F15C Suggestion- Adding Strike/Ground attack loadouts

[Kev2go]

I realise the F15 is a meant to be a air superiority first and foremost, and was used as such through most of its life.

 

However it's missing its secondary strike characteristics.

 

Irl the F15 could mount air to ground ordinance, but it doesn't have such options ingame.

 

I hope to see these added with dcs 2.0

 

Since there is no strike eagle or f16, the F15c should have this ability too, since it actually could.All Russian planes have secondary strike characteristics ( ie Su27 & mig29)

 

 

Here is a proof: Standard aircraft characteristics Datasheet on the F15c from post gulf war circa 1992.

 

http://www.avialogs.com/index.php/en/aircraft/usa/mcdonnelldouglas/f-15eagle/f-15c-eagle-standard-aircraft-characteristics-february-1992.html

 

 

The mission & description says: "The airplane had additional capability to perform an attack mission with conventional externally mounted stores".

 

 

to see the specific External Stores/ weaponry mounts please go to page 8 of the PDF.

 

There are many different bomb types but notably including the MK80 series, and Gbu bombs.

 

 

I know this could be modded, but I think it deserves to be added officially by ED.

Edited September 18, 2015 by Kev2go

[pr1malr8ge]

I realise the F15 is a meant to be a air superiority first and foremost, and was used as such through most of its life.

 

However it's missing its secondary strike characteristics.

 

Irl the F15 could mount air to ground ordinance, but it doesn't have such options ingame.

 

I hope to see these added with dcs 2.0

 

Since there is no strike eagle or f16, the F15c should have this ability too, since it actually could.All Russian planes have secondary strike characteristics ( ie Su27 & mig29)

 

 

Here is a proof: Standard aircraft characteristics Datasheet on the F15c from post gulf war circa 1992.

 

http://www.avialogs.com/index.php/en/aircraft/usa/mcdonnelldouglas/f-15eagle/f-15c-eagle-standard-aircraft-characteristics-february-1992.html

 

 

The mission & description says: "The airplane had additional capability to perform an attack mission with conventional externally mounted stores".

 

 

to see the specific External Stores/ weaponry mounts please go to page 8 of the PDF.

 

There are many different bomb types but notably including the MK80 series, and Gbu bombs.

 

 

I know this could be modded, but I think it deserves to be added officially by ED.

 

From what I remember only the Isrealies have used the f15c for this role. How ever all f15c should have the ability to do so. It's just a matter of enabling the software and changing hard points?

 

as far as ED implimenting this It wont happen. They are working on the f18 ATM..

 

I think the only other thing to be done to the f15 is going to be the FM FE will be tweeked to resolve the TRO issue at alt. other then that The model wont be touched again atleast not for some time afaik.

[104th_Maverick]

I know this could be modded, but I think it deserves to be added officially by ED.

 

 

Nothing extra is going to be added to the FC3 level Aircraft, they are not intended to be 'Study Sim' Modules.

 

Suggestions like yours will have to wait until we one day have a DCS F-15C, not an FC3 F-15C.

[Dauntless]

Originally Posted by Maverick,

"Nothing extra is going to be added to the FC3 level Aircraft, they are not intended to be 'Study Sim' Modules."

 

What about MiG-29? :cry:

[Chrinik]

Originally Posted by Maverick,

"Nothing extra is going to be added to the FC3 level Aircraft, they are not intended to be 'Study Sim' Modules."

 

What about MiG-29? :cry:

 

What about it? They aren´t adding anything in terms of capability or weapons, just updating the cockpit and FM to be in line with the rest of the FC-3 aircraft.

[Kev2go]

but I'm not asking for it to be full fidelity, its meant to be added as fc3 level.

 

su27s and mig29s have ground attack capacity and are not full fidelity.

 

why should the Russian planes have more fleshed out capabilties than the F15c? its a bit unfair.

 

America lacks a FC3 fighter jet with strike capacity, while the Russians don't have this issue.

this probably wouldn't take that long to implement. They can already use existing 3d models for ordinance that are already available for other aircraft.

 

Its a quick solution instead of waiting on Air Force F15E strike eagle or a F16c, or the Navy carrier borne multirole F18c.

 

Its good enough if this gets in ED's radar screen, doesn't have to be a asap thing, but rather somehere along the to do list, at some point in the future.

 

The Stat sheet is called "Standard" aircraft characteristics. so it means basically any F15C has this capacity. It isn't expermental or a very Specific upgrade for a Specific block of the F15. So think this is a legitimate capability.

 

Its honestly a shame ED overlooked this feature to begin with, when first developing FC3

Edited September 19, 2015 by Kev2go

[FSKRipper]

but I'm not asking for it to be full fidelity, its meant to be added as fc3 level.

 

su27s and mig29s have ground attack capacity and are not full fidelity.

 

why should the Russian planes have more fleshed out capabilties than the F15c? its a bit unfair.

 

America lacks a FC3 fighter jet with strike capacity, while the Russians don't have this issue.

this probably wouldn't take that long to implement. They can already use existing 3d models for ordinance that are already available for other aircraft.

 

Its a quick solution instead of waiting on Air Force F15E strike eagle or a F16c, or the Navy carrier borne multirole F18c.

 

Its good enough if this gets in ED's radar screen, doesn't have to be a asap thing, but rather somehere along the to do list, at some point in the future.

 

The Stat sheet is called "Standard" aircraft characteristics. so it means basically any F15C has this capacity. It isn't expermental or a very Specific upgrade for a Specific block of the F15. So think this is a legitimate capability.

 

Its honestly a shame ED overlooked this feature to begin with, when first developing FC3

 

As stated dozens of times, balancing will not happen in DCS because there is no reason for it. The russian planes use AG munitions in real life, the american F-15C not.

 

Theoretical Options are completely senseless as we have seen in another thread regarding the F-14 Tomcat and the Amraam.

 

If you essentially need a western fighter plane which drop bombs wait for the Mirage otherwise the A-10 will do it.

[Kev2go]

its hardly fantasy/theoretical when its stated in the manual, that the f15c has strike capabilities and the Standard aircraft characteristics, shows what ordinance it could carry.

 

"Standard" = common. this is not a 1 time experiment or a theoretical what if.

 

 

 

I provided a legitimate source. basically any f15c should be capable of carrying ordinance, which like the mk80 series, rockeye, and cbus are already ingame.

 

& the Isrealis actually did use the F15c in ground attack in such configuration, confirming it can be done. You can basically just choose your country as isreal in mission editor: and presto you have an isreali F15c. ;)

 

So just because it wasn't used for whatever reason in actual combat with the usaf. doesn't mean it shouldn't be available for usaf eagles, when its listed in the "STANDARD" aircraft characteristics.

Edited September 19, 2015 by Kev2go

[cichlidfan]

Regardless of your sources and their veracity, which nobody has questioned, it is highly unlikely that ED is going to add new systems, requiring revisiting old code and writing new documentation, when they have so many other current projects in the works.

 

EDIT:

 

I provided a legitimate source. basically any f15c should be capable of ...

 

The operative word there is 'should' not 'is' and that is a pretty big difference.

Edited September 19, 2015 by cichlidfan

[Kev2go]

Regardless of your sources and their veracity, which nobody has questioned, it is highly unlikely that ED is going to add new systems, requiring revisiting old code and writing new documentation, when they have so many other current projects in the works.

 

EDIT:

 

 

 

The operative word there is 'should' not 'is' and that is a pretty big difference.

 

 

And yet you have modules like the F86F. Its supposed to be Representative of a USAF f86, and yet it has access to gar8s.

 

this was not standard or common issue, and most sabres that were armed with gar8s 1956 and later, were exports.

 

I have looked at standard charactersitics sheet, f86f block 25- 40, and they don't have gar8s.

 

and I cant find any images or actual recorded usage of USAF F86F actually armed with gar8s.

 

 

IMo f15c having ordinance is about as legitimate if not more so than a select handfull of USAF based F86F variants that were retroffited post korea with gar8s, unlike the f15c did not have standard issue munitions

Edited September 19, 2015 by Kev2go

[cichlidfan]

What a different company did with a different aircraft is not relevant to why ED is unlikely to do what you want. This isn't about whether they should be there or not but rather about whether ED is likely to spend the time on implementation.

[FSKRipper]

You can spare your time proving which aircraft did what and which could do this thing.

 

As Maverick said, as ED said, there won't be such thing like bomb dropping F-15C's in the next years, point!

[Kev2go]

What a different company did with a different aircraft is not relevant to why ED is unlikely to do what you want. This isn't about whether they should be there or not but rather about whether ED is likely to spend the time on implementation.

 

 

So I'm taking so much flak for wishing aircraft to be fully fleshed out? because some features that are based on legitimate sources, which are said to be standard issue were overlooked, due to lack of research? Why is this an assumption that I am the only one interested in this?

 

That Russia had FC3 level of air to air aircraft that have said secondary ground attack features' but the F15c doesn't, which in that case it honestly should?

 

 

 

I'm in no way forcing or harassing the company to do this, I just think its worth bringing to their attention, because it seems like an overlooked feature. If they say no, or even if its low priority to be worked not anytime in the near future. , its good enough of an answer.

 

player feedback on content should be met with positive/understanding responsiveness, not hostility.

 

but as of now theres no official response, so far its just a few other players "white knighting" for ED. There should be an official response.

Edited September 19, 2015 by Kev2go

[FSKRipper]

To make it short, the Mig-29 and the Su-27 in DCS carry AG munitions because they do in RL.

 

The american F-15C carry absolutely no AG munitions (ignoring the cannon). Because a publication tells it could, it doesn't mean that it will be done. Even if it is possible in theory!

You can search the forum, in one of the earlier threads it was stated that the certification for bombs was stopped. This means theoretically it could carry them but it isn't allowed to do so.

 

There was an idea after Iraqi freedom to wire them for JDAM delivery but this would need upgrades for the radar, the navigational equipment, the weapons computer and so on. Simply to expensive.

 

You can be sure that ED is aware of your topic since this comes up regularly which you would know if using the search function.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=140635

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=138353

 

The "take home message" is:

 

You won't see any A2G stores on F-15's in FC3.

 

I hope it is official enough for you!

Edited September 19, 2015 by FSKRipper

[Kev2go]

The "take home message" is:

 

 

 

I hope it is official enough for you!

 

 

 

Fair enough. If not for the fc3 f15c, perhaps when a full fidelity F15c comes around there could be a chance for ordinance carry to be modelled.

 

 

On another note how different is the Isrealli f15c? They actually did use the f15c in an attack capacity.

 

Its just a matter of software for weaponry and adding bomb mounts?

Edited September 19, 2015 by Kev2go

[GGTharos]

USAF went as far as removing some of the A2G software from their F-15C's IIRC, ie. 'not a pound for air to ground'.

 

Israel followed a different path.

 

I believe today those USAF eagles will train for some A2G things, but they're still pretty much treated as specialized air to air only, and with good reason (who needs to turn their eagles into targets when they have beagles around?)

[Exorcet]

For what it's worth though, Israel is in DCS and so is their F-15. Also, if I recall the FC F-15 isn't a specific model, but a mishmash, so adding A/G to it in US form probably isn't a big deal.

 

As much as I think it would be a nice feature though, it's probably not going to happen until DCS F-15, as was said already.

[DarkFire]

I can see the attraction of having A2G capability for the Eagle, but the mission dictates the tactics, right? Wy would anyone take an F-15C with bombs when an A-10C can accomplish the task much more effectively? Similarly for the Russian aircraft, taking an Su-27 armed with mud moving ordnance would make no sense if I had an Su-25T available.

 

Now, if we had an F-15E to fly...

[will-]

if you want it in the game, YOU can do it!

 

Example: Mod f-18 with a/g capabilities in DCS.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-MisNKBneg

[pr1malr8ge]

I can see the attraction of having A2G capability for the Eagle, but the mission dictates the tactics, right? Wy would anyone take an F-15C with bombs when an A-10C can accomplish the task much more effectively? Similarly for the Russian aircraft, taking an Su-27 armed with mud moving ordnance would make no sense if I had an Su-25T available.

 

Now, if we had an F-15E to fly...

 

 

If the option was available to carry bombs in the f15c I would do so.. I could provide CAP along with getting ground kills when no threat is eminent towards the GPers

[okieordie78]

Me personally, I would like to see the fc3 a/c removed completely someday. I see enough modules inbound to keep me busy enough. When I want a FC a/c, I go to FC2. Just my 2 cents.

[Capn kamikaze]

Me personally, I would like to see the fc3 a/c removed completely someday. I see enough modules inbound to keep me busy enough. When I want a FC a/c, I go to FC2. Just my 2 cents.

 

.... and if you don't have FC2?

 

I paid good money for FC3 thanks, so unless they're upgraded then I don't want them removed.

 

If you don't want them then uninstall...

[Exorcet]

I can see the attraction of having A2G capability for the Eagle, but the mission dictates the tactics, right? Wy would anyone take an F-15C with bombs when an A-10C can accomplish the task much more effectively? Similarly for the Russian aircraft, taking an Su-27 armed with mud moving ordnance would make no sense if I had an Su-25T available.

 

Now, if we had an F-15E to fly...

 

I'd take the F-15 over the A-10. Also, militarizes don't get the luxury of always having the ideal tool for the job. While unlikely, there may be not better option than the F-15 available on a given day. Your options would be to not attack or attack with the F-15, and the former doesn't get much done.

 

Me personally, I would like to see the fc3 a/c removed completely someday. I see enough modules inbound to keep me busy enough. When I want a FC a/c, I go to FC2. Just my 2 cents.

 

To what benefit? Removing anything doesn't really make any sense.

[DarkFire]

Me personally, I would like to see the fc3 a/c removed completely someday. I see enough modules inbound to keep me busy enough. When I want a FC a/c, I go to FC2. Just my 2 cents.

 

If we had DCS: Su-27 and DCS: F-15 and DCS: Su-25T I'd agree completely. Otherwise that makes very little sense. I suppose one could argue that the simplified modelling of the FC-level aircraft make them easier to operate, but I'd counter by saying that the greater fidelity of DCS-level modelling provides more options and capability. They simply take more time and effort to learn. I genuinely don't see your reasoning here. :wassat:

 

I'd take the F-15 over the A-10. Also, militarizes don't get the luxury of always having the ideal tool for the job. While unlikely, there may be not better option than the F-15 available on a given day. Your options would be to not attack or attack with the F-15, and the former doesn't get much done.

 

True, and you make a very valid point. In reality, If I had a strike mission to fly and all I had available was an Su-27 then I'd absolutely take it over not being able to complete the mission at all, but such a restriction in-game would be entirely artificial. I get than the A-10 has some limitations, so maybe that wasn't a very good example on my part. A better comparison could be be deliberately taking an F-15C when you had F-15E's available. Not taking the more capable strike platform would be illogical surely.

[Kev2go]

Ok if wasn't in any way planned to be added( and if it still isn't), why are there screenshots from ED where an F15c is armed with mk82 snake eyes? Its from a preview of DCS 2.0

 

 

 

Heres a link to the DCS world 1.5- 2.0 discussion thread, First page, first post.

 

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=135473

Edited September 25, 2015 by Kev2go