GGTharos

At which point do you have a significant differentiator in combat?

Magnetic anomaly detectors can be used for very accurate navigation; detecting submarines is not their only use. Combined with the world magnetic model and potentially some other inputs, recognition of where the aircraft is located as compared with the WMM could yield accuracy similar to GPS, or at least reasonably constrain INS drift.

I just checked mine (from 1993), basic empty operating weight with CFT and crew at 37500. This would be the weight at which the F-15Cs lowest 'clean' chart is presented. Each CFT for the F-15E weighs in at approximately 2000lbs.

Different conformals for different purpose. The Icelandic and some of the Alaskan Eagles needed legs over pretty much everything else. Those CFTs do not have the A2G stations, and those F-15s do not have the weight issues that the strikes do when it comes to air to air combat. The EX is a replacement for the E - I suppose it'll be interesting if it ends up replacing the C's for a certain time, but that'll come to an end as soon as NGAD is put in place.

Sure, I'll correct you: The F-15E with CFTs weighs in at some 36400lbs empty, IIRC. It also has massive drag because of the CFTs compared to the F-15C. The F-15E has a far heavier nose, and that causes issues with AoA performance, CFTs or no CFTs. The F-15E's engines eat fuel a lot faster if you want more of that thrust. F-15E pilots don't do A2A unless it's against low threats, or if for some reason the F-22's and F-15Cs, and in some cases F-16's are not available. And at this point, F-35s will outperform them just due to stealth. Think for a moment: The USAF never re-engined the F-15C after the -220s. There's a reason for that, given that they've received other significant upgrades. But I come back to the most important thing: F-15Es do not take over F-15C duties because they do not train for them - basically if you're using F-15Es for front-line A2A you're desperate.

Real. What the in-game one does at the point of losing track I don't know.

It receives them but it ignores them - either permanently or perhaps starts obeying them again if track is lost. The last part isn't specified.

No, what you're seeing here is a lack of the most basic split-s detection and mitigation logic. This sort of logic is known to be available since the AIM-7F at least.

Removing the CFTs from an F-15E for air to air roles would be an act of desperation (ie. all of the dedicated air to air fighters are for some reason gone, or otherwise unavailable). In DCS, it would just be standard. I hope they don't remove them or at minimum make it server enforceable. And yes, it is a rocket-ship...and like a rocket, it'll go fast going in a straight line more or less. It still won't have F-15C performance.

ED has incorporated a thrust increase based on altitude behind the scenes since DCS came out ages ago. The exact details are not known. Everything is not 'declassified' and even for things that are, the information may simply not be available to you and HB might not be able to release what they have. Why you ask? In some cases people have purchased this information via FOIA and are unwilling to release it (you can do your own FOIA request), in others the information comes from proprietary sources such as the manufacturer, released to a developer specifically for say, making the module, and they do not allow further dissemination of the documents.

Mk38 and 52 is 2.9s ~8000lbf. They're made by different producers as was required in order to protect production against one producer having problems etc.

Yep, it depends - I don't know the exact procedures but hosing down the wheels can be a thing. You m ight also be stuck in the cockpit for an hour (as I understand it, the exploding part is basically the wheel halves that the tyre is mounted on separating, so those metal ... disks shall we say, blow out to the sides). So you just stay out of the way of that until it's safe. The determination can also be done mathematically since you can calculate the energy that is imparted during braking from the friction.

It does automatically blow your tires. While it might not blow them on the spot, the aircraft will be taken to a hot-brakes ramp and no one will be approaching from the side of the wheels until a certain amount has passed for them to cool, or more likely just explode. The situation you describe isn't on the margins in a sort of 'maybe they will maybe they won't' deal, the wheels will explode and such things have killed people IRL. You're right though, DCS does not model this or any kind of tyre wear so whatever It's supposed to settle where you want it to be Your glideslope is bad, resulting in a more dangerous and potentially later flare, and a longer ground-run. It is a good part of the reason you overran the runway

No, the advantage of the EX is a new fuselage and new equipment. The number of missiles doesn't matter that much since those aircraft won't be able to perform BVR on the level of the F-22 or F-15C, or probably not even on the level of the F-35. The F-15EX is very broadly speaking a replacement for the aging F-15E airframes.

This is bunk. While it will be great to bring the FC3 sensors up to part with FF modules, FF modules have been doing perfectly well against FC3 aircraft in pretty much every way. And that is because nothing in those FC3 modules is magical in any way. In a number of ways those FC3 modules perform worse than they would if they had an FF counterpart, and an easiest way to show that is the bricks on the eagle radar that won't move when you make a turn. It's a really basic thing which makes life harder despite the whole 'FC3 players have it so easy' propaganda. How about TWS? Yep, it tracks like SWT which is wrong, but the moment you even think 'notch' it goes 'I give up'. So yep, FC3 sensors are modeled on a simpler level, but the basics of their operation and capability remain on a reasonably similar level. The weapons? They're the same so that capability is identical, so you can fly respectable BVR tactics against them, and with high quality flight models you can prosecute a dogfight just as well as you should expect. So I would like to understand why you have that opinion despite the facts, or are these facts just being interpreted in a different way?

That's a great question. And the answer is, there's not as much live OPFOR without FC3 and that would suck. While I'm not necessarily that interested in your server (I guess you might say I like my MFDs? But mostly I like my F-15C) I can appreciate the work you've done it, and good job. It looks like it's popular, successful and people have fun times on it and that's what's really important. I'd call to question the 10km EWR thing but whatever - I think that's about the only thing I'd pick on and I understand that you have your reasons for doing it.

F-15Es have them too, but you have to have a recent enough upgrade.

The SIT page will come later.

I didn't. It won't behave correctly if the rocket motors are vastly different. Some particular trajectories may end up being more or less a match, but most won't.

Because the performance won't be the same. Dual thrust has very different behavior in specific cases, and also top speed tends to be lower. Look at sparrow for example.

You just had bad opponents. Not either. The F-15E's air to air capabilities can deal with low threat opposition, but I imagine all that is happening when air superiority has already been gained. Basically if you're thinking of the F-15E as some form of swing role figher, stop thinking of it that way. The DCS world, especially typical MP which is highly disorganized and there's really no air superiority is a bit different and doesn't represent IRL warfare.

And temperature dependent.

ISP can vary by altitude, that's why any thrust/ISP figure by itself is not enough. ISP can increase (and does) with an increase in altitude (drop in pressure) and this is modeled in DCS in a simple way IIRC. A missile can have +7% thrust at high altitudes compared to SL.

Are you seeing the mipple with the vertical box there?

Yep, it's that mundane