F-15E?

[jojo]

Sure thing, then go ahead and fly with 4 less available a-a weapons and about 8500lbs less fuel.

 

 

Oh man of little faith :D

Without CFT STA 3/4/6/7 are available for AA missiles, and the plane can carry the same external tanks as F-15C on STA 2/5/8.

[falcon_120]

wanted --- full DCS-level F-15C (ASM - advanced systems modeling)

+10000

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

[Rainmaker]

Oh man of little faith :D

Without CFT STA 3/4/6/7 are available for AA missiles, and the plane can carry the same external tanks as F-15C.

 

 

That’s an incorrect assumption ghostrider....

[jojo]

That’s an incorrect assumption ghostrider....

 

 

So TO 1F-15E-1 manual is wrong ?

 

 

Are the STA not wired ?

 

 

Edited August 23, 2018 by jojo

[Rainmaker]

So TO 1F-15E-1 manual is wrong ?

 

 

Are the STA not wired?

 

 

No, the manual is not wrong, your interpretation of a picture in the manual is.

[jojo]

:doh:

OK, the STA are actually on the CFT :D

 

 

The drawings are very simplified on the bottom view...sorry

[Phantom88]

STRIKE EAGLE PORN :D

 

[Dr.SquirrelBoy12]

wanted --- full DCS-level F-15C (ASM - advanced systems modeling)

 

I'd like one with the new glass cockpit though I doubt any info would be available on it.

 

[Horns]

So how many AA missiles can it carry without CFTs?

[Dr.SquirrelBoy12]

So how many AA missiles can it carry without CFTs?

 

I'd assume 4 unless we got some sort of double missile rack.

 

[gear_monkey]

On a side note, that pilots call sign is awesome.

 

Guano means "Bat S**T". Which is usually referenced in "Bat S**T crazy". There's even a bat right next to his call-sign. :lol:

 

That immediately caught my eye as well. I can only imagine the back story on that one.

[RShackleford]

The Singaporeans seem to like taking the CFT's off of their F-15SG's for airshows haha! I've also seen photos F-15K's and F-15I's fly without CFTs but that would never be an operational thing...

 

It will be interesting to see if Razbam lets us take the CFT's off or not, my guess would be not because I think it would be a lot of extra work to have the flight model coded for with CFTs fitted and without.

 

The F-15SG model has an even more powerful GE engine with about 32k lbs of thrust per engine in AB... an F-15 without CFTs using those engines would be insane, pretty much crush the pilot in BFM but absolutely dominate rate and vertical fights. Not enough fuel to do anything with unless doctrine goes back to high speed interceptors for taking out strategic bombers but for a jet that routinely takes off with CFTs, 2xfuel tanks, and a full load of bombs, it is awesome. Would be nice having engines that you don't have to worry about TOLD with at high temperature regions.

[Rainmaker]

The F-15SG model has an even more powerful GE engine with about 32k lbs of thrust per engine in AB... an F-15 without CFTs using those engines would be insane, pretty much crush the pilot in BFM but absolutely dominate rate and vertical fights. Not enough fuel to do anything with unless doctrine goes back to high speed interceptors for taking out strategic bombers but for a jet that routinely takes off with CFTs, 2xfuel tanks, and a full load of bombs, it is awesome. Would be nice having engines that you don't have to worry about TOLD with at high temperature regions.

 

Meh. There's always VMAX :D

[RShackleford]

Meh. There's always VMAX :D

 

VMAX is just what it was tested to, right? :smilewink:

 

Good luck getting there in a 220 or even 229 jet with CFTs though haha. Even going super in the 220s with CFTs takes a lot of time, I doubt it is even possible to reach the VMAX. My max in a 220 was Mach 1.335 after a lot of time and fuel starting above 40k' and in a shallow dive. The CFTs are just a huge factor in transonic/supersonic flight. Meanwhile the fighter that should have never had its production line cancelled can sprint/cruise in mil power at Mach 1.5... I'm pretty envious about that. Can we just get better engines in the F-15E fleet-wide?

[Rainmaker]

VMAX is just what it was tested to, right? :smilewink:

 

Good luck getting there in a 220 or even 229 jet with CFTs though haha. Even going super in the 220s with CFTs takes a lot of time, I doubt it is even possible to reach the VMAX. My max in a 220 was Mach 1.335 after a lot of time and fuel starting above 40k' and in a shallow dive. The CFTs are just a huge factor in transonic/supersonic flight. Meanwhile the fighter that should have never had its production line cancelled can sprint/cruise in mil power at Mach 1.5... I'm pretty envious about that. Can we just get better engines in the F-15E fleet-wide?

 

 

Mmmm...I'm more referring to the little red-covered "go faster" switch above the left console

[RShackleford]

Mmmm...I'm more referring to the little red-covered "go faster" switch above the left console

 

Oh yes, the one with wires covering it at all times lol. Was thinking VNE when you said VMAX. I almost forgot that switch exists. Referring to my bad memory, I think it only gives 2-3% more thrust though, not nearly as much as a even -229 will give you.

[mvsgas]

The Vmax switch in the F-16 is called max power. It is only for the PW-220 or PW-200. Is magnetically held to the on position only if the engine is at max AB and above a certain speed. It only allows the FTIT to increases by 22°C. How does it work for you guys?

[Rainmaker]

The Vmax switch in the F-16 is called max power. It is only for the PW-220 or PW-200. Is magnetically held to the on position only if the engine is at max AB and above a certain speed. It only allows the FTIT to increases by 22°C. How does it work for you guys?

 

 

15’s is guarded with copper safety wire, not magnetically held though. I think function is about the same, only effects full AB, 2% RPM increase, FTIT rise but I would have to look up the values again.

[SinusoidDelta]

15’s is guarded with copper safety wire, not magnetically held though. I think function is about the same, only effects full AB, 2% RPM increase, FTIT rise but I would have to look up the values again.

 

I thought the Vmax switch was only functional for the the F100-PW-100 not the 220 and 229 :huh:

[Dr.SquirrelBoy12]

It's been quiet here... :music_whistling:

 

 

How do people here plan to set up their HOTAS for the rear cockpit?

[RShackleford]

It's been quiet here... :music_whistling:

 

 

How do people here plan to set up their HOTAS for the rear cockpit?

 

I think it's going to need to be heavily keyboard intensive, since they have two hand controllers and I doubt there will be a HOTAS being made for that. Thankfully you won't need to fly while using combat controls. As you can see in the pic you posted, there's almost no HOTAS for the stick and throttle in the back seat. TrackIR + mouse and keyboard will actually be a great setup IMO. Don't need to worry about Gs in a sim.

[jojo]

I actually already found a copy of that -1 manual, actually I have the 1993 version.

 

I am pretty sure RAZBAM said that everything the WSO can do the Pilot can do so I guess it would work out alright if I just mapped the HOTAS the same way since the WSO can fly the aircraft too.

 

I wonder how it will work for Multicrew, I assume the pilot controls will trump WSO controls.

 

I think that currently, on the Gazelle, in multi crew, the commands are segregated.

But they share the same cockpit, in the Strike Eagle each one his cockpit and they share the weapon system. So I have no idea...

[jojo]

There is no "trump", only one crew member can take command of a screen at any given time.

 

Ok, so front seat MFD and back seat mfd are coupled ?

 

At least the WSO as one more MFD for himself only...

[Rainmaker]

Ok, so front seat MFD and back seat mfd are coupled ?

 

At least the WSO as one more MFD for himself only...

 

No, they can both select the same screens or different. Difference being only one can "take control" of the display at any given time. By take control, I mean using the TGP, RDR, SIT display, moving map, etc. Both can view or not view, but only one can control. Front seat can take control of one display in the front, back seat can take control of two independent screens due to having two hand controllers.

 

For example, front can control RDR while backseat controls TGP and SIT display...all simultaneously. Each can view those displays at the same time.

Edited September 20, 2018 by Rainmaker

[Dr.SquirrelBoy12]

There is no "trump", only one crew member can take command of a screen at any given time.

 

I meant for the module in DCS not the actual aircraft. If the pilot tries to move the stick left and the WSO pushes theirs right what happens? Who's input will take priority. Obviously in the real fighter the stick would move. But in a sim our HOTAS sticks will not move when the other pilot moves their stick.

 

Front seat can take control of one display in the front, back seat can take control of two independent screens due to having two hand controllers.

 

For example, front can control RDR while backseat controls TGP and SIT display...all simultaneously. Each can view those displays at the same time.

 

So it sounds like the rear seat will be better suited with a different setup than just duplicating the Pilot controls as best as possible for the rear seat. It will be interesting seeing how we can map certain controls.

Edited September 20, 2018 by Dr.SquirrelBoy12