A Flanker Driver's First Eagle Experience

[DarkFire]

Being a big fan of the Su-27, and having "flown" one since the old days of Su-27 Squadron Commander's Edition in about 1997, I finally decided to have a look at the Eagle. This was unusual for me as except for considering myself a vaguely proficient Su-25T pilot I'd never really flown anything except the Flanker. I decided to do a runway takeoff, wander around for a bit doing some turns, climbs & acceleration testing then see if I could land again.

 

Please bear in mind that this was my very first flight in the F-15C (it could be my second Eagle flight in all fairness, I might have taken one up for a couple of minutes in FC2 days, I can't remember now) so my initial impressions could and probably will be totally wrong, but for all you F-15 aficionados, here are some initial thoughts from a long-term Flanker driver. Test conditions were a standard DCS day, 100% internal fuel but no other stores loaded.

 

 

TAKE OFF:

The Eagle felt like it wandered around during acceleration a little bit more than the flanker, and it very obviously has far less nose wheel authority, but otherwise no issues. Very impressed with the acceleration! As soon as I had gear & flaps up I was levelling out and found myself subconsciously thumbing the trim controls. Old habits...

 

 

GENERAL HANDLING:

No need for constant pitch trimming! Ahhhhh, bliss! The largely care-free handling of the Eagle was a real pleasure. Though I don't miss having a FPM while flying the Su-27, having one in the Eagle definitely allowed me to really cut things fine in terms of avoiding terrain & buildings at very low level. You do get used to not having one in the Flanker and learn how to judge terrain avoidance but undeniably it does make things easier. General flying around was about as easy as I could possibly imagine.

 

 

PERFORMANCE:

HOLY CRAP THIS THING CAN ACCELERATE!! And the climb rate!!!! :shocking: The raw power of the Eagle engines was very obvious, and even more impressive. Going from a nominal 80% throttle cruise at ~1,000' AGL I pushed the throttles up to Z5 and after what felt like mere seconds I was well and truly supersonic. Damn this thing is impressive! Raw acceleration and speed felt a definite step above the Su-27, as did the climb rate.

 

Turn performance felt like more of a mixed bag. While the acceleration was undeniably incredible, I found myself unable to sustain speed in anything more than a ~4G turn at Z5 AB at around 1-2,000 feet. I might well be completely wrong about this, but the Eagle felt like it bled speed a lot more in a hard sustained turn than the Flanker does, at least a nominal 50% fuel with 4 x missiles Flanker. Of course this is offset a great deal by the incredible acceleration, but the F-15 did feel as though I was bleeding much more energy in tight turns. I was also genuinely unnerved by the cockpit shaking during relatively high-alpha turns. I suppose you probably get used to it but as a first flight that really bothered me.

 

What frankly scared me about the F-15 was the fuel consumption. I have it easy in the Su-27 which has a huge 42% extra internal fuel capacity and the Flanker is also fairly fuel efficient, whereas the Eagle seemed to burn through JP7 at an incredible rate. I guess this is a product of the incredible engine power. I guess this is also why most people seem to fly their Eagles with external tanks.

 

 

AVIONICS:

I didn't use the radar so can't comment on it, though from what I've seen watching YouTube videos it's certainly impressive. What I found myself really, really missing was the moving not-quite-a-map that you get on the HDD in the Flanker. Navigation is unquestionably much, much easier when you have waypoints, desired tracks and your relative position shown graphically as opposed to having to follow the HSI without any waypoint numbers being shown anywhere. I must confess that when this subject was brought up before I privately scoffed a bit, thinking it couldn't really be that difficult could it? Well, sincere apologies to all you Eagle drivers: navigation in this thing is a real pain compared to how easy it is in the Flanker.

 

As a small aside, I was surprised that it's apparently impossible to adjust the barometric altimeter calibration for QFE value. Is this impossible in the real F-15C? How are you supposed to accurately judge altitude for landing as the Eagle doesn't appear to have a radar altimeter?

 

 

APPROACH & LANDING:

Other than wondering how the hell I was supposed to find my airfield using the HSI without a big map showing where the runway is relative to my position, and not understanding how the ILS system works, I was actually very impressed by how easy it was to land the F-15. My approach was entirely guess work. I ended up coming over the runway threshold at around 20 units of AOA at roughly 160 Kts which seemed to work. With aero braking and the wheel brakes I had no trouble coming to a halt at around 50% runway length. Again the Eagle felt like it squirmed around a bit more during the roll-out than the Flanker does.

 

One thing that impressed me was how stable the Eagle was during the approach. Again flying a 20-unit AOA approach at around 160 Kts it was rock steady whereas the Flanker has a tendency to wallow slightly at that sort of speed and feels like it suffers significantly more from secondary effects of controls. Overall I was very impressed.

 

 

FINAL THOUGHTS:

To sum up, I really loved the raw power, speed and acceleration of the Eagle as well as the care free handling and the lack of any need for constant pitch trimming. The perceived energy loss during hard turns was less impressive and the shuddering really bothered me, but I suppose you get used to that.

 

All in all I really enjoyed my quick outing in the F-15C. While I don't think I'll totally transfer my time from the Flanker, I do think it's helpful to have a go in unfamiliar aircraft and I'll definitely put more time in to learning the Eagle. In the same spirit I'd urge the Eagle fans to have a go flying the Su-27. The Flanker takes a lot of practice to get used to its quirks but I can assure you it's worth the effort...

 

I've attached a brief track showing my antics & landing. In the interests of learning I'd be grateful for any constructive criticism or pointing out of anything that I've said that's inaccurate or simply wrong :)

F-15C First Flight.zip

[Ironhand]

Sigh....

 

a journey to the dark side....

 

:)

[Sryan]

Hope you enjoyed it! Maybe try a little combat as well sometime ;) I understand it was your first flight with assumably no time spent in the manual but I thought I'd explain a few things. navigating in the F15 is actually not that bad. when in Nav mode your waypoint number is shown in the bottom right of the hud. You will even see time to target and range there as well. In order to get where you need to go you need to put the bug on the compass tape in the center above the chevron and then put the bank steering index ( that "l" that floats through the hud) on the vector indicator. You're now flying on track to your waypoint :) Maybe not as intuative as the wanna-be map on the sukhoi but you do not need to go heads down on the eagle :) so both have an advantage. There's no need to to go heads down to watch the HSI. If you don't care about desired track then just putting the compass tape bug right is enough.

 

As for the external tanks you see most eagles with, it's kinda designed that way. Eagles don't lose out on any weapons if they choose external tanks. You take-off and cruise around with your externals on. When you engage in combat you'll drop your tanks and unlock a lot more speed and maneuvrability. Hopefully you'll have enough juice to make it home or to a tanker after the fight.

 

For safe ILS landings, just put the cross that appears on the velocity vector and you're on your way for a safe touch-down. 180 is the approach and touch-down speed afaik. Faster if you're heavy. In order to get full nosewheel authority you need to hold down "S".

Edited March 1, 2016 by Sryan

[GGTharos]

PERFORMANCE:

Turn performance felt like more of a mixed bag. While the acceleration was undeniably incredible, I found myself unable to sustain speed in anything more than a ~4G turn at Z5 AB at around 1-2,000 feet.

I might well be completely wrong about this, but the Eagle felt like it bled speed a lot more in a hard sustained turn than the Flanker does, at least a nominal 50% fuel with 4 x missiles Flanker.

 

You're trying it with a fully fueled eagle at way below it's preferred turning speed - try it with an 80% flanker and tell me how it feels :)

 

A 38000lbs clean eagle (about 8000-9000 lbs fuel) will sustain 'over-g' at the right speed at SL (about M0.8). Typical preferred fighting speed is 350-450, and it's a weight-based sliding scale. Less weight, less speed.

 

The flanker will definitely out-turn the eagle in a slow speed fight at SL. At the same time, keep in mind that it's not always the aircraft that's being out-turned ... the meat-stick actuator also counts.

 

I was also genuinely unnerved by the cockpit shaking during relatively high-alpha turns. I suppose you probably get used to it but as a first flight that really bothered me.

 

It tells you what the aircraft is doing. You might be able to get more finesse out of it by listening to the eagle roar as well, it gives you an idea of the AoA via the audio.

 

What frankly scared me about the F-15 was the fuel consumption. I have it easy in the Su-27 which has a huge 42% extra internal fuel capacity and the Flanker is also fairly fuel efficient, whereas the Eagle seemed to burn through JP7 at an incredible rate. I guess this is a product of the incredible engine power. I guess this is also why most people seem to fly their Eagles with external tanks.

 

Actually it eats it at a slightly lower rate than the flanker. Fuel them both up to the same amount of fuel and stick'em in a neutral sustained turn, the flanker will run out first. In a race, the eagle might run out first because fuel consumption increases with speed, and the eagle's going to get there first and peak higher. Probably.

 

In any case, not fussed about fuel because you shouldn't be getting stuck in a fight anyway - get the kill in 45 sec and your fuel consumption is a non-issue.

 

AVIONICS:

I didn't use the radar so can't comment on it, though from what I've seen watching YouTube videos it's certainly impressive. What I found myself really, really missing was the moving not-quite-a-map that you get on the HDD in the Flanker. Navigation is unquestionably much, much easier when you have waypoints, desired tracks and your relative position shown graphically as opposed to having to follow the HSI without any waypoint numbers being shown anywhere. I must confess that when this subject was brought up before I privately scoffed a bit, thinking it couldn't really be that difficult could it? Well, sincere apologies to all you Eagle drivers: navigation in this thing is a real pain compared to how easy it is in the Flanker.

 

It's not, but it's also quirky and not modeled to the real deal. See the little armament display? That displays something like the TAD in the A-10C, through without the map. It will display data-link contacts, WPs etc. WPs are also displayed on the VSD. Obviously all that isn't modeled. You've seen my list ;)

 

As a small aside, I was surprised that it's apparently impossible to adjust the barometric altimeter calibration for QFE value. Is this impossible in the real F-15C? How are you supposed to accurately judge altitude for landing as the Eagle doesn't appear to have a radar altimeter?

 

Of course it can be IRL, you can even see the knob for it in the game ... but also don't need it for a visual approach. Shoot the glideslope correctly and you know you've got 300'/nm.

 

 

APPROACH & LANDING:

Other than wondering how the hell I was supposed to find my airfield using the HSI without a big map showing where the runway is relative to my position, and not understanding how the ILS system works, I was actually very impressed by how easy it was to land the F-15. My approach was entirely guess work. I ended up coming over the runway threshold at around 20 units of AOA at roughly 160 Kts which seemed to work. With aero braking and the wheel brakes I had no trouble coming to a halt at around 50% runway length. Again the Eagle felt like it squirmed around a bit more during the roll-out than the Flanker does.

 

You just have to learn to use the HSI and you have to learn the ILS system quirks :D

Landing AoA is 20-22 units with 21 units being 'dead on' with a 2.5-3deg glideslope, so, close enough. However your flare was inadequate (hard landing), and your aerobraking was not performed. You pulled the nose through 23uAoA for just a moment. Hold it there and you'll find that on a runway like Sochi, you'll be down to 50kt before you reach anywhere near the end of the runway, and you'll not even need to touch the breaks until it's time to turn off the runway. IRL this saves tyre and brake wear.

 

If you wanted to do a minimum ground run, then the procedure is 1-2deg glideslope approach at 23uAoA (probably can't do it at sochi due to buildings in the way), barely flare if at all (descent should be fairly slow anyway), drop the nose after touch-down (no aerobraking!) and max anti-skid breaking from there.

 

In the same spirit I'd urge the Eagle fans to have a go flying the Su-27. The Flanker takes a lot of practice to get used to its quirks but I can assure you it's worth the effort...

 

Most of us do, it's a dangerous BFM opponent and DACT is valuable. ;)

[DarkFire]

Sigh....

a journey to the dark side....

:)

 

He he I haven't handed in my Flanker fanatics club membership card just yet :D

 

Hope you enjoyed it! Maybe try a little combat as well sometime ;) I understand it was your first flight with assumably no time spent in the manual but I thought I'd explain a few things. navigating in the F15 is actually not that bad. when in Nav mode your waypoint number is shown in the bottom right of the hud. You will even see time to target and range there as well. In order to get where you need to go you need to put the bug on the compass tape in the center above the chevron and then put the bank steering index ( that "l" that floats through the hud) on the vector indicator. You're now flying on track to your waypoint :) Maybe not as intuative as the wanna-be map on the sukhoi but you do not need to go heads down on the eagle :) so both have an advantage. There's no need to to go heads down to watch the HSI. If you don't care about desired track then just putting the compass tape bug right is enough.

 

As for the external tanks you see most eagles with, it's kinda designed that way. Eagles don't lose out on any weapons if they choose external tanks. You take-off and cruise around with your externals on. When you engage in combat you'll drop your tanks and unlock a lot more speed and maneuvrability. Hopefully you'll have enough juice to make it home or to a tanker after the fight.

 

For safe ILS landings, just put the cross that appears on the velocity vector and you're on your way for a safe touch-down. 180 is the approach and touch-down speed afaik. Faster if you're heavy. In order to get full nosewheel authority you need to hold down "S".

Thanks, and yes after I'd done my test flight I went back and read the entire manual. Obviously should have done that first. Nav and ILS are much clearer now, though without the IRL features that the actual Eagle VSD has around navigation waypoints, it's still more work load than in the Flanker.

 

I actually wish the Flanker had bags for exactly the reason you explained: when fully loaded with fuel & weapons the Su-27 can feel more like driving an Su-25 than a fighter...

 

 

You're trying it with a fully fueled eagle at way below it's preferred turning speed - try it with an 80% flanker and tell me how it feels :)

 

A 38000lbs clean eagle (about 8000-9000 lbs fuel) will sustain 'over-g' at the right speed at SL (about M0.8). Typical preferred fighting speed is 350-450, and it's a weight-based sliding scale. Less weight, less speed.

 

The flanker will definitely out-turn the eagle in a slow speed fight at SL. At the same time, keep in mind that it's not always the aircraft that's being out-turned ... the meat-stick actuator also counts.

I certainly won't argue with that. A Flanker at max weight can feel like I'm trying to pilot a main battle tank. So am I right in thinking that the corner speed for the F-15C is between 350-450 depending on weight, with lower weight = lower corner speed?

 

It tells you what the aircraft is doing. You might be able to get more finesse out of it by listening to the eagle roar as well, it gives you an idea of the AoA via the audio.

Definitely. I was very happy when the... 'AOA wind noise'... was introduced. From memory of flying small single-seater prop planes 20 years ago it felt much more realistic and immersive.

 

Actually it eats it at a slightly lower rate than the flanker. Fuel them both up to the same amount of fuel and stick'em in a neutral sustained turn, the flanker will run out first. In a race, the eagle might run out first because fuel consumption increases with speed, and the eagle's going to get there first and peak higher. Probably.

 

In any case, not fussed about fuel because you shouldn't be getting stuck in a fight anyway - get the kill in 45 sec and your fuel consumption is a non-issue.

Fair enough, maybe it just felt like greater consumption because of the larger internal capacity of the Flanker.

 

It's not, but it's also quirky and not modeled to the real deal. See the little armament display? That displays something like the TAD in the A-10C, through without the map. It will display data-link contacts, WPs etc. WPs are also displayed on the VSD. Obviously all that isn't modeled. You've seen my list ;)

Ah yes :) Shame we don't have features that are closer to the real aircraft. Same goes for the Su-27, -33, MiG-29 I guess...

 

Of course it can be IRL, you can even see the knob for it in the game ... but also don't need it for a visual approach. Shoot the glideslope correctly and you know you've got 300'/nm.

 

You just have to learn to use the HSI and you have to learn the ILS system quirks :D

Landing AoA is 20-22 units with 21 units being 'dead on' with a 2.5-3deg glideslope, so, close enough. However your flare was inadequate (hard landing), and your aerobraking was not performed. You pulled the nose through 23uAoA for just a moment. Hold it there and you'll find that on a runway like Sochi, you'll be down to 50kt before you reach anywhere near the end of the runway, and you'll not even need to touch the breaks until it's time to turn off the runway. IRL this saves tyre and brake wear.

 

If you wanted to do a minimum ground run, then the procedure is 1-2deg glideslope approach at 23uAoA (probably can't do it at sochi due to buildings in the way), barely flare if at all (descent should be fairly slow anyway), drop the nose after touch-down (no aerobraking!) and max anti-skid breaking from there.

 

Thanks, I'll give it some more practice.

 

The top items on my DCS dream wish list are DCS: Su-27 and DCS: F-15C modules...

[GGTharos]

So am I right in thinking that the corner speed for the F-15C is between 350-450 depending on weight, with lower weight = lower corner speed?

 

Yep, it's not the peak of the thrust curve at SL (About M0.8 is), but 350-450 will very broadly give you some of the best sustained turning, and a good start for ITR (start ITR from the higher limit ... actually 450 may be a bit too high unless you're pretty heavy. In the end, it all depends).

At higher altitudes, 15000' and over, your best maneuvering speed is in IMN - Indicated Mach of about 0.95.

 

Now, that's best maneuvering speeds ... not to say absolutely have to be at those speeds. If you've got a bandit in front of you doing 200kts, you might not want to be overtaking him with your +200 :)

 

 

The top items on my DCS dream wish list are DCS: Su-27 and DCS: F-15C modules...

 

Yes, moar please :)

[Hook47]

The Eagle is a great plane, and I enjoy them both, but having a large amount of time in both, I feel like it is my game to loose when I fight an Eagle in the flanker. The superior handling, HMD and armament advantages are substantial. The only thing I have to worry about is surviving a bunch of SPAMRAMS on the way to the merge

[DarkFire]

If you've got a bandit in front of you doing 200kts, you might not want to be overtaking him with your +200 :)

 

Definitely! To paraphrase the old joke: in Soviet Russia, R-27ET follows you!

[Nerd1000]

Now, that's best maneuvering speeds ... not to say absolutely have to be at those speeds. If you've got a bandit in front of you doing 200kts, you might not want to be overtaking him with your +200 :)

 

 

Slightly off topic to discuss BFM maneuvers here, but I usually prevent overshoots on much slower targets by pulling up into a zoom climb, rolling around to keep the target in view and then coming back down from above (essentially a big vertically stretched barrel roll). I'm sure its a pretty transparent move that could easily be countered by a pilot who knows what is going on, but IMO its better than wasting energy by slowing to the target's speed. It also gives you more options- if your enemy starts turning you can quickly change it into a high yo-yo, for example.

[GGTharos]

You definitely have a lot of options :)

[Vincent90]

This thread has inspired me to do my own first flights of the F-15C. :)

 

First flight: Analyzing the aircraft

 

For my own first flight, I've had chosen to do a reconnaisance of the Crimean peninsula without weapons. I fitted 3 drop tanks, take-off and landing both from Anapa.

 

As a Flanker boy I can concur that the acceleration and climb rate really surprised me, shocked me even. Wait, are my flaps in the right position? Where are the flap indicators?!

 

What also surprised me was finding no mode to change Imperial units into SI units. The Imperial system is the big reason why I never fly American aircraft, but on such an advanced platform used by other countries as well, I would've expected an SI option.

 

I reach the strait reaching to Kerch

 

I have a hard time doing maximum thrust without going into afterburner. Afterburner fuel consumption scares the living daylights out of me. I also notice the amount of buttons and systems on the sides of the cockpit. Oh boy, someone make this a full fidelity module! :joystick:

 

The center panel systems are obtuse and complicated. At this point, I get a feeling of information overkill. No matter for now, but I will need to check the manual to see what everything means for a later flight.

 

This aircraft has automatic trimming as well?! WOW! At this point I reach the place where Sevastopol should be. Yup, they weren't lying, the Crimea really isn't in this game. Too bad.

 

I decide to check the northern approach to the crimean penisula to see for myself if it really is as tight as the maps suggest.

 

On the way I decide to do some altitude tests. On the ED forums, there was an argument about the ceiling of the F-15, with some great pictures out of a high-altitude F-15.

 

Again, the rate of climb stuns me. When I get over 40.000 feet It wears a little off though. Not a clue how to read the mach counter so the only thing I have is the IAS and my vertical velocity indicator to keep me in check and stable. What I also notice is that my side tanks have independant fuel indicators, but my center line tank hasnt, is this true?

 

I reach ~60.000 feet and conclude that the earth is flat.

 

The F-15 starts to feel wobbly due to lack of air under and over the wings. I decide that its time to return home.

 

At this point I start to notice how I LOVE the way all the info is given on the center right side of the cockpit. Instead of only a gauge that is open for interpretation, there is a counter within every gauge as well that shows more exact numbers. Why didn't other manufacturers think of that?

 

The lady with the electronic voice tells me I have bingo fuel. Apparently this means I'm not empty and still have 3000 lbs to get home. Great feature, although with these thirsty engines I hope to land safely. Thank god Anapa is in sight.

 

The plane lands as a dream and seems to be easier to land as the Su-27 was when I started out, although this could be an experience thing. It doesnt like to decelerate after landing though, and why does my drag chute refuse to open?

 

An hour and 15 minutes after take-off, i'm safely back on the ground :)

 

Overall, after this first flight I can conclude a couple of things. The F-15 loves to climb and accelerate. Together with the AIM-120 this makes it a very suitable interceptor.

 

Like most American aircraft, The F-15 has an overcomplicated information lay-out and compromises the time my eyes are towards the blue sky; it tries to cram too much information into too little of a space. The black cockpit is also more eyestraining than the standard russian turqoise pit, although this could be due to the age and fidelity of the module. The cockpit also gives me the feeling i'm in the cockpit lower and that the entire cockpit is smaller, although again this could just be a color thing.

 

The counters within the gauges are a godsend though and the automatic trim significantly reduces pilot work load.

 

 

Before my next flight, I'll read the manual so I can try out Navigation and both BVR and WVR attack systems. If I have fuel left, I'll test rate of roll and turn rate at different altitudes and speeds.

 

I'm looking forward to it :)

 

@GGTharos: You mention a list with stuff that isn't modeled, could you post a link to it? :)

[Sryan]

This thread has inspired me to do my own first flights of the F-15C. :)

 

First flight: Analyzing the aircraft

 

For my own first flight, I've had chosen to do a reconnaisance of the Crimean peninsula without weapons. I fitted 3 drop tanks, take-off and landing both from Anapa.

 

1: As a Flanker boy I can concur that the acceleration and climb rate really surprised me, shocked me even. Wait, are my flaps in the right position? Where are the flap indicators?!

 

2:What also surprised me was finding no mode to change Imperial units into SI units. The Imperial system is the big reason why I never fly American aircraft, but on such an advanced platform used by other countries as well, I would've expected an SI option.

 

I reach the strait reaching to Kerch

 

I have a hard time doing maximum thrust without going into afterburner. Afterburner fuel consumption scares the living daylights out of me. I also notice the amount of buttons and systems on the sides of the cockpit. Oh boy, someone make this a full fidelity module! :joystick:

 

The center panel systems are obtuse and complicated. At this point, I get a feeling of information overkill. No matter for now, but I will need to check the manual to see what everything means for a later flight.

 

3: This aircraft has automatic trimming as well?! WOW! At this point I reach the place where Sevastopol should be. Yup, they weren't lying, the Crimea really isn't in this game. Too bad.

 

I decide to check the northern approach to the crimean penisula to see for myself if it really is as tight as the maps suggest.

 

On the way I decide to do some altitude tests. On the ED forums, there was an argument about the ceiling of the F-15, with some great pictures out of a high-altitude F-15.

 

4: Again, the rate of climb stuns me. When I get over 40.000 feet It wears a little off though. Not a clue how to read the mach counter so the only thing I have is the IAS and my vertical velocity indicator to keep me in check and stable.5: What I also notice is that my side tanks have independant fuel indicators, but my center line tank hasnt, is this true?

 

I reach ~60.000 feet and conclude that the earth is flat.

 

The F-15 starts to feel wobbly due to lack of air under and over the wings. I decide that its time to return home.

 

At this point I start to notice how I LOVE the way all the info is given on the center right side of the cockpit. Instead of only a gauge that is open for interpretation, there is a counter within every gauge as well that shows more exact numbers. Why didn't other manufacturers think of that?

 

The lady with the electronic voice tells me I have bingo fuel. Apparently this means I'm not empty and still have 3000 lbs to get home. Great feature, although with these thirsty engines I hope to land safely. Thank god Anapa is in sight.

 

The plane lands as a dream and seems to be easier to land as the Su-27 was when I started out, although this could be an experience thing. It doesnt like to decelerate after landing though, and why does my drag chute refuse to open?

 

An hour and 15 minutes after take-off, i'm safely back on the ground :)

 

Overall, after this first flight I can conclude a couple of things. The F-15 loves to climb and accelerate. Together with the AIM-120 this makes it a very suitable interceptor.

 

Like most American aircraft, The F-15 has an overcomplicated information lay-out and compromises the time my eyes are towards the blue sky; it tries to cram too much information into too little of a space. The black cockpit is also more eyestraining than the standard russian turqoise pit, although this could be due to the age and fidelity of the module. The cockpit also gives me the feeling i'm in the cockpit lower and that the entire cockpit is smaller, although again this could just be a color thing.

 

The counters within the gauges are a godsend though and the automatic trim significantly reduces pilot work load.

 

 

Before my next flight, I'll read the manual so I can try out Navigation and both BVR and WVR attack systems. If I have fuel left, I'll test rate of roll and turn rate at different altitudes and speeds.

 

I'm looking forward to it :)

 

@GGTharos: You mention a list with stuff that isn't modeled, could you post a link to it? :)

 

1: Somewhere in the bottom left. Flaps are also automatic in that they retract automaticly when you go over 200 knots. but you should still put them up manually, otherwise the plane will drop them in a fight should you ever go below 200 :) when aproaching just hit the flaps key and the plane will put them down when the speed is right.

 

2: regardless of the systeme internationale most countries in the western world use the feet, knot and nautical mile as the aviation standard. With time spent in the plane you will be able to learn to 'feel' the values.

 

3: <what Tharos says>

 

4: When you put her in a combat air-to-air mode. You'll get a digital mach readout on the bottom left of your HUD. So as an example. Tap 2 to put her in BVR mode, read out the Mach number, then 1 to go back to navigation.

 

5: This is a digital readout. When not tampered with it actually digitally reads out your onboard tanks. you need to press Lshift-D to move the knob below the fuel indicators to put them on WING-TANKS or CENTERLINE-TANK. All 3 external tanks drain at an equal rate though. they typically each have the same amount of fuel in them.

 

I wonder what info you have such a hard time aquiring from the pit? Most things you'll need are shown on the HUD in one mode or another. Only engine perfomance, fuel indication and the caution light panel are placed a little out of sight in my opinion. If you feel troubled reading the gauges why not try turning on the lights? (L).

 

Hope you had some fun flying that thing, too :D

Edited March 3, 2016 by Sryan
correcting based on what ggtharos said.

[GGTharos]

For 3, it is automatic trimming, however, to be precise, we're talking about the PTC (pitch trim compensator), which is just a part of the CAS.

 

The CAS with the PTC will trim pitch to 1g + pilot bias input (ie, your manual trim). Roll trim is always manual. Yaw operations are largely automated, plus pilot pedal input.

[Hydrox]

Also have flown flanker mostly but couple times tested F-15. This recent flight I took was like omg, I didn't feel like I was flying a plane at all, felt like it on rails or something, so weird. If this is realistic flight model, then I don't know what to say... back to russia?

[GGTharos]

If you felt it was like on rails then I don't know what to tell you. Don't ever wish for a newer flanker variant, they'll be pretty raily too ;)

[Vincent90]

I wonder what info you have such a hard time aquiring from the pit? Most things you'll need are shown on the HUD in one mode or another. Only engine perfomance, fuel indication and the caution light panel are placed a little out of sight in my opinion.

Well, that is actually part of my problem! I feel the HUD is WAY too cluttered compared to the Su-27.

I can't read the HUD texts unless at least partially zoomed in, and a lot of the info is unneccessary and detracts from all the other stuffed jammed into the HUD. Sometimes the text collides with other info on screen, which renders it inelligable.

 

 

What I would remove from the HUD would be:

-ETA to waypoint,

-amount of missiles left on the plane and the info behind it,

-G-force when it is lower than the recommended amount for the air frame.

-Angle of Attack when not it landing mode

-Bank steering index (although apparently most pilots like it, considering it's on the russian aircraft as well)

 

All these things can be easily deducted from the other avionics in the cockpit and are not necessary to constantly be reminded of,

so why have them constantly on the hud?

 

I also find the course deviation dots on the HSI to be overkill, since you already have proper heading and the course deviation line on it.

 

The MFCD also has a lot going on (I understand the benefit of having inventory of the aircraft stores, but why all the other information?), and the radar screen copies a lot of info already given on the HUD.

 

A cluttered cockpit is pretty standard for 1970's era NATO aircraft (With Sepecat Jaguar being the worst offender IMHO), but I would've expected something more advanced from the later ne plus ultra C-variant.

 

Thanks for the tip on mach number though, really helps out!

 

 

Going down the range

 

AMRAAM.

 

One of the most feared missile systems in the world, claimed to be capable of hitting targets over 160km away.

This thing makes me nervous every time I climb into the Su-27.

 

Not only does it out-range the russian missiles (I refuse to use the R27ER until performance is better explained by ED), but paired with the powerful APG-63 i'm afraid it wil burn through my ECM before I can get close enough to the F-15, especially since it has an active seeker. This thing really makes me respect the F-15 as an adversary.

 

Thankfully the version in DCS is less powerful than the Raytheon brochures claim, but still it should be a sledgehammer. I can't wait to try it out.

 

 

First things first: figuring out the radar.

 

The FC3 manuals and tutorials are old inaccurate piles of trash, but I couldn't find a quick and complete overview of the F-15 missile systems, so the DCS manual must do. (Remind me to buy a thorough F-15 book for this summer, any recommendations guys?)

 

From what I understand each weapon has their own modes.

- The M-61 cannon can be used with or without radar lock

 

- AIM-9 has a mode with a small locking windows for specific targets in large groups of heat signatures, or a large locking window to kill the first target it sees.

 

It also has a "radar-slave mode" for "Vertical scan" and "Boresight" modes, ...although I don't understand any of that.

 

- AIM-7 has a "flood" mode, which is a "kill something that is within the radar beam" mode for use WVR. It doesn't require a radar lock either.

 

It also has the traditional BVR mode called "Target Tracking Radar". The manual says "the radar automatically transfers the track file to stt mode if it is designated to be locked". I don't understand any of that either, and at this point the game makes me feel like a Teletubbie for not understanding.

 

BUT WE SHALL NOT GIVE UP!

 

- AIM-120 has a similar mode as Flood, but now its called "Visual" and is only effective when the target is within 10nm because of the seeker limitations.

It also has the same BVR mode as the AIM-7, but you have to lock a specific target twice. I assume this is because AIM-120 allows multiple launches at multiple targets at once, although the manual keeps shtumm about everything involving this.

 

The radar also has 3 Auto Acquisation modes, but I figure i have enough fabric for a single Navigational, BVR and WVR testing flight.

 

Alright, so the F-15 is a lot more complicated than the Su-27. It also requires you to use both HUD and radar screen to make the kill. Very different from the Su-27, where the radar screen is mostly superimposed on the HUD.

 

So, after trying out AIM-7 and understanding it, I loaded up with 3 drop tanks, 4 AIM-120C's and 4 AIM-9M's, i take off for a course along the Black Sea coast. I've planned to intercept a Tu-95 between Waypoints 1 and 2.

 

Taking off, climbing and accelerating is again no problem, even at these heavy loads. Of course, the manual doesn't give info on which engines the module contains. My suspicions are they threw out Pratt & Whitney's offering, and replaced it with Superman and his brother.

 

Navigation is really easy and exactly the same principle and modes as the Su-27, so no surprises there. The landing mode I prefer a little bit above the one in the Su-27 since it shows estimated location of touch-down, although my issues with the cluttered HUD remain.

 

Intercepting the Bear fails. I just can't get through the ECM with the AIM-120 until I'm within 10-11nm. AIM-9 works like it should though and 2 hits later I see those supersonic props hit the water.

 

Is the AMRAAM a myth? Would Icarus be a better name for this thing, and is the old trustworthy Tu-95 its sun?

 

Second test is with an unarmed Yak-40 transport plane

 

 

Yak-40 is at 24600 feet, i'm at 27000

There is 26nm between me and our unaware victim, according to the Radar this should barely work. DCS Encylcopedia says otherwise.

I shoot the first AIM-120, and it misses.

 

I climb to 29500 feet

I shoot the second AIM-120 at 22nm, again a miss.

I shoot my third and last AIM-120 at 20nm, well within claimed range of the AMRAAM for a barely moving target.

 

Again a miss.

 

Now I am within the maximum permitted launch range to maneuvering target and also within seconds of my usual attack window with the Su-27.

 

Incredible.

 

I RTB and process what has happened.

In some other flights I noticed that the US RWR is very different than the russian system, since it provides a more dynamic overhead view of the situation but lacks the possibility to make more exact estimations on the altitude of the threat and it doesnt show the aircrafts blind zones on screen.

It does have a single beep instead of a continuous one, which is just better.

 

I start getting used to the F-15 cocpit and soon I'll be able to try out the campaign. The position, size and lay-out of the radar screen remains a werid one though.

 

I'm shocked to see the Su-27 radar giving a better picture of the air space than the F-15C. Not only does it have a larger screen, it also manages to project all possible targets directly onto the HUD, with relative positions in the bigger picture kept on the radar screen. The F-15 stuffs it all in a single screen, making it harder and more time-consuming to filter the relevant info.

 

 

This really is a surprise to me, considering the rationale and design objectives of the F-15.

 

 

The F-22 has got the 'proper' overview, so they've corrected it and perhaps other, later F-15 variants have the correction as well, but I expected more given the F-15 reputation.

 

 

All in all, i'm not very impressed by the AIM-120 and it makes me wonder the usefulness of having such a powerful radar when you cant reap the distance benefits. Especially in a world of AWACS and data-links.

 

 

 

Next up: Test flights and campaign opinion! :)

Edited March 4, 2016 by Vincent90

[0xDEADBEEF]

What also surprised me was finding no mode to change Imperial units into SI units. The Imperial system is the big reason why I never fly American aircraft, but on such an advanced platform used by other countries as well, I would've expected an SI option.

 

Aviation has always been and will always be imperial: Knots/Feet/Nauticmiles. Only the russians do their own thing. I feel you, I am metric too, but you will get used to those 3 units easily. I'm still struggling when i have to deal with pounds and gallons, but as long as you got fuel in the tank this does not matter a lot, and when you run out of fuel, fuel is out and you got other problems to worry about ;)

[Sweep]

Try shooting an AMRAAM at about 12-18nmi from high and fast (25-40 block, M1.2+) - 8-12 from 18-25 block - Anything below 15k, well...Within 8, but you need to know the missile time of flight and endgame speed (speed right before impact, for anyone who doesn't use cool fighter terms)...Also, sometimes, sub-8 mile shots result in lots of missiles flying past your canopy...That's just the way it works atm.

 

20nmi+ shots would be great, but the FM still needs tweaking.

 

Edit: Against what you're shooting at (AI/non-maneuvering stuff), you can add a few miles to most of those.

 

I'm more PVP oriented...

Edited March 4, 2016 by Sweep
fixed some stuff.

[CHDT]

" Only the russians do their own thing."

 

No.

During the Cold War (in fact until the Hornet goes into service), all the Swiss airforce military aircrafts had also metric instruments.

It was nice, making it one's own way.

I like the Russians for that :-)

[Sryan]

Well, that is actually part of my problem! I feel the HUD is WAY too cluttered compared to the Su-27.

I can't read the HUD texts unless at least partially zoomed in, and a lot of the info is unneccessary and detracts from all the other stuffed jammed into the HUD. Sometimes the text collides with other info on screen, which renders it inelligable.

 

 

What I would remove from the HUD would be:

-ETA to waypoint,

-amount of missiles left on the plane and the info behind it,

-G-force when it is lower than the recommended amount for the air frame.

-Angle of Attack when not it landing mode

-Bank steering index (although apparently most pilots like it, considering it's on the russian aircraft as well)

 

All these things can be easily deducted from the other avionics in the cockpit and are not necessary to constantly be reminded of,

so why have them constantly on the hud?

 

I also find the course deviation dots on the HSI to be overkill, since you already have proper heading and the course deviation line on it.

 

The MFCD also has a lot going on (I understand the benefit of having inventory of the aircraft stores, but why all the other information?), and the radar screen copies a lot of info already given on the HUD.

 

I personally like the plethora of info shown :) Why would you not want to see the state of your fuel tanks and amount of gun ammo on the MFD?

 

A cluttered cockpit is pretty standard for 1970's era NATO aircraft (With Sepecat Jaguar being the worst offender IMHO), but I would've expected something more advanced from the later ne plus ultra C-variant.

 

Thanks for the tip on mach number though, really helps out!

 

 

Going down the range

 

AMRAAM.

 

One of the most feared missile systems in the world, claimed to be capable of hitting targets over 160km away.

This thing makes me nervous every time I climb into the Su-27.

 

Not only does it out-range the russian missiles (I refuse to use the R27ER until performance is better explained by ED), but paired with the powerful APG-63 i'm afraid it wil burn through my ECM before I can get close enough to the F-15, especially since it has an active seeker. This thing really makes me respect the F-15 as an adversary.

 

Thankfully the version in DCS is less powerful than the Raytheon brochures claim, but still it should be a sledgehammer. I can't wait to try it out.

 

 

First things first: figuring out the radar.

 

The FC3 manuals and tutorials are old inaccurate piles of trash, but I couldn't find a quick and complete overview of the F-15 missile systems, so the DCS manual must do. (Remind me to buy a thorough F-15 book for this summer, any recommendations guys?)

 

From what I understand each weapon has their own modes.

- The M-61 cannon can be used with or without radar lock

 

- AIM-9 has a mode with a small locking windows for specific targets in large groups of heat signatures, or a large locking window to kill the first target it sees.

 

It also has a "radar-slave mode" for "Vertical scan" and "Boresight" modes, ...although I don't understand any of that.

 

In these modes the radar locks on to a target and then guides the seeker head to the target. You can squeeze more range in the lock this way.

 

 

- AIM-7 has a "flood" mode, which is a "kill something that is within the radar beam" mode for use WVR. It doesn't require a radar lock either.

 

It also has the traditional BVR mode called "Target Tracking Radar". The manual says "the radar automatically transfers the track file to stt mode if it is designated to be locked". I don't understand any of that either, and at this point the game makes me feel like a Teletubbie for not understanding.

 

BUT WE SHALL NOT GIVE UP!

 

- AIM-120 has a similar mode as Flood, but now its called "Visual" and is only effective when the target is within 10nm because of the seeker limitations.

It also has the same BVR mode as the AIM-7, but you have to lock a specific target twice. I assume this is because AIM-120 allows multiple launches at multiple targets at once, although the manual keeps shtumm about everything involving this.

 

You need to lock a target once if you are in the normal BVR mode. You need to lock a target twice if you are in TWS ( Track While Scan ) mode in order to transition to STT ( single Target Track ). ALthough you can still launch an AIM-120 if you only got a single lock in TWS, but not an AIM-7 sparrow. You can lock multiple targets in TWS wich is where the powerful ability to launch multiple slammers at multiple targets comes from. The targets won't even be notified of the launch untill it's time for the slammers to go active.

 

The radar also has 3 Auto Acquisation modes, but I figure i have enough fabric for a single Navigational, BVR and WVR testing flight.

 

Alright, so the F-15 is a lot more complicated than the Su-27. It also requires you to use both HUD and radar screen to make the kill. Very different from the Su-27, where the radar screen is mostly superimposed on the HUD.

 

So, after trying out AIM-7 and understanding it, I loaded up with 3 drop tanks, 4 AIM-120C's and 4 AIM-9M's, i take off for a course along the Black Sea coast. I've planned to intercept a Tu-95 between Waypoints 1 and 2.

 

Taking off, climbing and accelerating is again no problem, even at these heavy loads. Of course, the manual doesn't give info on which engines the module contains. My suspicions are they threw out Pratt & Whitney's offering, and replaced it with Superman and his brother.

 

Navigation is really easy and exactly the same principle and modes as the Su-27, so no surprises there. The landing mode I prefer a little bit above the one in the Su-27 since it shows estimated location of touch-down, although my issues with the cluttered HUD remain.

 

Intercepting the Bear fails. I just can't get through the ECM with the AIM-120 until I'm within 10-11nm. AIM-9 works like it should though and 2 hits later I see those supersonic props hit the water.

 

Is the AMRAAM a myth? Would Icarus be a better name for this thing, and is the old trustworthy Tu-95 its sun?

 

Second test is with an unarmed Yak-40 transport plane

 

 

Yak-40 is at 24600 feet, i'm at 27000

There is 26nm between me and our unaware victim, according to the Radar this should barely work. DCS Encylcopedia says otherwise.

I shoot the first AIM-120, and it misses.

 

I climb to 29500 feet

I shoot the second AIM-120 at 22nm, again a miss.

I shoot my third and last AIM-120 at 20nm, well within claimed range of the AMRAAM for a barely moving target.

 

Again a miss.

 

Now I am within the maximum permitted launch range to maneuvering target and also within seconds of my usual attack window with the Su-27.

 

Incredible.

 

I RTB and process what has happened.

In some other flights I noticed that the US RWR is very different than the russian system, since it provides a more dynamic overhead view of the situation but lacks the possibility to make more exact estimations on the altitude of the threat and it doesnt show the aircrafts blind zones on screen.

It does have a single beep instead of a continuous one, which is just better.

 

The blindzones on the F15C are straight up and straight down, in a 45 degree cone. The thing has 360 degree coverage, so you cannot approach it from the horizon with your radar on without an eagle seeing you coming at him, unless he is in a steep bank

 

 

 

I start getting used to the F-15 cocpit and soon I'll be able to try out the campaign. The position, size and lay-out of the radar screen remains a werid one though.

 

I'm shocked to see the Su-27 radar giving a better picture of the air space than the F-15C. Not only does it have a larger screen, it also manages to project all possible targets directly onto the HUD, with relative positions in the bigger picture kept on the radar screen. The F-15 stuffs it all in a single screen, making it harder and more time-consuming to filter the relevant info.

 

 

This really is a surprise to me, considering the rationale and design objectives of the F-15.

 

 

The F-22 has got the 'proper' overview, so they've corrected it and perhaps other, later F-15 variants have the correction as well, but I expected more given the F-15 reputation.

 

 

All in all, i'm not very impressed by the AIM-120 and it makes me wonder the usefulness of having such a powerful radar when you cant reap the distance benefits. Especially in a world of AWACS and data-links.

 

 

 

Next up: Test flights and campaign opinion! :)

I think you've not played the AIM-120 to it's strengths yet. The real thing about that missile is that when you shoot one, two timers will appear on the bottom left of the HUD. When the shorter timer runs out, the missile is active and you can break off or go defensive. The missile will guide itself in. A SARH equiped opponent has two options, break off to defend against the missile causing his SARH to go dumb or try to keep guiding the SARH while the amraam will most likely destroy him. The other advantage the thing has is that when you launch it from TWS mode the thing does NOT provide a launch warning untill the short timer runs out and the missile is active, usually around 6 to 12 seconds before the projected impact.

 

I understand you're a flanker pilot going on a holiday :) But the F15 still requires time and respect to be learned properly. Go back to the manual wich, in my opinion, is not that bad at all. Check the chapters about radar manipulation first ( starting from page 66 ).

[probad]

yeah your troubles with the bear ecm would be easily solved by launching from tws.

 

the f-15c represented in fc3 is not only an early model but also missing a lot of features especially with the radar so you might want to temper your expectations a bit.

that said half of it is also familiarization, when i went from russian planes to the f-15 i thought the hud was the dumbest thing (why doesn't it just read out my ias/alt as a number? etc etc) but as i warmed up to it issue has reversed itself and i find myself wishing the russian hud was reorganized.

[Vincent90]

I personally like the plethora of info shown :) Why would you not want to see the state of your fuel tanks and amount of gun ammo on the MFD?

Yeah, THOSE I want to see, together with arming confirmation which combat systems are "live", the missiles and amount of chaff/flare still on board.

What I DON'T want to see is the other stuff. :)

 

Example what I would get rid of: http://i.imgur.com/er2Q9Vu.png

Ideal: http://i.imgur.com/VvuyHAF.jpg

 

when you launch it from TWS mode the thing does NOT provide a launch warning untill the short timer runs out and the missile is active, usually around 6 to 12 seconds before the projected impact.

So if I understand your and this information correctly, when the 120 is still on board the F-15 it doesn't actually "lock" on to target; it just flies to an estimated point X seconds away based on F-15 radar (and THIS is that track file that the manual keeps mentioning?) and THEN activates its own radar and locks at the closest bandit and glides towards it?

 

the F15 still requires time and respect to be learned properly.

You're absolutely right, I have plenty of homework to do in the upcoming week, especially when it comes to the limits of every single radar mode :)

 

 

 

By the way, do you guys prefer the 120B or 120C? It seems that the increased range of the 120C is not as useful against a high-manoeuvring target (ie. 4th gen fighters) as the increased cornering of the 120B, but this should be countered by the better ECCM of the 120C. Is the 120C always the way to go?

Edited March 5, 2016 by Vincent90

[GGTharos]

Yeah, THOSE I want to see, together with arming confirmation which combat systems are "live", the missiles and amount of chaff/flare still on board.

What I DON'T want to see is the other stuff. :)

 

The other stuff is quite important in RL. Indeed, there's no use for it in-game, but it is a fairly authentic representation.

 

So if I understand your and this information correctly, when the 120 is still on board the F-15 it doesn't actually "lock" on to target; it just flies to an estimated point X seconds away based on F-15 radar (and THIS is that track file that the manual keeps mentioning?) and THEN activates its own radar and locks at the closest bandit and glides towards it?

 

The 120 does not lock anything while on the wing - that would probably require activating the battery, and you can't turn it off. So, if you don't launch the missile, you've effectively wasted it.

The 120 will fly to a certain distance from the target in-game, not seconds to impact (although, who knows - all this stuff is programmable in RL!), then it will select the juiciest target (in RL, it will filter targets based on M-Link information).

 

By the way, do you guys prefer the 120B or 120C? It seems that the increased range of the 120C is not as useful against a high-manoeuvring target (ie. 4th gen fighters) as the increased cornering of the 120B, but this should be countered by the better ECCM of the 120C. Is the 120C always the way to go?

 

120C works fine. Realistically as the target you shouldn't see a maneuver difference from one to the other, but that's the way it is in the game; the missiles maneuver differently enough.

To put it another way, if a 120B can pull 33g and the C 31g, there's a tiny margin of maneuvering capability you could exploit against it in theory. In reality, it'll just blow you up almost no matter what you try to do.

Unless it's slow, then it just can't really do anything like all missiles :)

[Sryan]

Yes, the concept you have is sort of correct. Before launch, the aircraft programs the missiles inertial navigation system. During the first phases of flight the F15 updates the missile through a datalink system, the missile itself still "sees" nothing. So the missile will still perform course corrections in the early stages, provided you maintain the lock. If the lock is lost, the missile will maneuvre to the last updated point and go active there, so technically it's already in a fire&forget state now.

 

I wouldn't say it just locks onto a bandit at the spot where it goes active. It's usually in a good kinematic position to get a kill on only the bandit you designated.

 

I'd always go for the 120C. The range being the biggest boon for me. Or higher speed for a given time of flight. It can intercept 4th gen just fine usually.

[DarkFire]

I take it then that DCS doesn't model the uplink to the missile for mid-course correction purposes?