Njinsa

@GGTharos - empty 34600, type 5 CFT (empty) about 4400, according to 1993 dash1 (-229 engines).

Hardcore F-15 fan here, too. Data is not a problem as a lot of info lies in -1 manuals. FM could be derived out of that. Main issue is lack of SME experience in this particular loadout (or their opsec limitations) and level of guesswork Razbam decide to introduce in a product they feel should stay as realistic as possible. FCF flights are regular but so far operational CAP sorties with live ammo without CFTS are yet to be confirmed. If I may ask - what's the main driver behind this request ? Lack of perspective for FF F-15A/C or BFM-ing ?

Guys are working around the clock. Amazing list.

+1

So, 97% for -229 is not a valid figure ? At least in this (DCS) case where RPM at ground and inflight is approximated to be same value.

It easy to check. Start with JFS and keep it a bit longer rolling - there seems to be one odd background bump at the end of sample, but that might be normal/authentic. Leave ECS to off. Spool up both engines to idle. All OK. Get ECS to MAN a you get your suspect - there's a additional noise print within the sample which repeat each 5-6 seconds. I'm sure this and a some other (external) sounds will improve when critical bugs are resolved.

Maverick D,G,K versions are planned as they're all already in DCS, but it will take some time Razbam figure how that should work at all. Only MountainHome guys had it for CAS training hence very limited insight. AGM-130 is planned, but depends on when ED plan to support all code required to run & guide this baby. No HARM in any case.

Currently it can fly beyond M2.0 (got M2.14 yesterday) but that's outside structural design limits for CFTs. Maybe later in EA, when more important bugs are squashed, we have some skin/panel damage being visible if those high Mach figures are actually reached.

There are 3-part instruction videos done by Razbam SME, real WSO. 2nd is the one you want to consult for AG /bombs, but go through all of them, it makes a difference.

Maybe, maybe not. RAZBAM has proper documentation including some performance charts, details like basic aircraft limits and stores/weapon carriage constraints. That 700kts looks more like limit imposed on both LANTIRN pods. If we're allowed to loose the pods, just continue to M2.00 as that should be next stop (CFTs structural design limit) without (simulated) damage. At least -229 engines are more than capable to get her there, not sure that those 2 guys from podcast were flying lucky ones with 229s, hence their pain. Other than that, IRL airframe get stressed over years and it would not be strange to see some speed restrictions being imposed intentionally, saving some serious maintenance costs and keeping the numbers of air ready units. Maybe that's something we can see in distant DCS future.

You sure about this ? Maybe some SME could verify, but moving panels (wiring and switching interface) does not make any sense if you phase out older subsystems or integrate them more tightly with UFC and MPDs. We're talking about COMPASS, VTR and SENSOR panel from pilot seat.

Apache went EA on 18/03/22 with manual being released week before.

There are clues as SW development uses staging for lifecycle management. It seems that FAT stage (factory acceptance test), performed in last few months by developers (Razbam) indicate their confidence that build can enter UAT stage (user acceptance test) or Closed Beta if you wish. SW builds which were thoroughly looped in regression testing during FAT stage can reduce duration of UAT from months to weeks. I find Closed beta more as a quality assurance that Razbam internal test procedures and test cases which tackle key F-15E EA milestones are well defined and work as projected. Just mine 5 cents

AFAIK, should remain only on Raam, as IRL.

No, manual is critical part of EA release, it won't be skipped over if they're keeping all strings at their hands. If BD needs more time to finish it, RB may/should extend the release date (the very one we don't know) and it's not that RB guys are bored by not actually adding any features at new builds. This module is extremely complex and manual is direct tool to prevent a swarm of bug false positives pouring down the support channel. This is a clever way to enhance probability of real bug reproduction, the ones that will slip through closed beta team attention. So far it's over 500 pages and that's past half of what real life -1 manual weights. If you have/had access to -1, I'm sure you'd rethink about those 99.9% being RTF. Not even close.

Sounds like direct rip from Janes F-15 with a slight pitch up.

I beg to differ. A/C were export success too as you have to account the production line runtime, strategic value those presented at that point of time and competition from other vendors. A/C were tip of the spear for at least mid 80s being extremely expensive and offered only to closest or highly reliable allies. Yes, only 3 export customers, but in total 339 units in about 15 years runtime. E and derivatives, being in production for more than 35 years still fall short of that figure. In fact, with Qatar order still being on delivery, it's only 302 with no chances to overtake legacy Eagles even if Indonesian deal fully gets through. Of course, that does not change or take away anything from E, just saying that it's different era and evolution of F-15 in general. Next. After F-15C production ceased, there was dead end for single seater variant. All offers were drawn from F-15E tooling. In fact, dual seat strike fighter concept in E was and still is best crew workload implementation. You can't beat that with single seat and any kind of avionics fusion/automation. Yet. Agree - too shame you went with Hornet as Eagle or even later some E derivative for Australia would be a real beast ruling the theater. BR

The problem here is that one team (RB) is still adding features to the expected EA module build. When said 'added' that could mean those that were supposed to be there at this time but so far have been slowly crawling on the backlog. We can't know for sure what are those except ones they talked before (mostly from weapons and sensors wise aspect), but as some SMEs moved in in recent months, this could be seen as a step up in quality of not only internal testing (does it feel like the real deal) but also hinting to the developers how some stuff could be done in different way. That, by a mere definition, is a rapid moving target inducing a brutal amount of testing. As they add fragments of new functions and procedures, the amount of required testing time starts to build up almost with geometric progression. You can't add more testers there before some bugs slip through unnoticed. Add there a fact that ED alone is in the midst of engine refactoring which bring a lot of important changes and you find yourself very near of losing any control of what your best guesses on EA drop dates. Personally, I choose to get pre-order exclusively because of discount. I don't care if I'm the last one finding out that EA was yesterday or a month ago. No need for such stress as too many other things are out of my control.

At least 3 extremely resourceful RB F-15E Discord members were joined to RB Moderator group as SMEs. A former WSO and 2 CCs. If you want to tweak a flight model, tune up radar other pieces planned for EA release, you want this crowd under your flag. Pure gold IMHO.

This reminds me when a guy drives a car on wrong side of road and wonder 'WTF so many idiots are driving in opposite ?'.

Human error in following operation procedure in most cases. For instance, you forgot to flip JFS switch ON so you waste one JFS accumulator. Easy to model such case.

1200 ? I thought they were 940.

No. -229 has no effective Vmax.

Judging by extremely low app server response in last 2 hours, I'd dare to say that Razbam will survive those 'own goals'. Some will play (when it hits EA), some wait and watch. Freedom of choice.

It's not about pre-order date slipping at all, for most people this won't make any significant change in their wallet. It's about a way you communicate with audience (future customers) and keep your authority. No matter what they thought promotion should look like to boost the sales, they are about to loose a lot of credibility stack they need for more important milestones like getting EA and CTU stages. Project manager should be aware of that whole the time and act accordingly.