer... That's why I gave fights F-15C's from the former Yugoslavia as an example. There were similar planes - with similar possibilities, unfortunately with a huge advantage of information on the US side. Nevertheless, the pilots did not allow themselves to risk "coming into" eye contact before the missiles were launched.

I wrote that the F-15E is able to fly with CFT and armament 2.54+ Mach? No, I wrote that the F-15E has a maximum speed of about 300 km / h higher than the F-15C - around 3000-3100 km / h. It is probably obvious that the maximum speeds are the result of technical trials and 99% are carried out on "bare" airframes. Which does not change the fact that the F-15E is much faster than the F-15C.

Yessss.... but... Why was the rocket launched when the signal did not confirm that the warhead was locked? Or maybe the movie is from a machine that didn't fire? FOX - is a term for a radar-guided missile in the radar beam of the aircraft - Sparrow. In official USAF reports from the post-Gulf War period, there is not a single case of an F-15C downing an enemy aircraft with a missile other than a Sparrow.

It is not a question of "converting" the F-15E model to the F-15C, because it entails a change of, for example, the cockpit, a change of a large part of the avionics installed in it. In short - it is impossible to make a ready-made "C" module from just a "E" version. That is why RAZBAM will not make at 99.9% the "hi fidelity" "C" version . The simplest and fastest way is to "upgrade" the current "C" module by ED. So until, for example, the MiG-29A / Su-27 clickable appears - also the F-15C will not appear But with their current policy, I do not believe that.

Hahaha First film information about range - 15 miles distance - maybe first shot from 10 miles ... and according to you it's Sidewinder? Leader reports "FOX" shot, moments later his wingman also reports "FOX". FOX is the same as FOX ONE - it's Sparrow ... and besides, a Sidewinder from 10 miles ?? Congratulations on your ingenuity ... Before active warhead rockets appeared, the term FOX referred to passive rockets of the AiM-7 Sparrow type, and FOX TWO - with an "infrared" warhead. So much for First Desert Storm and "Sidewinder kill"

Yea... Do you understand what I'm writing? Show me an example of an F-15C / E maneuver combat with Sidewinder missiles. Step back and read again what I wrote and what plane I am writing about. I am not interested in the F-16 which was created for such a fight. You can read these documents of yours and carefully check what rockets and at what distances were used by pilots of the 493th over the former Yugoslavia. I found nothing in these documents that would contradict my theory, except to confirm it on page 6 and nexts from linked by you document: https://www.afhra.af.mil/Portals/16/documents/Airmen-at-War/Haulman-MannedAircraftLossesYugoslavia1994-1999.pdf?ver=2016-08-22-131404-383 Well, I'm still waiting for what is more than maybe one example in several dozen. Let me remind you of the First Gulf War - all the F-15 kills with the SiM-7 Sparrow missiles. None with the Sidewinder. How was the Second War?

What are you guys troubling about? USAF uses the F-15E with permanently attached CFT tanks. They are disconnected only occasionally. Why in Korean or Japanese F-15s the other way around have occasional CFT tanks installed? A simple answer - in the USAF, apart from the F-15E, there is a sufficient number of typically fighter F-15Cs, so it is not worth juggling tanks in "E" since you can send "C" versions quickly where needed. In Korea or Japan, these aircraft are primarily intended to defend the airspace - hence the typical Air Superiority Fighter configuration - without CFT. But if necessary, they are assumed "once a year". Whether RAZBAM will make it removable or not is in theory irrelevant - For today, if the "E" version module will have similar flight parameters to those from the F-15C FlaminngClifs, it will still dominate Air to Air even with CFT. Since the F-14 manages to accelerate to dizzying Mach 1.8-1.9 and the F-16 "from good downhill" to 1.6-1.8, the F-15, flying at Mach 2.5, is the only one with a real speed - in BVR he will have no opponent. The F-15E without a CFT in real life is faster than the F-15C by about 300 km / h. In DCS he does not have to, is enough for him around 2750km / h (Mach 2.54) like have "C". It would be nice to be able to remove the tanks. But if it doesn't happen, it doesn't matter to me, I will fly only with AMRAAM and Sidewinder. Whether with CFT or without - it makes no difference to me

Ok - so I would like to ask for examples of maneuvering combat involving the F-15 (apart from shooting at defenseless planes taking off from Iraqi airports) where the missiles were fired from the VISUAL distance of the target identification by the pilot. 8 miles of WVR ?? From this distance, can you see the target and identify it without the use of on-board electronics? Congratulations ... Without binoculars, I am not able to judge whether the passenger plane flying at an altitude of 10-12 km is a Boeing 737 or an Airbus 320 ... 10 - 12km its about 6-7 miles. I have not seen F-15C pilots flying with binoculars in the cockpit ... I repeat - the "relatively equal" fights of the American F-15s are those in the former Yugoslavia. All MiGs were attacked from a distance classified as BVR. And destroyed at the border, at least 8-10 km with rockets fired in the BVR. Again, if the pilot flying the F-15C - an air superiority plane - allows "visual" combat, it means that something went wrong. And that's about it. When it comes to fighting in Israel, that "theater" is governed by completely different rules, if only because the skills of Israeli pilots and the technological advantage against the enemy allow for a completely different approach to combat with this type of plane. But the shots down by the Izraeli F-15s are also mostly those in the BVR.

Bay the way: If those other eyes see your opponent yo it's too late for any fight. Today, contrary to what we get in DCS, 95-99% of air fights start and end out of sight. An example of the shooting down of MiGs over the former Yugoslavia. And if someone cites cases of "dogfighting" during the Desert Storm, let him not forget that these were not equal air fights - it was a hunting with an battue. And only one "sensible fight" took place when the F / A-18 shot down by the MiG-25 fell because the NAVY pilots were relaxed and did not assume that anyone could hunt them this time.

Since you say that weight does not matter, I had to write something that may open your eyes to the relationship between weight and flight characteristics ... And one more: Let me suggest one more thing - fuel and weapons dump before an emergency landing - Fuel Dump - Not Fuel Tanks Dump. Dump fuel tanks before maneuvering combat. It doesn't matter in your opinion? Oh, it probably has nothing to do with weight either ...

Do you seriously think an airplane with the same shape but with twice the weight will still have the same flight characteristics ?? You're kidding I hope ... It may have the same drag, but in life it won't achieve the same AoA ... do you know the concept of inertia? Do you know what it involves? Maybe ask the pilots of the F-15C and E if they think that both versions have the same "chance" in maneuvering combat. Controversy due to the increase in weight associated with the change in the airframe structure, the E version got much more powerful engines. Therefore, it is much faster than the C version - but unfortunately it is less "maneuverable". And he is no longer a fighter who can enter a maneuvering fight an equal level with for example, the F-16 or MiG-29 / Su-27 and their next development fighters versions. But C of course yes. C is still good dogfighter but E no.

Gentlemen, start comparing the characteristics of the F-15C and F-15E by comparing the WEIGHT of the empty machines of these two versions ... E is about 3 tons heavier. If someone thinks that it does not affect the flight characteristics, and especially the maneuverability, congratulations ...

Yea answer is before F-15E or after it? I vote no sonner than 2-3 years...

First of all, the cruising speed of the F-15C is not 0.9 Ma but 0.75 so I do not understand why you want to fly without an afterburner at 0.9 Ma, since this plane from version A to version C / D has never been able to do it in the real world? As for the radar, the DCS detection and "locking" parameters for the F-15C / D are laughs. The version after the modernization of MSIP already had much higher parameters declared by Raytheon than what is in DCS. But that is exactly what I would not like to change it do, because it is probably the best working DSC radar compared to the F / A-18 and F-16 radars, the F-15C has a great radar. No real but still better than other radars in DCS. Yes, I can lock 6 targets in the F-15C in TWS without a problem. The condition that they meet all the radar operating conditions at once, and not when some of them are just "escaping" from the radar. I propose single mission, six no maneuverable targets on the opposite and check. Its works for me.

Without any problems I can detect and lock target like C-17, Tu-95, KC-135 or E3 on 70-80 Nm. If you cannot do it, you do not know use the radar. A locked target with the correct radar parameters can only disappear when it flies perpendicular to your direction of flight or reaches your speed while flying in the same direction as you. There is no other option. Ah is one option is - bad radar work in your hands. Are you unable to distinguish a single plane from a pair in a close formation? Again, I suggest you learn to use the radar. You can locate two close-flying targets at a distance of 40-50 Nm. Do you know how to use the radar operating frequency? What frequency, under what conditions, enables or prevents the detection and lock of the target? Do you know the principle of Doppler radar? Worth knowning On 100% motors only run at full afterburner. So I don't understand what's wrong with the "power" indication of their work without afterburner?