av8orDave

A random question for F-15E experts: You often hear in the F-14 world about the underwhelming performance of the Pratt TF30 engines, and how the GE F110's on the F-14B and D made it the aircraft it should have always been. You hear a fair amount of anecdotal stories that the A model was badly underpowered, and that the Bs and Ds flew with a night & day difference to the As due to the extra thrust. Is there a similar thought in the F-15E world about the 220s vs the 229s? Do pilots complain about the performance of the 220s, or praise the performance of the 229s? Is it less of a storyline than it was with the F-14? Does the 220-engined jet have performance issues or limitations in certain conditions, or is the feeling that the 220 is adequate but just not as powerful as the 229?

Agreed. I'm no longer using GBU-10s as a result. I've noticed it most often when also having a mixed load of GBU-12s and 10s, although I think I've seen this when carrying only 10s as well.

Definitely a thing. I've experienced this as well. I've stopped using GBU-10s as a result.

Start at about 13:00. He says “it also has a forward looking infrared camera as well that was actually used prior to night vision goggles.”

NCTR is coolie right and will give an immediate response if the aircraft you’re trying to ID is coming more or less front aspect. IFF is coolie left, takes a second to initiate and a sweep of the radar to respond, and doesn’t give a “definitive” answer. If it squawks back, you can bet it is a friendly. If it doesn’t, that isn’t a guarantee that it is hostile. This is true in both the sim and real life.

I watched an interview the other day with a pilot from the 494th out of Lakenheath. He made a quick comment at one point to the effect of “the NAV pod projected FLIR imagery onto the HUD before we had NVGs”, and the way he phrased it got me wondering… Do operational squadrons still use the NAVFLIR on the HUD, or have night vision goggles made this obsolete?

And just for clarity, the confusing thing about what you wrote is that you never mention NCTR at all, but say that "sometimes being 20 miles from the enemy it still doesn't recognize it." IFF doesn't recognize enemy aircraft, ever, regardless of distance. The transponder pings the other aircraft and waits for a response. Enemy aircraft won't do anything. IFF only identifies friendly aircraft with their IFF systems on.

For NCTR, is the contact you're trying to ID flying directly toward you?

Are you referring to IFF or NCTR? IFF will only tell you whether it responds to a transponder query (a circle) or not (triangle or square). If a circle, it is friendly. If not, it could still be friendly or it could be hostile or it could be neutral... all you know if that it didn't respond to the query. NCTR will give you what type of aircraft it is (but not whether it is friendly, neutral, or hostile), but only if it is basically facing you (I guess it needs to see the compressor blades). If it is side-aspect or flying away from you, you won't get a recognition.

It seems… backwards. You lose stabilization when you designate, then when you slew it re-stabilizes. Additionally, if you select point track, then click the auto acquisition button to get a track, it tracks, but when you designate it seems to drop the track. I’ve noticed it also jumps from area track to point track and vice versa when you designate. All kinds of strange.

Does anyone know if the current stabilization behavior of the TGP is as intended? When you slew the TGP and designate, the TGP crosshairs drift around as you maneuver after the designation. If you slew the TGP again after designation, it stabilizes and doesn’t drift. I’m not an expert, but that seems counterintuitive. I’d think it would stabilize when you designate.

Funny thing about the Mk-84 & GBU-31 conversation is that there are actually a number of photos out there of A-10s carrying a single GBU-31 along with their other CAS ordnance in Iraq & Afghanistan. I've read accounts of insurgents hiding out in buildings or reinforced structures, where a 2,000 lb. bomb comes in as a handy asset. Nothing wrong with having a variety of ordnance to provide a bit of flexibility! null

Agree. The bloom on the position lights on the Strike Eagle is way overdone.

I'll add that although a bit off-topic (kind of?), the super-tight centering action on the TM Warthog stick is pretty awful and unrealistic. It kind of "pops" into and out of the center of the range, whereas real aircraft have a very smooth transition, and a pretty minimal "centering" feel if one at all. I think this makes takeoffs and air-to-air refueling pretty tough, or at least harder than it needs to be in DCS.

Like Yurgon in the post above, I've read quite a good deal about every other conflict the A-10 served in from this timeframe. Finding info on OIF is surprisingly hard. Having said that, there is a caption in the Osprey book "A-10 Thunderbolt II Units of Operation Enduring Freedom 2002 - 07" that reads "The AN/AAQ-28 Litening II targeting pod... Having served ANG and AFRES units well in OIF in 2003, was issued to active-duty squadrons in Afghanistan later that same year." This seems to indicate the pod was in use in Iraq in '03 and prior. Outside of the pod, most images of A-10s from this timeframe show one or two AGM-65Ds, a mix of GBU-12s and Mk-82s, and a rocket pod. Overall, relatively lightly loaded. Granted, many of these photos are from Afghanistan, where density altitudes called for lighter loads. If I were aiming for realism, I'd put on a TGP, one MAV, a rocket pod, 2 GBU-12s, and 2 Mk-82s.

As an update, just based on my personal experience: I’ve been struggling with the pitch control, mainly on takeoff during rotation (the nose wheel becomes “unstuck” from the ground and the nose then wildly oscillates). A few days ago I got a Winwing Orion 2 F-18 stick (I had been using a TM Warthog). The Winwing has no distinct centering action like the TM does, and the pitch control issue immediately disappeared. This isn’t a Winwing advertisement, but it is interesting to note that hardware can make a big difference. The other nice improvement is in aerial refueling, where the tiny control inputs needed are way easier without the stick trying to force itself back to center. Just an FYI.

Thanks for that. Reassuring to know I'm not totally losing my mind (yet).

I flew a single player Liberation mission today to take out an SA-10. I covered my flight with a SEAD flight of F/A-18s armed with TALDs. Other than that, I flew at about 100 ft, at about 6 miles popped up to about 5,000 ft AGL, and dropped CBU-97s (87s would have worked too) in CDIP. Took out the majority of the site.

A/A to A/G with a castle-up click works fine. Scrolling through the MFDs, not so much. It works, but it is anyone’s guess as to how many clicks it’ll take and what it responds to. Happens with both left and right. I’ve checked bindings as well as testing with two separate sticks (TM Warthog and Winwing Orion 2 F-18).

Ok. You said something about "trouble when your defined sequence contains the quick page like TEWS". My defined sequence has nothing to do with the TEWS page, however. On the left MFD, I'm defining 1) AA Radar, 2) ARMT, 3) TPOD. It still doesn't want to flip from page to page. I have to click a bunch of times, maybe up to 5 or 6 sometimes, then it'll work for a click or two, then back to not working and having to click bunches of times. I guess what I'm saying is that regardless of the quick page, it isn't working right.

Ok, I appreciate it. I've been pretty confident I understand the HOTAS / switchology (I'm a real pilot and not a new flight-simmer) but thought maybe I might be missing something. It's certainly not a show-stopper, but it is annoying if you're trying to flip through pages quickly (especially after taking the time to set up and save the MFD pages).

Yeah, I’m not referring to the right page and yeah I know it goes to TEWS first. I’m talking even the left page takes a bunch of presses and is still inconsistent. Is this to say it works fine on first press for you?

Is anyone else having trouble getting this to work? When I try to use the castle switch to scroll through MFD pages by clicking that direction, it is super inconsistent. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. Sometimes I have to click about 5 times to get it to work. I’m setting up the pages to scroll in the order I’d like, then making the MFD I’d like to switch the sensor of interest, then castling that direction, but it only works occasionally. Any insight?

Strikeeagle; Dude, fantastic answer. Thank you for satisfying my curiosity. I learned a few things today.

A question about the engines in the real world: - I read an article that there are plans to start phasing out F-15Es with the -220 engines first. - Do squadrons operate a mix of -220 and -229 engines within a squadron? - If not, which squadrons have which engines? I did find an article that said the 494th and 492nd have exclusively -229s. - Is there a way to tell the difference visually between the -220 and -229? Thanks!