Spurts

I don't know about the 3D model (I know RAZBAM is making a Sniper XR model and I wouldn't know the physical difference between a LII and LG4) but the functionality is better than the LII.

JHMCS is already in game for other modules. Litening II is in game for other modules. AFAIK Sniper XR is new but so was the Litening G4 used on the Harrier.

turn down the contrast to see if it's working. Max brightness and min contrast will green out your whole HUD. If Max Bright and Max Contrast only the hottest of things will show up at all and it will look like all that changed is the HUD text.

the first video of my dedicated time in the Harrier.

In the terms of the FX Development Concept Paper (DCP), the F-15 is "Optimized for counter-air missions" operating as part of TAC. ... It is no surprise, therefore, to learn that the DCP calls for the F-15 to be "superior in air combat to any present or postulated Soviet fighters both in close-in, visual encounters and in stand-off or all-weather encounters." According to the assessment, an improved F-4E with new wings and engines was not considered able to meet FX objectives. The performance requirements embodies in the FX Request for Proposals were intended to equip the resulting fighter to better all existing and proposed Warsaw Pact opponents. As of the late 1960s these were represented by the small, agile, MiG-21 ...(and -23 and -25 and Su-15) At the same time some compromises had to be accepted, so that the USAF's original requirement for a maximum speed of Mach 2.7 at high altitudes, for example, was reduced to Mach 2.3 with a Mach 2.5 burst capability. The higher speed not only would have prevented the use of a bubble canopy... More generally, performance was to be a consequence of high thrust-to-weight and low wing-loading, which had been recognized as the fundamental elements in providing the desired degree of superiority in performance and agility. By the time Boyd was assigned to the FX program in October 1966 he had already developed his theory of energy maneuverability... Thus the F-15s low wing loading and high thrust-to-weight ratio combine to make it exceptionally maneuverable. (In Israeli service) Combat is usually conducted at close quarters with infra-red homing missiles and, of course, the 20mm cannon, underlining the continuing requirement for the classic dogfighting type of aircraft. Excerpts from The Great Book of Modern Warplanes F-15 chapters written by Michael J. Gething and published in 1987. Can we put to bed that the Eagle was not designed with close fighting in mind? As if the 900+ round ammo drum and 4 Sidewinder stations didn't already cover that.

If the F-105 can have the most gun kills of Vietnam for the US (more than all other US types combined IIRC) then anything is possible even in real war.

cool! I am actually coming back to the harrier to use some of these for the first time (only use Sidearm, APKWS, and LJDAM right now)

8 AMRAAMs and the speed and fuel to employ them is plenty

How many AA kills in total have there been in the last 20 years? All else aside, to Nahen's original point, the F-15E will do just fine in BVR. If BVR fails it will be fast enough and have enough fuel to run away and allow "contempt of engagement." Anyone who takes the Mudhen into a 1v1 gunfight server clearly likes a challenge, but I also see videos of people being successful with the AV-8B there too so if that's your jam then go for it.

but the answer to your second part is Yes. 15 units is the best balance of speed and turning. It's also where lateral stick for roll is still effective but so is rudder use.

Lookup Operation Skyburner. And the F-14 was absolutely designed for maneuver combat along with high speed interception.

Study up then. The first engagement the F-15 got kills with Sparrow, Sidewinder, and canon all in one mission. So the answer is more than 0. The F-15 was designed to be dominant in all phases of fighter combat. Why engage in WVR where risk is greater if you can kill them all BVR? The bubble canopy, low wing loading, conical camber, and 900+ rounds of canon ammo are all things that would hinder it if it was only meant to be a better interceptor than an F-4. BTW, the F-4 was faster than the F-15. Operation Skyburner gives an idea of what the F-4 would have been capable of if given J79-GE-19 motors.

The F-15 was the FIRST fighter built with Ps requirements in the design. This is a historical fact. It absolutely was built to maneuver. That is why it has a conical camber on the leading edge which adds drag in supersonic dash, because it was less complex and less weight compared to adding LEFs and the drag penalty was considered to be worth it for the benefit gained in maneuvering. The F-16 was being developed after the fact to get a Hi/Lo mix of vastly capable but expensive airframes paired with a higher number of less capable and less expensive airframes. It was the F-16 where GD went above and beyond the required maneuvering specification of 9G sustained at 60% fuel and instead delivered 9G sustained at 100% fuel.

I was not familiar with AGM-130. Thank you. I have not heard that ED is adding it to the game, only the GR mods.

That happens often with updates

The Hornet has better standoff options: JSOW, HARM, Harpoon, SLAM, SLAM-ER. AFAIK nothing on the F-15E module will have more standoff range than a Maverick or GBU-24 (both avail on Hornet as well). That said, I am not a fan of those munitions in most cases, but you cannot say the loadouts are equivalent when only one has standoff capability.

Not by my experience. I've gotten the F-14A with 4/2/2 loadout to 1.6M above 53,000ft. According to the -1, an F-15E with -229 motors CFTs, 8AAMs, and pods can only reach 48,000ft at that speed on a standard day and no faster than ~1.7M at any altitude. Ditching the pods might help some, but not enough to make up a 5,000ft deficit. (Altitude it what matters for a Phoenix)

Quest 2. That was the first (and thankfully only) time I've had such a drastic and bizarre drop in frames.

I just ran the mission again after a update to my VR software and the problem did not repeat.

since Ps drops to zero at ~600kt, I'm going to say not much. Don't worry so much about best STR like that. 15-20 AoA on the gauge will give you roughly best STR. 25-30 AoA gives a very tight turn circle and high pitch rate (going full nose down trim helps prevent AoA excursions past 30). 10 AoA lets you pick speed back up fairly well. Getting the most out of the Tomcat means something should always be changing.

you might just be rusty?

Hot start at Kobuleti, self made ME mission, with nothing but a few aircraft on a ramp. Nothing was close to the Apache as I was half an airfield away from all the planes on the ramp.

In my first flight in a while, latest open beta, I took out an Apache and was shocked to see slideshow frames and frame tearing when taking off. Once speed picked up the issue went away and it came back when I slowed down to land. Anyone else have this issue or was it just me?

Gotcha. Thanks.

In a PD radar a radar return is processed into two factors, Range Gate and Doppler Gate. A Range Gate return that has no Doppler Gate component is automatically filtered out as "ground clutter". This is what allows look-down shoot-down to work at all, because otherwise the Range gate with the strongest return will almost always be the ground. Pure Doppler modes need no Range Gate and ONLY measure closing velocity and cannot be used for targeting purposes. Pulse modes only use Range Gate and cannot be used against aircraft near the ground (the ratio of slant range to aircraft and slant range to ground needs to be enough that the notionally smaller return from the aircraft becomes the strongest signal received and by enough margin to pass the SNR Clutter filters)