bies

4. Make a small additional number of sales with both variants - without investing more money, just disabling a few things in existing one. To be fair sales will increase even if only a bit when both versions are present, and they won't spend any significant amount of money by just disabling few elements in earlier variant, not modeling anything new.

F-15C used -220 since mid 1980s.

Generally considered as even more restrictive then Russian one. You won't even find Indian manuals to much older aircrafts or weapon sytems.

Does it mean F-15A and F-15C had the same wing with the same structural strenght?

True, F-14 was expensive, they were just saving the airframes, it has peacetime +6.5G, wartime +7.5G, transient over-G +8G. With MiG-23 crashes I wrote it from memory, i may be wrong, there were so many MiG-23 fatal accidents on MiG-23, especially on earlier models, they were limiting max G many times, sometimes even as early as +3,5G, for 23S +5G. 23M was briefly cleared to +7 in 1977, but they've found cracks and reduced it again in years 1977-1980 etc.

Or going to Page 1; FlyingIron Simulations already made a big part of graphic/model work, elements of the avionics and they stated one time they've invested lots of money to obtain all the documentation and data needed for full fidelity F-117 simulations. Next they went silent, focused on A-7E. Not announcing "two ahead" may be their policy as well, not to let the hype boil ~2 years before the release. I doubt they would invest so much money, resourses, manhours and then scraped it, just like that. Especially they're making modules for MSFS and X-Plane as well, which obvioulsy wouldn't give a justice or use the full potential of milatary aircraft without the military context, but they would still release it for at lest some revenue. So i expect they may release it just after the A-7E. And both machines has some things in common, speding up the work. Plus F-117 may be work on slowly already under the hood.

Yes, things were going fast during the Cold War. A cold, but still like a war. F-15A production started 1974, 1976 became fully operational and in strenght in Europe, 1979 production of both F-15C and F-16A started. F-15A went to second-grade units, air defence, National Air Guard. 1942 Zero was the best carrier fighter of the world. 1943 despite modernization lost its edge. 1944 it became hopelessly outdated. True, but pilot's opinion about "increasing the limit" wasn't particularly enthusiastic. The increase itself and 1979 MiG-23MLA was the motivated by 1979 9G F-15C and F-16A. Interviews with WarPac and Soviet pilots later on - aircraft like the F-15 was nerly full envelope 9G, F-16 was full envelope 9G plus care free, MiG-29 had some holes in the envelope you needed to remember, regarding subsonic/transsonic/supersonic speeds, assymetrical turn, amount of fuel and missiles, Su-27 has significantly more of them, especially fuel and missiles under the wings, but speeds as well, when MiG-23 was full of them, different for different speeds, different wing swept angle, different weights, missiles. Even the speed was to be closely monitored as MiG-23 would just accelerate, and MiG-23 accelerated faster then MiG-29 and much faster then Su-27, to the poin it would melt or destroy the engine or desintegrate. Fascinating machine. And when later variants like ML/MLA had properly reinforced construction, the earlier one were often a death traps for the pilots accidentially exceeding the limits. Including Colonel Vladimir Ilyushin, son of the famous Soviet aircraft designer Sergei Ilyushin. Or Lieutenant General Anatoly Surzhikov, Deputy Commander of the Soviet Air Defense Forces (!) who died in a crash of MiG-23M when he tried to increase dwindling morale of MiG-23 pilots after series of deadly accidents...

Impossible in practice, even the siplest things like when you just select the gun, or rockets or bombs CCIP computer is automatically engaged. You're obliged to know MFD functions and logic to even manage the weapon, automatic trim systems is permanently active and many, many more. You just can't. "Artificially restricting yourself" is ruining the immersion. --- And it's worth remembering that in any simulator, or a game, or a movie, immersion is EVERYTHING, it's what makes it enjoyable at all. Without immersion, you would constantly think you're just pointlessly looking at some idiotic set of pixels in front of you like some moron, and it would give you absolutely zero joy. The only real reason such thing as computer games, or flight simulators, or movies are enjoyable AT ALL is immersion. Without it, man wouldn't be able to enjoy it even a for minute; it would feel like 100% pointless and empty waste of time. That's why immersion is so important , that's why e.g. people are so amazed by VR despite it's higher requirement and price, becuase it help you immerse more, because that's how the human brain works.

No aircrafts, no money, not cost-effective missile, relatively big drag and poor energy retention (200mm vs. 178mm for AMRAAM) due to dated bigger, heavier microelectronics etc.

Yes, full fidelity analog A-10A from Cold War and Desert Storm (pre-LASTE modernization) would be awesome with Fulda Gap and Iraq maps. No boring, hard to remeber, electronic procedures and standoff weapon - but just pure adrenaline, piloting skills and fun, flying between the trees, manually aiming guns, rockets, dumb bombs, Mavericks when dodging Soviet AAA, Cold War Gone Hot! One of many A-10A rquests, with cool video:

R-77 wasn't even introduced to the Russian military in 1990s and produced only for export to India and China as RVV-AE. It was considered by the Russians as low reliability and limited capability coupled with high cost. For Russian Air Force R-77 entered serial production only in 2015. It was R-77-1. Later on in 2022 R-77-2 has been introduced.

Is' very much possible.

MSIP II started in 1985, not 100% of the fleet has been upgraded instantly, first in Europe. Before 1985, original F-15C had obviously original old stick. Non-MSIP II Eagles were used by National Guard quite some time after 1985.

F-16A entered service later, in 1979 together with 1979 F-15C with 9G. MiG-23ML, the newest variant of the era, Air-to-Air Load (R-23/24 + R-60) In subsonic 16° sweep: +6.0G, 45° sweep: +6.5G, 72° sweep: +7G. In transsonic and supersonic even less. MiG-23 was overall very limited through the envelope and citing just one single biggest perfect condition G-load is, in case of MiG-23, is very misleading. And its limits were not optional like for the F-15, MiG-23 exceeding this limits was close to catastrofic failure. MiG-21bis had sturdy wing and simple construction, but as every Soviet fighter, pilot has remember about many different limits e.g. "at M>0.8, the G limit is 7 at a fuel state of ≤800 liters".

7,33G. It was still considered very high at that era, pilots often exceeded the limits even during training, because the air superiority training (and people) was very competitive, and F-15 didn't have a G-limiter, just audio warning. In a few years many airframes were flying on a second set of wings as original were bent On the other hand F-15A was a bit lighter and it has even greater low speed/high AoA maneuverability then later models. F-15 maneuverability when it entered service and came to Europe in mid 1970s was quite a shock for other fighters pilots they trained with. EE Lighting pilot described his first BFM against the F-15A - i started behind him (offensive) and i didn't see him turning, he just started to change shepe (aspect) and we were neutral. Since 1979 F-15C was full* envelope 9G.

There is no need to argue. Both will be the great, especially because differences would be relatively easy to implement by just disabling some functions. It was in essence the same aircraft, just modernized. With the same cockpit and airframe. Personally i would prefer original 1985-2004 Cold War / Desert Storm / Allied Force MSIP II as it fits the wole DCS enviroment. And because the newer 2005+ has some disadvantages; it has close to zero historical relevance, it didn't take part in any real air combat. it doesn't have any proper timeframe opponents in DCS, not even AI. (with multirole F/A-18C, F-16C, F-15E it wasn't so obvious as they could go for ground and sea targets when F-15C is pure A-A platform) it serves in times when F-15C started to simply get dated after 30 years (!) of service, F-22 was already operational consuming all the budget and relegating the Eagle to second-grade missions. When original 1985-2004 MSIP II; very relevant historically, achieved all ~38 F-15C air kills and it's a legend of real air combat. it has full proper timeframe enviroment, with maps like Gulf War in Iraq, Bekaa Valley in Lebanon, Fulda Gap Cold War. it has proper flayable opponents from enemy side, like MiG-29 9.12, Mirage F.1, MiG-21bis, Su-25, Su-27S, Su-17M, L-39, Mi-24P, and allied Tornado IDS, F-14A/B, A-6E, A-7E, Viggen, F-4E etc. It has all proper timeframe AI assets, air, ground, sea like MiG-23M, MiG-25PD, Tu-22M, Tu-95, Tu-142, Tu-160, S-200, S-300P, Osa, Kub, Buk, SCUD, F-117, F-16, B-1, B-52, Patriot PAC 1, Hawk etc. It's a timeframe when the F-15C was still the best fighter in the world.

There is no need to argue. Both will be the great.

Just to be clear, there were 4 main F-15C standards: 1979 to 1984: Initial F-15C, similar to F-15A but a bit heavier, reinforced wing for 9G, a bit more internal fuel, added internal AN/ALQ-135 ECM, AN/ALR-45 flares/chaff, upgraded APG-63. Used in combat only by Saudi Arabia during 1991 Gulf War with 2 air kills Mirage F1. 1985 to 2004: F-15C MSIP II, added new F100-PW-220 engines, PACS armament control, MPCD display, AN-ALR-56C RWR, AN/ARL-47 flare/chaff, improved AN/ALQ-135 band 4 ECM, NCTR IFF, PSP processor, ACSG HOTAS, pugraded HUD, partial NVG integration, AMRAAM integration and wiring. This variant achieved nearly all F-15C air kills, it was used in late Cold War in Europe, 1991 Gulf War operation Desert Storm with 36 air kills, 1993-1995 Balkan War operation Deny Flight, 1999 operation Allied Force with 2 air kills MiG-29. 2005 to 2016: mid life upgrade, added Link-16, JHMCS, GPS-navigation, AIM-9X integration, APG-63v(1) with reliability and ECCM upgrade, newer computer. Used in Operation Iraq Freedom, no air kills as Iraq basically didn't have aviation anymore. 2017 to 2026 pahse out: Golden Eagle, added AN/APG(v)3 AESA LPI radar, PAD Passive Attack Display with sensor fusion, AIM-120D integration, Sniper pod, new digital HUD classified AN/ALQ-135 ECM and AN/ALR-56C upgrades, classifed EPAWSS self protection. Used in patrols over Syria operation Inherent Resolve, no air kills.

Yes, especially we're not talking about any complex RCS simulation. Still just a simple table in xml. With just a few numbers, depending on angle and weapon - instead of only one single number. And this would already add a whole lot of depth.

Folland Gnat was actually great, all guns no missiles, cheap, very nimble and responsive, 360 roll in 1 second, stick and rudder aircraft, it would work like slightly newer MiG-17, but in NATO. Or British F-5.

Both 1980s Su-27 and MiG-29 are going to be dangerous opponents for any 1980s aircraft, (and both used very similar and unified avionics and weapon), but neither Su-27 or MiG-29, in 1980s trandard, stand any real chance against 20 years newer 2005 standard F-16C, F/A-18C, F-15C, F-15E. PS: And when EW will be simulated in DCS, the 1980s machines will be even more hopleless against few decades more recent ones, as jamming their radar will be trivial... Plus full fidelity Su-27 and MiG-29 will have some additional RL limitations current grossly simplified FC3 low fidelity ones doesn't model at all. IRST will be way less useful, sensitive to any weather and only situational, radar operation and tuning will be more difficult and time consuming and limited when not being steer from the ground GCI, Su-27 TKS-2-27 datalink will be prone to jamming, will have limited range, refresh rate, number of donors, R-27T/ET will have way more limited practical range and seeker sensitivity, inertial navigation will drift and store only a few points, and many more - and that's the whole beauty. Just like e.g. full fidelity analog F-14. There is simply not much sense to fight 1945 Mustang against 1965 Phantom, 1955 MiG-19 against 1975 F-15 Eagle, or 1985 Su-27 and MiG-29 against 2005 F-16C, F-15C, F/A-18C, F-15E. Or you, obviously, will be at big disadvantage. Just like 2015 F-35, if even remotely realistically modeled, will be seal clubbing 2005 fighters without any effort.

First - MiG-29SMT is a fat, overweight pig, disliked by the pilots. It has the worst kinematic performance, acceleration, maneuverability among whole MiG-29 family. The worst T/W and the worst wing loading. It's even the worst looking with disproportionate humpback. When original 9.12 was one of the best looking jetfighter ever. Second - making F-35 without full documentation already sparks controversy - and there's a whole lot of information about the F-35 publicly available, and openness of the producer to share all non-classified components, logic, workflows, HOTAS, avionics etc., as this is world wide exported whole NATO fighter produced in 1100 pieces already. At the same time there is close to zero MiG-29SMT information available, everything would be totally made up, its avionics, MFD pages, weapon systems, HOTAS functions - it would be a sad joke. Completely fictional abomination not better than amateur-made MODs already free to download.

A bit different; early F-15C from 1979 had strenghtened wing for nearly full envelope 9G, a bit increased internal fuel tank for additional 1745 lbs and internal AN/ALQ-135 ECM. When F-15A with 1000 lbs /450kg lighter airframe having even better high AoA/low speed maneuverability. Cockpit:

Yes, whole manuals, sometimes with few pages remaining classified, are publicly available. And tons of other documentation. Plus retired pilots explaining all the declassified avionics logic, flight regime quirks etc. Sidenote: it's not worth chasing "modern" Russian planes, because it will never be possible and 1980s Soviet ones are just better - this are all the same Su-27/30/35, Su-25/39, MiG-29/SMT platforms, the difference is today MiG-29SMT, Su-35, Su-39 are old, overweight, outdated relisc, unable to compete with F-22, F-35, J-20 or possibly even with much better kinematically and much better armed Eurofighters. When during 1980s MiG-29, Su-25, Su-27, Su-24, MiG-31 were world class aircrafts as still USSR had the resources to stay in the competition when Russia has not. That's why MiG-29 9.12, Su-25, Su-27S, MiG-23MLA, MiG-25PD, MiG-31, Mi-24P, Su-17 are perfect.