F-15E?

[WinterH]

If an 80s F-16 would be announced instead of a Block 50 here, I can foresee the forums going thermonuclear :D

 

Again, only the latest F-15E would be considered a 4.5 gen aircraft.

 

Although, I tend to agree that an influx of 60s-70s-80s aircraft together would help with a more cohesive multiplayer scene, and I also personally find those eras more interesting than post 90s too.

 

I have to add though, all but the earliest versions of F-16 are AMRAAM capable, at least with small upgrades. There are some airforces chose not to integrate that on all their fleet, or denied the option, but if any F-16 module is done besides F-16A, it will be AMRAAM capable anyway. And F-16A itself, doesn't have Sparrow capability either. Sparrow capable F-16s, as far as I know, are ANG birds, and some upgraded export F-16As, which, I think happened at late 80s-early 90s, so more or less the same time frame as an early F-15E.

 

Edit: sniped by shorter explanations of essentially same things I said by Dudikoff :)

[mjmorrow]

You can stop right there as this doesn't exist apart from the ADF one which entered service AFTER the F-15E.

 

What specifically doesn't exist?

 

Just what do you think the difference in generations is there between the "mid '80s" F-16C and the 1988 F-15E?

 

The difference is that the F-16 would be a better complement and match for the Mirage 2000, Mig-29, and other proposed DCS rides. 1980's F-16's certainly did exist, whatever the technical error you intend to allege or address in my earlier proposal not withstanding, and we can certainly find a historically accurate, realistic, highly competitive, non AIM-120 carrying F-16 to match against the Mirage, Mig-29, etc, for sure.

Edited December 10, 2015 by mjmorrow

[Dudikoff]

I really don't understand why people are so much into the F-15E.

Let aside the look and the number of bombs it can carry, there's not a single thing it can do that the F/A-18C cannot. Plus the Hornet is truly multirole, and carrier capable.

Once ED's Hornet is released, from a gameplay standpoint the Strike Eagle will be pointless.

 

Besides it being faster and having a useful combat range, it is also a USAF plane (thus uses some different weapons) and a dual seater to boot which is certainly useful from the "gameplay standpoint".

 

It also has a more powerful radar (with aperture mode from the start which the F/A-18C only got later with the AN/APG-73 IIRC).

[Dudikoff]

The difference is that the F-16 would be a better complement and match for the Mirage 2000, Mig-29, and other proposed DCS rides.

 

That's debatable without the BVR capability, but time-wise yes, somewhat, but they're not really incompatible. Mid-80's is like 1984-86 and F-15E is available from 1988.

 

I mean, I'm not against the mid-80's F-16C Block 25 (although it would be more interesting and flexible to have Block 40/42's). I prefer 70's and 80's planes and weapons to the later ones, but what's with all this matchmaking and the negative vibes.. The F-15E is a beautiful plane and it would be great to have it in the DCSW.

Edited December 10, 2015 by Dudikoff

[WinterH]

80s F-16 did exist but had no BVR (at least until very late 80s). As years passed, they almost all got upgraded to include AIM-120 and a whole lot more, quickly.

 

I don't think any developer will go ahead and say "here, we are making F-16A, without all the things you scream for as F-16 since forever", people still say "why this variant" about Mirage 2000C, for somethig as popular and in demand as F-16, I don't think developers will attempt anything earlier than F-16C (I'd assume Block 30 or 40 at least, probably 50, if they ever do one). People demand F-16 as their be-all end-all multirole iconic and popular fighter it became in 90s, not the original lightweight low cost dogfighter.

 

As for 70s and 80s aircraft, as stated before I also think it would be the way to go for populating a diverse DCS supersonic aircraft combat enviorenment, and I personally prefer that era anyway. But I just don't think F-16 relates correctly for this argument, especially in regards to being different from F-15E.

[mjmorrow]

That's debatable without the BVR capability, but time-wise yes, somewhat, but they're not really incompatible. Mid-80's is like 1984-86 and F-15E is available from 1988.

 

I mean, I'm not against the mid-80's F-16C Block 25 (although it would be more interesting and flexible to have Block 40/42's). I prefer 70's and 80's planes and weapons to the later ones, but what's with all this matchmaking and the negative vibes.. The F-15E is a beautiful plane and it would be great to have it in the DCSW.

 

I'm not obsessing over a particular date in time. A early 1990's Persian Gulf War F-16c would be a very solid competitive match for a SARH only Mirage 2000 and other such SARH only BVR missile carrying Western and Eastern 4th Generation DCS rides, a real complementary plane. A early 1990's F-16 would have all sorts of multi purpose air to air and air to ground functionality, including SARH BVR air to air capability, and best of all, would absolutely not carry the AIM-120. The F-16 is the real go to multipurpose NATO workhorse, with formidable air to air capabilities, particularly WVR. :thumbup: MJ

Edited December 10, 2015 by mjmorrow

[mvsgas]

Not related to F-15E topics, but just to let you guys know, F-16 did not get BVR capabilities until mid 1990 to 1991, so all F-16 (including F-16C block 25 to 42) only carry AIM-9 even into first desert storm. AIM-120 capabilities was part of the Falcon start and falcon up upgrades for USAF aircraft AFAIK and IIRC.

 

Only some ADF version of the F-16 block 15 or 20 and test birds (with ED or OT tail code in the US anyway) could carry the AIM-7. Thees ADF aircraft are recognize by the spotlight on the left side of the nose. Some countries had this capabilities as well but is hard to narrow down because every single F-16 is different.

 

You have to know the block, the year, the country and what modifications a specific F-16 had to determined its capabilities, and those change depending on the source.

[mjmorrow]

Not related to F-15E topics, but just to let you guys know, F-16 did not get BVR capabilities until mid 1990 to 1991, so all F-16 (including F-16C block 25 to 42) only carry AIM-9 even into first desert storm. AIM-120 capabilities was part of the Falcon start and falcon up upgrades for USAF aircraft AFAIK and IIRC.

 

Only some ADF version of the F-16 block 15 or 20 and test birds (with ED or OT tail code in the US anyway) could carry the AIM-7. Thees ADF aircraft are recognize by the spotlight on the left side of the nose. Some countries had this capabilities as well but is hard to narrow down because every single F-16 is different.

 

You have to know the block, the year, the country and what modifications a specific F-16 had to determined its capabilities, and those change depending on the source.

 

Were there F-16's, in US service or otherwise, in the 1990's carrying the AIM-7 and not the AIM-120? Bare in mind, this is not a gotcha question. Though I have seen sources stating that some F-16s during the Gulf War, and into the early to mid 1990's, did carry the AIM-7, these sources may be in error. Presently, I lack sufficient information to come to a well reasoned determination, one way or the other, on the matter of whether or not, at least some, F-16's carried the AIM-7 as a BVR missile, during the Persian Gulf War or in the early to mid 1990's, generally so. I do intend to research this issue, time permitting. :thumbup: MJ

Edited December 10, 2015 by mjmorrow

[mvsgas]

Were there were F-16's, in US service or otherwise, in the 1990's carrying the AIM-7 and not the AIM-120?

Yes some F-16 could carry AIM-7 circa 1990.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article14.html

But as I posted, keep in mind F-16s ( like many other aircraft sold to different countries) have different capabilities depending on many factors.

[mjmorrow]

Yes some F-16 could carry AIM-7 circa 1990.

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article14.html

But as I posted, keep in mind F-16s ( like many other aircraft sold to different countries) have different capabilities depending on many factors.

 

Thank you and understood. It is a great good for me to be ever mindful of the distinctions in national modifications and requirements for the F-16, from nation to nation, block to block, etc. Our DCS Mirage 2000c is a great example of this. Our French Mirage 2000c won't have the capacity to launch the Exocet, but the Greek version of the Mirage 2000 does. Some 1990's F-16s may have had the SARH BVR capability, but not other 1990's F-16's. It would be important to model a version of the F-16 that would carry a SARH BVR capability, in order to best match a DCS F-16 to the DCS Mirage 2000c, future DCS Mig 29, and other future 4th Generation DCS rides. :thumbup: MJ

Edited December 10, 2015 by mjmorrow

[JazonXD]

Basically what we need is a multi-role fighter that's decently modern. The thing with the F-16 is that we need a pretty decent variant that's kinda new. Like mentioned before, not many people are going to be too happy with the A variant, and since the later variants (C and blocks xx) are in the 90s and later, it'll be harder to simulate them because of the mil restrictions. That's why I really want the 15E because it's a really upgraded and developed aircraft variant already but still in the same decade (80s to 90s) and I think it'll be a bit more worthwhile to do the 15E? Please correct me if all of this is wrong, just my personal opinion though.

[mjmorrow]

Basically what we need is a multi-role fighter that's decently modern. The thing with the F-16 is that we need a pretty decent variant that's kinda new. Like mentioned before, not many people are going to be too happy with the A variant, and since the later variants (C and blocks xx) are in the 90s and later, it'll be harder to simulate them because of the mil restrictions. That's why I really want the 15E because it's a really upgraded and developed aircraft variant already but still in the same decade (80s to 90s) and I think it'll be a bit more worthwhile to do the 15E? Please correct me if all of this is wrong, just my personal opinion though.

 

Personally, I see nothing Universally or inherently right or wrong with your personal preference. At the end of the day, you like the idea of a DCS F-15E. What is Universally or inherently wrong with that? For me, nothing. Your interest in a F-15E doesn't make you absolutely wrong or the root of all evil in my book. The way I see it, you and the other flight simmers advocating for the F-15E are a bunch of cool dudes and gals sharing my passion for flight simulation. It is just that you are into an awesome ride that I could happily live without. I would much rather see Razbam make a SARH only F-16, than make a F-15E, for a variety of reasons, but, at the end of the day, so what? How does that reflect on you, the validity of your preferences, the, so called, rightness and wrongness of your preference or the rightness or wrongness of anyone's preferences?

 

I don't see how I or anyone else could reasonably hold out to the DCS community that we have the one and only true and worthwhile point of view on the matter of whether or not to make a DCS F-15E, without resting selfishly on our subjective opinion and personal preferences. I'm not advocating for the introduction of the F-15E, but at the end of the day, that doesn't make you right or wrong, doesn't make me right or wrong. There is no DCS World politically correct ride choice. :megalol: Some players are going to like the idea of a DCS F-15E and some players will not like the idea. It is an issue of preference, reasonable minds can and do differ. There is certainly no absolute undeniable truth coming out of my corner, here. :thumbup: MJ

Edited December 10, 2015 by mjmorrow

[Dudikoff]

It would be important to model a version of the F-16 that would carry a SARH BVR capability, in order to best match a DCS F-16 to the DCS Mirage 2000c, future DCS Mig 29, and other future 4th Generation DCS rides. :thumbup: MJ

 

I answered this two pages ago already:

 

"You can stop right there as this doesn't exist apart from the ADF one which entered service AFTER the F-15E."

 

If you had read more about the ADF variant, you would have found out it only served in the continental ANG units so not really a flexible multirole choice for the DCSW. And besides, two years later AMRAAM came into service so, again, this whole F-16 + BVR - AMRAAM matchmaking idea you keep pushing through is completely pointless.

Edited December 10, 2015 by Dudikoff

[blkspade]

Thank you and understood. It is a great good for me to be ever mindful of the distinctions in national modifications and requirements for the F-16, from nation to nation, block to block, etc. Our DCS Mirage 2000c is a great example of this. Our French Mirage 2000c won't have the capacity to launch the Exocet, but the Greek version of the Mirage 2000 does. Some 1990's F-16s may have had the SARH BVR capability, but not other 1990's F-16's. It would be important to model a version of the F-16 that would carry a SARH BVR capability, in order to best match a DCS F-16 to the DCS Mirage 2000c, future DCS Mig 29, and other future 4th Generation DCS rides. :thumbup: MJ

 

If you further click through that site you'll find AIM-120 was always something intended as part of the BVR package for the F-16, at least for the US. Further more it was the first aircraft to actually use it in combat, and score a kill. They mention certain at least block 10s being structurally sound to carry the 120, which I find interesting considering considering its lighter than the Aim-7. As much as you seem to be against it, any F-16 released for DCS with BVR capability will have 120s.

[Sweep]

+1

 

I really don't understand why people are so much into the F-15E.

Let aside the look and the number of bombs it can carry, there's not a single thing it can do that the F/A-18C cannot.

 

Plus the Hornet is truly multirole, and carrier capable.

Once ED's Hornet is released, from a gameplay standpoint the Strike Eagle will be pointless.

 

The F-15E is multi-role also, the USAF -15E might not have an ARM or proper anti-ship missile, but its still the best strike fighter one can get.

 

Its not the number of bombs it can carry...but the strike radius with that number of weapons or less than that number of weapons...you put 2 Mk-84s, CFTs, and 2 600 tanks on a Strike Eagle and it goes far...now put 2 mk-84s, and 3 330 tanks on a Hornet...:D

 

While range to target may not be a problem in most scenarios in the sim currently, it'd be darn cool if it were...

 

The F-15E is the ultimate tactical bomb truck, and while a Hornet will be cool too...the Mud Hen really needs to be represented here! :joystick:

[TomOnSteam]

Well we are getting the C hornet, while the F-15E is multi-seat, so even though their missions are similar, I'd still be getting both because flying solo, and flying with a friend will be two different reasons to play :)

[mjmorrow]

I answered this two pages ago already:

 

"You can stop right there as this doesn't exist apart from the ADF one which entered service AFTER the F-15E."

 

If you had read more about the ADF variant, you would have found out it only served in the continental ANG units so not really a flexible multirole choice for the DCSW. And besides, two years later AMRAAM came into service so, again, this whole F-16 + BVR - AMRAAM matchmaking idea you keep pushing through is completely pointless.

 

During the First Persian Gulf War the AIM- 7 was not carried on any F-16s used in combat? Look, I am going to research this point, so if you don't know for sure, just say so. There is no shame in your lacking sufficient information to come to a well reasoned determination as to whether or not the AIM-7 was actually used on F-16's during the Persian Gulf War. I have sources claiming that it was, but I would not simply state that this must have been the case, because I am not confident in the sources I currently have Based on the information I do have, I would not claim to know for sure, one way or the other.

Edited December 11, 2015 by mjmorrow

[mvsgas]

I agree with Dudikoff. AFAIK, No F-16 carried AIM-7 in first desert storm. Not the F-16 mission to fly cap, sweeps or other air interdiction unless it require ground attack. I think only 42 F-16A where in combat operation during desert storm, 24 of which where from 138 TFS deployed to Al Kahjr AB. 18 belong to the 4401 MMS(P) both under the 4 TFW(P)

 

http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5437

Edited December 11, 2015 by mvsgas

[Kayos]

Since I think DCS is going to do the F-16 after the F-18 I would love to see the F-15E.

I think another multi-crew would be awesome and there aren't many of any better bomb trucks than the F-15E.

If DCS does do a F-16 it should be the C version, block 50+ and obviously have the 120's.

That is what everyone wants. No one wants a F-16A that only can carry Aim-9's

Edited December 11, 2015 by Kayos

[mvsgas]

One thing I would like to point out is the F-16 progression is not linear. What I mean is there are A model F-16 block 15/20 with more capabilities (in terms of avionics and special weapons carried, pilot training ,etc) than newer F-16C block 52. It all depends on many factors. F-16A does not mean less capable unless referring to a specific time period.

[mjmorrow]

+1

 

I really don't understand why people are so much into the F-15E.

Let aside the look and the number of bombs it can carry, there's not a single thing it can do that the F/A-18C cannot.

 

Plus the Hornet is truly multirole, and carrier capable.

Once ED's Hornet is released, from a gameplay standpoint the Strike Eagle will be pointless.

 

+1 We are getting the Hornet and two versions of the Tomcat. I am starting to suspect that many more Marines and Navy guys go into flight simulation development than Air Force guys. :megalol:

 

:thumbup: MJ

[AG-51_Razor]

Hey guys, when you get right down to it, nothing that happened over the beach matters. It what happens when you get back to the boat that counts! :pilotfly:

 

A-6 next please!!!

[Angelthunder]

With apparent speculation that EDs F/A-18C Hornet could be released next year.I think Razbam needs to focus on the T-2 Buckeye and A-7 Corsair II next before we get the Strike Eagle.

[Greekbull]

With apparent speculation that EDs F/A-18C Hornet could be released next year.I think Razbam needs to focus on the T-2 Buckeye and A-7 Corsair II next before we get the Strike Eagle.

 

We have no clue when the F-18 will show...could still be a long way off. But a F-15E would be very welcome! I still think I will be flying the Tomcat before we see the Hornet. I hope I'm wrong but every time we think we will get it...it seems like those time periods come and go...

 

I hope the F-16 is a 3rd party developed mod because we likely won't see it till 2020 if it's an ED module IMO:D

[Dudikoff]

During the First Persian Gulf War the AIM- 7 was not carried on any F-16s used in combat? Look, I am going to research this point, so if you don't know for sure, just say so. There is no shame in your lacking sufficient information to come to a well reasoned determination as to whether or not the AIM-7 was actually used on F-16's during the Persian Gulf War. I have sources claiming that it was, but I would not simply state that this must have been the case, because I am not confident in the sources I currently have Based on the information I do have, I would not claim to know for sure, one way or the other.

 

I don't know what you think you're accomplishing with this childish condescending attitude of yours, but it's tiring. You could have done this "research" of yours already in the time spent on repeating the same thing over and over.

 

For the fifth time in this thread, in the USAF, the Sparrow was only carried by ANG-specific F-16 ADF variants (with CW illuminators added to their older AN/APG-66 units) which were used in the air defense of the continental USA only. The F-15C units provided CAP in DS.

 

While some foreign operators (e.g. like Taiwan) did use Sparrows on their F-16 variants (In Taiwan's case, this was post 1992) and the later US variants (Block 25+ with the AN/APG-68 ) were probably technically compatible with AIM-7M (or later variants), they were never equipped operationally. From the references on foreign F-16 variants, I presume some updates on the USAF operational units would be required (like e.g. WCS to force HPRF in STT when Sparrow is armed, pylons, etc.) to provide them with this capability.

Edited December 11, 2015 by Dudikoff