F-15E?

[Rainmaker]

We’ve also put a few in the dirt along the way so the count is lower. There are a few D’s that were converted to E’s, of those some were 229s, and a few of those were rolled back to 220s so there is some skew there.

[HawkDCS]

Sorry for dumb questions but what are CFTs?

 

What’s the big difference between the D and Es?

[Rainmaker]

Sorry for dumb questions but what are CFTs?

 

What’s the big difference between the D and Es?

 

Conformal Fuel Tanks. They are the flush mounted external fuel tanks on the E model. The C/D models can actually carry them as well but currently aren’t part of a standard load.

 

There is some current testing being done on the possibility of bringing back the CFTs to the A/A version to extend the gas load/range.

 

D is the two-seater version of the C. E models are the ground strike version of the F-15.

Edited June 28, 2018 by Rainmaker

[HawkDCS]

Thanks didn’t even know 15 had those tanks.

 

Amazing to see the 15 out accelerate the 16 what a beast.

[BritTorrent]

I can tell you from a 1st person experience, the AdA actual pilots of the Mirage 2000C actual complain is about something NO ONE complained (I wont say it, leave that to DCS M2000C experts) and the complain is about the procedure we used instead of it's functionality.

And about some other complains by the community? well, some stuff (switches) in the cockpit are not even pilot intended but ground crew intended, and yes, the complain is about those not being implemented.

About Harrier functionality, did you know that the NATOPS/manual hanging around freely in the internet actually has almost NOTHING to do with the version we did for DCS? it's mostly DAY ATTACK version (phased out long time ago) but only a REAL USMC AV-8B pilot can tell, so the so called Harrier Bible being used in RAZBAM inquisition is actually..well...obsolete.

We do know since we do have real, very much in active, AV-8B pilots testing the module.

And now about bugs, functionality and stuff "unfinished", DCS is a continuously evolving simulation, some stuff is "there" some stuff is simply "not there" yet and some is there but not fully implemented until the next iteration of DCS arrives, the most notorious might be A/G radar, some thing work today, tomorrow they wont (hence the coming and going bugs), we take the blame and find the solution (because something was changed in the code) but the bottom line is that this means that DCS is alive, always changing and evolving and we have to deal with it and constantly adapting, that's why we keep working with the M2000C (which is officially complete) and the Harrier being finished up. I love DCS, love the development mechanics behind it and i praise Eagle Dynamics for what they are doing.

F-15E is a go, Mig-23 is a go, A-29 is a go, and some others that i simply can't talk freely due to my OWN policies. It has been said and explained ad nauseam our work flow, there is a very capable team, in all fronts. I could fill pages with tech stuff taken from the real world, pictures and stuff and explain to you how it works...in real life, but this is not REAL aircraft development, nor actual avionics or flight instruments, while in real world you have to work with navigational algorithms, in software development is as clear as if alingnementTime <= 4 then Pos = Pos + random; else Pos = Pos(this is not an actual code line) and then the DCS engine handles the rest, this is where we have to work hand in hand with ED(which is phenomenal in this department) . But these lines of code are not going to write themselves, it has to be done manually and that takes time (hence our silence), yes silence means we are working.

So there you have it, I'm telling you what most are not willing to tell you, but those in the know (and i know there are software developers being DCS fans) know exactly what i mean.

Now i will step down from this soap box and be quiet again, since there is a lot happening and yes, some of these guys actually work in Sundays.

Best regards

 

 

Ron Zambrano

RAZBAM Simulations, LLC

Owner & Founder

Prowler I'm a bit confused about your Harrier NATOPS statement.

 

The NATOPS version we have is from 2011. It regularly references systems that the day attack Harrier doesn't have such as NAVFLIR, radar, night vision devices etc.

 

The TAC manuals we have talk about FLIR and radar too.

 

Unless you've got access to even more recent documents than we have, which I accept is a possibility, I don't understand how your statement makes sense. Our manuals are very clearly written for Night Attack Harriers.

Edited June 29, 2018 by BritTorrent

[DeathRaptor5]

I am very excited for this. I'm assuming it'll be getting AIM-9X's?

Unfortunately it looks like we are going to get a mid 2000s F-15E aka pre JHMCS/Aim-9x. JHMCS was integrated into the f-15e starting in the late 2000s and into early 2010s. During that time they change the function of the hotas so that it will function with JHMCS and they replaced the UFC to one found in the newer export Variants.

 

 

Edited June 30, 2018 by DeathRaptor5
Grammar

[GGTharos]

You don't need JHMCS for AIM-9X.

[Rainmaker]

Unfortunately it looks like we are going to get a mid 2000s F-15E aka pre JHMCS/Aim-9x. JHMCS was integrated into the f-15e starting in the late 2000s and into early 2010s. During that time they change the function of the hotas so that it will function with JHMCS and they replaced the UFC to one found in the newer export version.

 

You’d still be far away from the 9X.

 

The UFC is just more user friendly and a permanent solution to making the cockpit NVG compatable. The alternative was filter kits all over the place either mounted on studs or velcro stuck all over the cockpit.

[Sierra99]

A lot of extra weigtt, lot of extra drag, different radar, gun rounds count is lower...not really all that close but can still holds it own depending on the scenario.

 

You can slim it down, dump the CFTs, etc...but with both in a combat config they aren’t really equal when it gets to the knife fight.

 

The -229 motors can close that gap a little bit, but again, they are still not really all that close.

Ya know simple fact is this...most people don't understand USAF missions. The F-15E isn't an Air Superiority Fighter...it is a Strike Fighter.

 

What does that mean?

 

It means it's not COMPETING with the F-15C for bragging rights. It is a bomb truck. Period. Just like the A-10C.

 

The Difference is IF it gets jumped by an Su-27 one the way to do Bomb Truck things...it has a far better chance of surviving than the A-10C. If you wanna use it for a fighter...your choosing the wrong Airframe.

[Sierra99]

Unfortunately it looks like we are going to get a mid 2000s F-15E aka pre JHMCS/Aim-9x. JHMCS was integrated into the f-15e starting in the late 2000s and into early 2010s. During that time they change the function of the hotas so that it will function with JHMCS and they replaced the UFC to one found in the newer export Variants.

 

 

[ATTACH]188835[/ATTACH][ATTACH]188836[/ATTACH]

 

Exactly what are you basing this statement on?

[jojo]

Ya know simple fact is this...most people don't understand USAF missions. The F-15E isn't an Air Superiority Fighter...it is a Strike Fighter.

 

What does that mean?

 

It means it's not COMPETING with the F-15C for bragging rights. It is a bomb truck. Period. Just like the A-10C.

 

The Difference is IF it gets jumped by an Su-27 one the way to do Bomb Truck things...it has a far better chance of surviving than the A-10C. If you wanna use it for a fighter...your choosing the wrong Airframe.

 

On one hand you’re right.

 

On the other hand in DCS World, if the F-15C doesn’t get an upgrade by then, the F-15E in AA load (without fastpack) will be more interesting for air superiority. :smilewink:

[mvsgas]

... The F-15E isn't an Air Superiority Fighter...it is a Strike Fighter.

...

The funniest part is some want bombs on the Mirage and A2A missiles on this one. :dunno:

[jojo]

The funniest part is some want bombs on the Mirage and A2A missiles on this one. :dunno:

 

The difference is that the F-15E weapon system is plenty capable in AA, as much as F-15C.

The plane could be multirole.

It’s a matter of fastpack (pain in the a.. to take on/ off) and crew training.

 

On the other hand, the Mirage 2000C weapon system is limited in AG.:smilewink:

[DeathRaptor5]

After searching google on when f-15e got the aim 9x. I manage to Stumble on a dot&e annual report on the aim 9x program. So I went to DOT&E web page and found the had and annual report on the aim 9x beginning from 1999 to 2015. I found that the aim 9x was integrated on the f-15e in 2015.2015aim9x.pdf I also found when it was integrated on F/A-18A/F, F-15C, F-22, f-35 and f-16C/D.

 

 

Beginning in 2003 F-15C/D and F/A-C/D started receive the aim-9x. 2003AIM-9X.pdf

 

 

F/A-18E/F Started to receive the aim-9x in 2005.2005aim-9x.pdf

 

F-16C started to received the aim-9x in 2010.2010aim9x.pdf

 

F-22 and F-35 Started to be integrated with aim 9x in 2015.

[gavagai]

On one hand you’re right.

 

On the other hand in DCS World, if the F-15C doesn’t get an upgrade by then, the F-15E in AA load (without fastpack) will be more interesting for air superiority. :smilewink:

 

It's not hard to be more interesting than FC3. Hopefully the F15E will get the 9x and jhmcs and the C won't.

[SDsc0rch]

hopefully the C *WILL* get the 9x and JHMCS !!

 

 

 

what a strange thing to say

 

 

why would you say that

 

 

??

[Weasel]

After searching google on when f-15e got the aim 9x. I manage to Stumble on a dot&e annual report on the aim 9x program. So I went to DOT&E web page and found the had and annual report on the aim 9x beginning from 1999 to 2015. I found that the aim 9x was integrated on the f-15e in 2015.[ATTACH]188850[/ATTACH] I also found when it was integrated on F/A-18A/F, F-15C, F-22, f-35 and f-16C/D.

 

 

Beginning in 2003 F-15C/D and F/A-C/D started receive the aim-9x. [ATTACH]188852[/ATTACH]

 

 

F/A-18E/F Started to receive the aim-9x in 2005.[ATTACH]188851[/ATTACH]

 

F-16C started to received the aim-9x in 2010.[ATTACH]188849[/ATTACH]

 

F-22 and F-35 Started to be integrated with aim 9x in 2015.

 

In the last issue of Combat Aircraft was an exercise report of “Iniohos 2018“. An unit‘s commanding officer stated:“ This is an exciting period for the F-15E. Over the next few years we are modernizing our radars, upgrading to receive the AIM-9X, and a major upgrade effort known as EPAWSS (Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability System) is under way to give the F-15E an entirely new suite of defensive capabilities“.

[DeathRaptor5]

Speaking of the C I did find Where Air Force put the switch to turn on JHMCS and were they move it when PAS display put in the C. I just hope that if ED makes a full fidelity modules of the C they'll make a new cockpit for the C.

 

Edited July 1, 2018 by DeathRaptor5

[SDsc0rch]

+1

[DeathRaptor5]

Any one looking forward more complaint about the F-15 ridiculous durability to battle damage?

 

[mvsgas]

Any one looking forward more complaint about the F-15 ridiculous durability to battle damage?

 

[ATTACH]188894[/ATTACH][ATTACH]188895[/ATTACH]

 

I hope you have stories for those pics...what happen? When, why, where,etc.

[DeathRaptor5]

I hope you have stories for those pics...what happen? When, why, where,etc.

One was from friendly fire and i believe it was aim-9M. you can find the story on f-16.net the other i do not know. Also I found these photos on the internet. just google f-15 damage.

Edit found the friendly fire story.https://www.nytimes.com/1990/06/29/us/jet-pilot-accidentally-fired-live-missile-air-force-says.html

Edited July 2, 2018 by DeathRaptor5

[SinusoidDelta]

One from friendly fire and i believe it was aim-9M. you can find the story on f-16.net the other i do not know. Also I found these photos on the internet. just google f-15 damage.

Edit found the friendly fire story.https://www.nytimes.com/1990/06/29/us/jet-pilot-accidentally-fired-live-missile-air-force-says.html

 

The other was a mid-air with an F-16 IIRC.

 

Edit: Disregard, not sure what the other is.

Edited July 1, 2018 by SinusoidDelta

[dundun92]

Sorry, couldn't resit :)

It got hit by a A-4, and actually landed like that.

[Greyman]

 

Worth a look