henshao

well I'm sorry you got killed by someone with a poor connection but tacview only exacerbates inaccuracies caused by high latency

obvious latency issue on the part of the hydro-mechanical jet in question

Was wondering why my AMRAAMs were going dumb on long range shots and realized the DLZ calculation will let you shoot from beyond the 90 second AMRAAM battery life

This was from a multiservice public release in 2000:

There were two trials with datalinked F-15s AFAIK; in the late 80s a handful of birds, and a full squadron of JTIDS aircraft (~20) at Mountain Home AFB in the mid 90s. The former didn't inspire much confidence but the latter inspired the installation of JTIDS on as many NATO fast movers as possible (eventually), though in cheaper/smaller terminals

Now who's got the charts for the insect

that -229 engine on a slick F-15 is a sight to behold, the -229 is allowed to run a good 100C hotter than the -220 among other improvements. VMax switch for the -220 would allow a 22C increase in FTIT for reference. Just a shame the common engine bay and other internal changes make the F-15E so much heavier, allegedly the -229 was designed to fit anywhere a -220 would and "should" fit in a "light grey" without problems. With that being said the proof of the pudding is in the eating, the apples to apples acceleration run in question for the clean F-15C is 21.5 seconds and only 13 seconds for the slick F-15E

the F-15C in question is using the original -100; -220 F-15C makes the run @40k lbs in 21.5 seconds. The clean F-15E @44k lbs with -229 is actually about 13 seconds on the chart (it's scaled out slightly different for some reason)

eventually they did decide to give the F-15 some A/G capability, roughly 1971-1972

consider why they put swing wings on a jet in the first place before you wonder too hard about which has less drag

The F-15 was partial fly-by-wire from the very beginning

What exactly about full fly-by-wire is so exciting?

https://www.thisdayinaviation.com/25-september-1960/screen-shot-2014-09-25-at-7-49-05/ Now pump that up to 1628 mph and run the math (for the Mig-25)

If you think the F-15 is complex add swing wings to the equation (there is a reason we are still using Eagles but not Varks and Tomcats) The F-15E carries ~20k lbs of fuel internally which is obviously well shy of the ~34k lbs of internal tankage in an F-111; the F-15E couldn't do everything the F-111 could do, but the same is true in the opposite direction much more drastically. In regards to the Foxbat it holds several records which are yet unassailable, not the least of which is speed over a 100km circuit which involves sustained ~5g turns at greater than mach 2.5. Such an energy maneuverability profile is to this day untouchable by anything which breathes air (that we know about). In fact I would hypothesize you can gauge how much someone knows about air combat by how highly they respect/fear the Mig-31 as a fighter particularly from during-the-cold war/post-soviet perspective

I think a lot of your conceptualizations are wrong which is leading you in the wrong direction; the f-111 could do mach 2.5+ at altitude it was not some low-altitude-only platform from a design perspective. Even the B-52 was prepared to do terrain-following attack profiles during the cold war, let alone the F-15. Similarly, the F-15 is not some "high altitude fighter" like a Ta-152 it is designed to go to the enemy and kill them at any altitude

The F-15E is not a poor man's anything lol

eagerly awaiting these Super F-15s thanks for the hard work

Matra JL-100 Fuel Tank / Rocket Launcher Pod, Matra TK-500 : drop tank and MER (multiple ejector rack) with 4x250kg bombs (fictional) Matra JK-200 : Rocket launcher, drop tank and MER

Ground Crew will not repair blown tires on their own, there must be other damage present, this I think is present on other modules as well

https://leehamnews.com/2018/09/28/bjorns-corner-supersonic-transport-revival-part-8/ The intake design on the F-15 has to be one of the most elegant aerodynamic solutions I've ever seen. The nodding ramps also function as a canard/leading edge flap for the lifting fuselage, and help control the center of lift shift from supersonic flight ala F-14 glove vanes

DCS F-16C uses the -129 I believe, it is a little quicker than the -229 version

spino this you? https://sites.google.com/view/spinossimulationsite/home?authuser=0 highly recommend you put that in your forum signature man

The DCS F-15 stacks on SIGNIFICANT G's when adding lateral stick to a given aft stick position. Rolling the jet at 9gs will spike the Gs a very large amount.

literally videos in this thread of operational F-15Es without CFTs but you guys don't see anything, perhaps a flight sim isn't right for you with such visual impairment