bies

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.

This semi-recessed pylons were used in all US interceptors/air superiority fighters like F-4, F-14, F-15, F/A-18 as well, because they significantly lower the drag, when missile is inside fuselage boundary layer. It's obvious when you look at F-4 or F-15 manual and compare drag index of the Sparrow/AMRAAM below the wing and inside semi-recessed pylon. That's why F-4, F-14, F-15, EF are so fast not only clean, but with 4 Sparrow/AMRAAM missiles as well, when e.g. Su-27, F-16, MiG-29 etc. are significantly slower when carrying missiles. And that's part of the reason EF can supercruise so fast being armed and not having full weapon bay. This way missiles generate lower RCS as well. Downside is such pylons are not universal - you can only carry Sparrow/AMRAAM/Meteor there. Plus you can't design semi-recessed pylons for some shape e.g. R-27 missile. But if you want pure air superiority cutting edge kinematic performance - with such pylons you're golden. Good observation with Meteors being rotated, it may have something to do with the drag of the aircraft as you've said, or access to non-turbulent air by the Meteor itself. It may be optional as well, being tested in different positions. And it may also be a configuration with the smallest overall drag found in a wind tunnel/simulation.

Exactly, if 1980s MiG-29 9.12 sells well (and Mi-24 did), then some 1980s Soviet aircrafts like Su-25 or Su-27S may be possible in the future. Only time will tell. Russian (Russian Federation) modernizations will never be even remotely possible due to plethora of reasons; Russian policy, stricter every year, classification paranoia, war, close to zero materials available, zero SME willing to share, some ED stuff working and living inside Russia etc.

From 1985 MSIP II modernisation - up to around 2017 the cockpit looked basically the same. Since 2017 after Radar Modernisation Program (RMP) with AN/APG-63v(3) Low Probability of Intercept (LPI) AESA, F-15C started to receive Passive Attack Display (PAD) 10.4-inch XGA sunlight-readable and NVIS-compatible flat panel display with a resolution of 1024 x 768 pixels. Much later then what we will have in DCS. Below: (1) F-15A/C 1974 - 1985. Original analog-digital mix avionics, modern cockpit with HUD and great layout for 1970s when F-15A was considered a superfighter. (2) F-15C MSIP II 1985 - 2017. added Programmable Armament Control Set (PACS), Multi-Purpose Color Display (MPCD), F-15 Advanced Control Stick Grip (ACSG) (3) F-15C Golden Eagle 2017 - 2026 (phasing out F-15C from USAF). added Passive Attack Display (PAD)

PilotMi8 is right, DCS would need ASW enviroment first, something like "Sea Power" or "Sonalyst's Dangerous Waters", to make ASW complex and engaging. And to develop a few ASW platforms to divide the cost and increse the profit like SH-3 Sea King, S-3 Viking, Ka-25/27, IL-38. Someone with naval background would need to step in and cooperate with ED.

Because making F-35 without full documentation already sparks some controversy - and there's a WHOLE LOT of information about the F-35 publicly available, and openness of the producer to share all the non-classified components, logic, workflows, HOTAS, avionics etc., as this is world-wide exported all NATO fighter, with 1100 airframes produced already. At the same time there is close to zero Su-35 information available, everything would be totally made up, its avionics, MFD pages, weapon systems, HOTAS, logic, workflows, functions, everything fictional - it would be a sad joke. Completely fairytale abomination, not better than amateur-made MODs already free to download. What would be even a satisfaction or enjoyment shooting down enemy knowing everything in your Su-35 is completely made up and false?

Ground pounders, interceptors and trainers as double-seaters, because it makes them better (dedicated sensors and weapon operator or navigator at cost of some performance); like Tornado IDS, A-6E, Mi-24P, F-15E, AH-64D, Mosquito, F-4E, C-101, L-39, UH-1, Gazelle, Bo-105, Mi-8, F-14A/B, TF-51, Mirage F.1BE etc. Fighters as single-seaters, beacuse it makes them better (better kinematic performance, acceleration, range, lower drag, better high AoA stability); like F-15C, F-16C, MiG-21, MiG-29, Su-27, Kfir, F-100, F-104, MiG-17, MiG-19, F/A-18, Eurofighter, Mirage F.1C, P-51, Mirage 2000 etc.

It may expand DCS in terms of RCS simulation. Even if only a bit. It would make flying F-35 much more interesting, analyzing enemy radars and chosing proper route to minimize own RCS.

F-35 may expand DCS in terms of RCS simulation. Even if only a bit. And i'm not talking about shape RCS simulation which would be resource demanding. Right now it's just a single number... Making it even a bit more nuanced e.g. 8 or 12 numbers depending on target's aspect + is the intake/compressor visible? + every missle/bomb it carries under the wing=big, semi-recessed pylon = small, weapon bay = zero increase in RCS. Just that, it would be still extremely easy to calculate for the CPU. It would make flying F-35 much more interesting, analyzing enemy radars and chosing proper route to minimize own RCS. --- E.g. F-16 with small size, blended wing/body is notoriously hard to detect from the front if it's a bit lower (intake invisible, covered by the nose) and carries only 2-4 AA missiles even for capable radars. And when the intake is visible, it carries many ordinance, it's being observed from the side - it's much easier to detect. Or F-4/F-14/F-15/EF carrying Sparrow/AMRAAM on fuselage semi-recessed pylons, it has minimal impact on RCS (and drag) - when e.g. Su-27, MiG-29 or F-16, carrying all the weapon hanging under the wings, every missile significantly increases RCS and (drag). When F-35 can mix weapon bay and under the wings, but no semi-recessed. RCS from different direction: And missiles: (1) full wing pylon (e.g. Su-27, F-16, MiG-29) - big RCS increase (2) semi-recessed pylon (eg. EF, F-15, F-4) - small RCS increase (3) weapon bay (e.g. F-35, F-22, J-20) - no RCS increase vs. vs.

It will have AESA. But F-35 AESA is not just a radar detecting air and ground targets at the same time, it's also an RWR, a jammer, an electronic warfare device, a communication datalink with missiles etc. And it can do all this things at once. And dozen of other strictly classified things.

Both should be included: 2005 F-15C which is already announced, to fit Hornet and Viper. And original 1985 F-15C MSIP II to unlock 20 years of F-15C career from 1985 to 2005, late Cold War, Desert Storm, Balkan War etc. When all F-15C scored all air kills. To be useble over Fulda Gap Cold War Gone Hot map, Iraq Desert Storm, to fight against/along all the DCS late Cold War modules like MiG-29. 9.12, Tornado IDS, Tomcat, MiG-21bis, A-6E, A-7E, Su-17, Mirage F.1, Bo-105, Gazelle L, Mi-24P, Kfir etc. Original 1985 MSIP II already has the same cockpit and nearly all the systems like MPCD display, PACS weapon management system, F-15 ASCG grip, AN/ALR-56C RWR, AMRAAM wiring and integration etc. It would just require to disable Link-16, JHMCS and AIM-9X.

Great trailer! Thanks for the light grey fighter Eagle Please include also original 1985 F-15C MSIP II from late Cold War, Desert Storm and Balkan War - as additional variant or an option in editor. It will unlock additional 20 years of F-15C career from 1985 to 2005. And it will be usefull over Fulda Gap map, Iraq Desert Storm, and it will be a counterpart for all late Cold War modules like MiG-29 9.12, Tornado IDS, Tomcat, Su-17, MiG-21bis, A-6, A-7, Bo-105, Mi-24P, Mirage F.1, Kfir etc. Cockpits are identical, just lacked a few addons like Link-16, JHMCS, AIM-9X integration. cheers

That's true, it would be great if F-15C would also take part in combat over Fulda Gap and Desert Storm: