pr1malr8ge

First and foremost, I never said the airplane would not ascend in a 90* perpendicular to earth attitude. What I said was an accelerated climb in the vert will not happen. Take off accelerate to 500kts pull 5gs to the vert and it will climb due to inertia, But it will NOT GAIN SPEED!

This is a game and I know I've been hot headed on certain aspects and have ran my mouth. What needs to be said is this: Its the nature of human ideology to believe what they/we want. A great example of this is spacial disorientation that results in CFIT. The instruments state you are diving but you believe you are climbing and dive further and into the ground. The same thing holds true with games or anything else we feel is wrong or right for that matter.. ED could theoretically produce an EXACT perfect replication on all aspects of these aircraft and no matter what every single person will have some debate that something isn't right. Even a real life veteran f15c pilot were to fly he would bitch about the su27 being wrong when it shoots him down since he never flown one. Even to add that not one single air frame acts identical to the next air frame. Case in point. My cousin was telling me that he was doing some maintenance ferry flights of f15s and he said there was one f15c he got in that for what ever reason was SCREAMING. It was just faster and more agile then the rest he flew. In the end we can bitch but unless you make your own game you ultimately have no leg to stand on if the Devs want to not deal with it or just know you're wrong about it.

Umm.. No the f15 has never had a TTWR of 2... Even with minimum amount of fuel a completely clean aircraft and equipment not needed for basic flight removed to reduce weight [the streak eagle] Only in the lower altitude TTC was a 90* accelerating climb accomplished. In the higher altitude climbs it was nowhere near vertical. This how ever was done using the older original 100 engines and the new ones do have more power and if placed in the streak eagle might possibly produce a TTWR of 2. http://www.pw.utc.com/News/Story/20150218-0945/2015/All%20Categories Now with that being said in the combat ready f15c we fly in DCS that weighs much more then that of the Streak Eagle we will never be able to accelerate in a pure vertical climb & we will never see a TTWR above probably 1.3

Ok, might I ask for you to do some testing on this.. Not saying your wrong but what fuel states are these being stated for.. SU27 vs f15 full fuel load OF course the f15c will have a significant TTW over the su27. The f15c is a lighter bird with full fuel. [unless you add bags] Add missiles load outs and the entire thing can be highly changed.. GO full fuel full missile load out against an f15c with only a few missiles and 50% fuel and you're gonna get your ass handed to you in a turning fight even with LEX or the f15c will just extend and you're stuck watching it scream away! Now not sure how exactly the SU27 is modeled in game but irl the f15 also has less parasitic drag then the su27 thanks to flush riveting. Therefor even with an identical gross weight & TTWR the f15 should have better performance in straight & level flight. This is in accordance with Wikipedia listing both jets showing a TTWR of 1.07 TTWR isn't a set in stone number for these jets either. the SU27 needs to be clean and @ <5x% fuel for that number. It also is not the only factor determining overall performance either.. Think of it like this.. you take a truck and need to haul 2 20ft trailers both are identical @ 3,000lbs except one has a ^nose the other is a flat nose. Which one do you think will require less fuel to transport over the exact same distance? This is what parasitic drag is to aircraft. Personally I think a lot of people are getting all hell bent over the F15 out turning and out running their su27 and claiming NO NO NO it can't happen but never look at what their gross weight is in compared to that of what of the f15 is. The more weight you have the more G you must pull to keep it in geometry vs the less weighted counter object needs to pull therefor the more energy loss compared to the opposite. the more weight you have the less your TTWR is also.

Not to concerned with real life I supose.. More ingame.. Think I might be able to push it out to 40-45 but thats max.. Id also supose Id have to be 60k m2+ also and target would have to be ~40k

Ok, so I just did a test.. I was able to hit a large target fired from what My radar scope said 35-38nm and tacview says 33-29nm with the aim7 along with a follow up shot at 31-29nm with tacview showing 27? with the closer fired shot actualy hitting first.. None the less both shots hit.. Fired from 52kft m1.9 against a tanker flying 435kts gs @30,000ft Link to tacview https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8KiatNmckBISjFaT1dXLXR0THM Sorry did not realise the link was locked.. It's now open to public

TRO is being updated supposedly in the next update 1.5 which is DCS world 2 minus the NTTR map.. as far as the F-15 having more thrust then usual isn't exactly a true statement.. It was calculated by what numbers they had I.e. Standard day or 15*c @ 0ft MSL. if the actual conditions in game were at that temp then the thrust would be correct. I don't think this is any major advantage though.

You want the links to them Have no issue giving them to you! you saw them. No need to retain them on the forums. And Best of luck with the Mirage/typhoon.. Great birds can't wait to fly them my self. You how ever probably wont shove an aim120 up my tail pipe unless you are a fraticider which I wouldn't doubt you would do if I were there. Then again you play on a different server anyways.

I've got many Let me KNOW HOW MANY you want to see! I'm not afraid to show what I've accomplished in my life. I'm still eating my awesome sauce!

What I find funny is you're bringing up the fact that the AIM120 gets mentioned in any missile thread in the RU side, how ever ru missiles are not mentioned in the F15 side... See if you scroll back to page one you might notice that YOU are the first person to mention the Aim120c.. While the statement might be true etc. But currently your statement holds no value in this thread because you're the one whom brought the aim120 in the conversation in the first place. There is no doubt you have an arbitrary love for the RU birds and you have a disdainful hatred of the Western birds that you patronize those who don't share the same view.

I knew the aim7 would not in real life work in TWS just wasn't sure if it would give an actual shoot que.. I could have txted my cousin but didn't feel it was worth the time to txt him and bug him about something of that nature. as far as switch to STT thats exactly what I do.. Once switch to STT I launch

If the option was available to carry bombs in the f15c I would do so.. I could provide CAP along with getting ground kills when no threat is eminent towards the GPers

NOPE there is NEVER a 100% certainty of IFF even in today's military doctrine with out visual confirmation. Even then the Mark 1 Eyeballs can be wrong also.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Black_Hawk_shootdown_incident

Ok, so I've had a few instances where I have been tracking a target in TWS with a soft lock and have been given shoot que with the aim7 selected.. While I have not tried to launch mainly in fear it wont do anything and cost me a missile. I think it could easily be mistaken for a SHOOT AUTHORIZATION and the WTF it never hit moment.. Or it does hit and again the blown up aircraft is WTF how did an Aim7 just kill me with no hard lock? Has anyone else have this happen and able to launch, and the aim7 actually track?

Best of luck with your Hotas m8.. See ya in 1.5/2!

From what I remember only the Isrealies have used the f15c for this role. How ever all f15c should have the ability to do so. It's just a matter of enabling the software and changing hard points? as far as ED implimenting this It wont happen. They are working on the f18 ATM.. I think the only other thing to be done to the f15 is going to be the FM FE will be tweeked to resolve the TRO issue at alt. other then that The model wont be touched again atleast not for some time afaik.

I fly high regularly. I make due. I just should not have to have the extra stress/finesse needed to fly that high. Again I did not say everyone just sits in the mnts and uses exclusive eos. But there is by far a huge number that do so. My apologies. I just Re-Read what I type in my response to you before this one and it does read that way. I am sorry I did not mean everyone. And where did I say that if you don't see a bandit that radio and DL would be related to LOS of that bandit? If you're in a deep valley in a mnt LOS from radio and DL would be severely hampered if not cut off unless your support aircraft is High and relatively close. In my first post that you quoted #2. I stated that in game people are using EOS as their primary mode for acquiring targets instead of it true design as a secondary system. I guess I can see how you could have perceived the way I typed it, that I meant it was the primary system. And I apologize for the quoting issues.. I hate breaking one entire quote into multiple quotes to separate each response to that specific section of the quote. I'm not trying to Pigeon hole you. I acknowledge you have a lot of time and knowledge you just seem to try and redirect things or maybe it's you're miss reading/interpreting my intentions.

as I've stated I have hit f15/su27s launched at 16nm.. Which has gotten some back lash as if it didn't happen.. These launches were at close to M2 +50,000ft I guess 38nm might be possible if launched at 60k m2.5 against a large target I.E. Awacs/tanker in the 36,000ft alt range.. But man I would think that's pushing it IMHO. Id also say it would take several tries to actualy get one to finaly connect. To add in all the tacview reviews that I've watched I've never seen the aim7 go about M3.4ish.. Hit me up on PM we can set up a MP mission and give it a test?

Frostie you're more then welcome to enjoy your Russian birds More power to you I think they are great planes my self except for the cockpits look like a smurf was blown up inside of it and the fact they have a ridiculous amount of parasitic drag [no flush rivets on the skin like a bunch of goosebumps]

Wow this sums up what I feel.. But unfortunately there is major reasons for this. 1. The f15 can not maneuver correctly in the higher altitudes where it normally fights. [supposedly being fixed in next update] 2. eos in RU planes is used as a primary weapon system instead of using it as intended a secondary system. So hiding in the mountains makes for easy prey. This is not real world tactics and before someone tries blasting me about it. Be honest with your self; the role of the SU/MIG is for air superiority You cannot effectively do this hiding in mountain ranges. Hiding in the mountains has two adverse affects. 1. you're radio communications are severely limited if not cut off all together and 2. you truly have no S/A on the bigger picture. You might be able to pounce on something that gets close but in the real world you're not effective and a waste of a resource. 3. The conlayer in the game is extremely un-realistic. I spoke with my cousin about this as he was an f15 pilot and now flys for fedEx. Actualy Scorch asked me to ask him in regards to Contrailing as a tactic with the f15c in real life. His Response was this. "We would send some one up to find the con layer and see if we should be above or below it." I also showed him that the layer in DCS starts are 25,000 and ends at 39,000. His response: "I've never seen a conlayer 15,000ft tall more like 5000ft at max and at times only maybe a 1000ft. Durring summer months the top up to 41k winter lower much lower." 4. it's a game and unfortunately based on sole KDR and not the end game.

Well, might work out to 38nm if you're flying an YF-12a with Aim-[4]7a at 80,000ft & M3.2 in DCS

What Winchester means in regards to not shooting up is rather trying to shoot at a target at further range that has a considerable height over you. I.e. you shoot at 6nm at where you're at 3,000ft and the bandit is at 13,000ft etc etc. If you're shooting up at close range at a only a thousand or so ft difference is a bit different. Yes SS covers the same area on the hud as flood mode. It how ever auto locks into an STT track. Just to further.. I would exclusively use SS over any other AAQC except when I have visual confirmation of my target in a turning fight then I would switch to VS. Other wise VS is too narrow and can easily miss a target.

VS is for turning only imho.. I still would rather use SS then VS if I had it due to the wider search.

See that's the issue I have. I would not have a leg to stand on if we were discussing Lomac FC1 or possibly even FC2. How ever we are talking about FC3 that I purchased only in the last few years. But hey what ever.. That's life I guess.

if you're in a target rich environment then BS will be the better option as you need to choose what target your want otherwise SS is the best AACQ.