DCS: F-15C

[draconus]

1 hour ago, Nahen said:

Hmm, why don't we add to Spitfires, Me-109s, FW-190s - AMRAAMs and Sidewinders?

Not realistic because the aircraft would need to be modified to even launch it.

F-15C otoh is fully capable of firing a gun and deliver a2g munition right from the factory both physically and with the software.

Edited January 15, 2023 by draconus

[Nahen]

49 minutes ago, draconus said:

Not realistic because the aircraft would need to be modified to even launch it.

F-15C otoh is fully capable of firing a gun and deliver a2g munition right from the factory both physically and with the software.

 

He is capable, he can do it, I will say more, he did it as part of testing and training. In Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, F-16s and F-15s often flew at a low altitude, scaring the enemy with their presence, it didn't matter if they fired from a cannon, whether they only raised sand and dust into the air or crossed the sound barrier.
We still play with Digital Combat Simulator - that is, we recreate/simulate real battlefields/combat. In the real world, in real conflicts, the F-15C did not attack ground targets. (I exclude the Israeli variants, but as far as I know he adapted and used the D versions for attacks on ground targets)
Tell You, I sometimes fly in DCS to attack and effectively destroy BTRY, BRDM, trucks using Sidewinders and AMRAAMs. So what? The F-15C is a normal multi-role fighter?

[draconus]

1 hour ago, Nahen said:

The F-15C is a normal multi-role fighter?

Yes, depends on the definition and what you compare it to. A2G is pretty limited here so I'd say MiG-29A and Su-27S level.

[Nahen]

13 minutes ago, draconus said:

Yes, depends on the definition and what you compare it to. A2G is pretty limited here so I'd say MiG-29A and Su-27S level.

I don't think the MiG-29 or Su-27 have ever actually attacked ground targets with the R-60, R-27 etc...

[Kalasnkova74]

20 hours ago, Nahen said:

I don't think the MiG-29 or Su-27 have ever actually attacked ground targets with the R-60, R-27 etc...

Here’s a flight of Ukranian Flankers bombing Russian positions on Snake Island

 

[jojyrocks]

 

F-15C does not truly have secondary ground attack ability other than the ability to do a rough or improvised strafe runs.

 

The Israelis  are the ONLY ones modified their F-15C and D to be ground attack capable, that is carrying dumb bombs.

 

Real US F-15C only can do improvised rough ground strafe, it is pure air to air configured and designed aircraft.

 

Su-27 and Mig 29 DO have real secondary ground attack ability, they can carry dumb bombs and even UG rockets.

 

Yes, I do really love to see US F-15C as a module. What we have is just the FC3 stuff. 

Edited January 16, 2023 by jojyrocks

[Kalasnkova74]

44 minutes ago, jojyrocks said:

The Israelis  are the ONLY ones modified their F-15C and D to be ground attack capable, that is carrying dumb bombs.

Real US F-15C only can do improvised rough ground strafe, it is pure air to air configured and designed aircraft.

 

In the F-15 Eagle’s early years, it did carry bombs (and conformal tanks) in USAF service. In the 1980s Langley assigned F-15s were part of the USAF’s rapid deployment team, and incorporated air to ground capability as they’d be first in the theatre. The “not a pound for air to ground” F-15 featured the same CCIP modes as the F-16. 

Once the F-15E entered service in the late 1980s the air to ground systems and training requirements were removed from the “Light Grey” Eagle squadrons. While the F-15C fleet may be a single mission outfit now, it was not always so. The “not a pound for air to ground” ad copy doesn’t stack up with the F-15s development or military procurement reality. One does not spend $40-$100 million on a twin engine long range fighter plane without building in at least rudimentary bombing capability. Even the Soviets built it into the Su-27/MiG-29 despite having no intention of using them for air to ground missions in the PFI/LFI requirements.

[F-2]

https://books.google.com/books?id=wLI9AQAAIAAJ&pg=PA4596&dq=f-15+a-7+ground&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjKjNj1sMz8AhXhFVkFHa7TC7MQ6AF6BAgEEAM#v=onepage&q=f-15 a-7 ground&f=false
 

the USAF never did much in the way of meaningful training for air to ground but the capability was there. Only Israeli seems to have used it

[Nahen]

2 hours ago, Kalasnkova74 said:

Here’s a flight of Ukranian Flankers bombing Russian positions on Snake Island

 

But do you know what R-60 and R-27 are??

[Nahen]

1 hour ago, Kalasnkova74 said:

 

In the F-15 Eagle’s early years, it did carry bombs (and conformal tanks) in USAF service. In the 1980s Langley assigned F-15s were part of the USAF’s rapid deployment team, and incorporated air to ground capability as they’d be first in the theatre. The “not a pound for air to ground” F-15 featured the same CCIP modes as the F-16. 

Once the F-15E entered service in the late 1980s the air to ground systems and training requirements were removed from the “Light Grey” Eagle squadrons. While the F-15C fleet may be a single mission outfit now, it was not always so. The “not a pound for air to ground” ad copy doesn’t stack up with the F-15s development or military procurement reality. One does not spend $40-$100 million on a twin engine long range fighter plane without building in at least rudimentary bombing capability. Even the Soviets built it into the Su-27/MiG-29 despite having no intention of using them for air to ground missions in the PFI/LFI requirements.

And the same thing over and over again... The F-15A/C had an avionics mode for "simple" air-to-ground attacks. THERE WAS NEVER ANY USAF UNITS READY TO USE F-15A/C TO ATTACK ON GROUND TARGETS. Yes, pilots of some squadrons practiced attacks on ground targets as part of the tests. This photo, as far as I can remember, is a photo from one of the proving grounds in early 80's where one of the last tests and comparisons of the possibility and effectiveness of attacks on ground targets between the F-16 and F-15 were carried out, which were directly related to the work on the F-15E.

No A-G systems have ever been removed from the F-15C. They are still on board and in aircraft avionics to this day.

Ground attack training was never removed from the regulatory training standards because it was never included in the training of F-15 pilots.
Some units practiced, but this was not the standard in the USAF.

And here's a statement from a guy who was serving in Kaden when this photo was taken, maybe you'll see how wrong you are.

 

>>>>When I worked wing scheduling at Kadena in the early 80s we were told from on high to test the bombing capabilities of our Eagles using only the supplied on board equipment.  When we told our three squadrons, they weren't overjoyed about this assignment but they got right to work on it.  All results were sent to the pilots working in our office who sent them to the appropriate commanders.  From what I was told, they did quite well for guys that never did air to ground work.

This shot was taken during a airshow we had during a carnival for a local orphanage.<<<

[Vampyre]

19 hours ago, jojyrocks said:

The Israelis  are the ONLY ones modified their F-15C and D to be ground attack capable, that is carrying dumb bombs.

The Israeli F-15C's are quite a bit more advanced than you assume.

 

[jojyrocks]

1 hour ago, Vampyre said:

The Israeli F-15C's are quite a bit more advanced than you assume.

 

 

 

Recorded use in Operation Wooden leg, 1985 on a strike at PLO HQ Tunis. six F-15Ds attacking PLO Headquarters in Tunis with two GBU-15 guided bombs per aircraft and two F-15Cs re-striking the ruins with six Mk-82 unguided bombs each. This was one of the few times air-superiority F-15s (A/B/C/D models) were used in tactical strike missions. Israeli air-superiority F-15 variants have since been extensively upgraded to carry a wider range of air-to-ground armaments, including JDAM GPS-guided bombs and Popeye missiles over the years.

 

Source: Wiki.

 

Israelis modify a lot of their planes from their original versions, like the F-15C

US based in service F-15C (vanilla) are not currently configured to carry AG ordnances, they maybe can do it. But they see it much better with it doing air superiority roles and leaving the Derivative two seat Strike Eagles to be the multi role plane.

 

 

Edited January 17, 2023 by jojyrocks

[Cab]

20 hours ago, Kalasnkova74 said:

 

In the F-15 Eagle’s early years, it did carry bombs (and conformal tanks) in USAF service. In the 1980s Langley assigned F-15s were part of the USAF’s rapid deployment team, and incorporated air to ground capability as they’d be first in the theatre. The “not a pound for air to ground” F-15 featured the same CCIP modes as the F-16. 

Once the F-15E entered service in the late 1980s the air to ground systems and training requirements were removed from the “Light Grey” Eagle squadrons. While the F-15C fleet may be a single mission outfit now, it was not always so. The “not a pound for air to ground” ad copy doesn’t stack up with the F-15s development or military procurement reality. One does not spend $40-$100 million on a twin engine long range fighter plane without building in at least rudimentary bombing capability. Even the Soviets built it into the Su-27/MiG-29 despite having no intention of using them for air to ground missions in the PFI/LFI requirements.

Wow, thanks for finding this picture.

I had thought I remembered reading in the 80's that PACAF F-15C's trained with single Mk-8X bombs under each wing station. But since I could never find a picture, I assumed my memory was wrong.

[Nahen]

2 hours ago, Cab said:

Wow, thanks for finding this picture.

I had thought I remembered reading in the 80's that PACAF F-15C's trained with single Mk-8X bombs under each wing station. But since I could never find a picture, I assumed my memory was wrong.

They didn't train - they tested it, it's a big difference... How many times can write the same thing over and over again?

Edited January 17, 2023 by Nahen

[Cab]

33 minutes ago, Nahen said:

They didn't train - they tested it, it's a big difference... How many times can write the same thing over and over again?

I don’t really know. From my experience, writing the same thing over and over again doesn’t, in itself, make it true. 
 

Tested, demonstrated, trained? Who knows forty years later without any documentation or verified first-hand accounts? But sitting at your keyboard demanding people believe your opinion over and over again is a losing strategy. 
 

I would think you’d have learned something from the CFT thread. 

[Nahen]

58 minutes ago, Cab said:

I don’t really know. From my experience, writing the same thing over and over again doesn’t, in itself, make it true. 
 

Tested, demonstrated, trained? Who knows forty years later without any documentation or verified first-hand accounts? But sitting at your keyboard demanding people believe your opinion over and over again is a losing strategy. 
 

I would think you’d have learned something from the CFT thread. 

Read the quote I posted a few posts above - it's a quote - a statement from a man who was serving there at Kadena AFB at the time this photo was taken. Maybe you don't have access to documents, first-hand information, I still know some people and I know where such information can be found.
I learned nothing about CFT - F-15Es have never been used in combat without CFT and I will not change my opinion based on my information. Today - and precisely since the withdrawal of the F-15C from Lakennheath, pilots 492 and 494 began (about half a year ago) to perform training flights without CFT due to the need to replace the F-15C - I also wrote about it there. But it still doesn't change the fact that F-15Es have never been used anywhere without CFT.

So again, the F-15C pilots have NEVER been by official trained in attacking ground targets, and never attacking ground targets with the F-15A/B/C/D was part of the OFFICIAL training in the USAF. There were tests for various programs run by the air force, but they were never regular and official training.

 

Maybe it's incomprehensible to you because maybe you're too young - today there are still dozens if not hundreds of USAF pilots who flew the F-15A/B/C/D in the 1970s and 1980s. Reach them, talk, find out something and don't say that "today there are no documents and information".

Edited January 17, 2023 by Nahen

[Cab]

1 minute ago, Nahen said:

Read the quote I posted a few posts above - it's a quote - a statement from a man who was serving there at Kadena AFB at the time this photo was taken. Maybe you don't have access to documents, first-hand information, I still know some people and I know where such information can be found.
I learned nothing about CFT - F-15Es have never been used in combat without CFT and I will not change my opinion based on my information. Today - and precisely since the withdrawal of the F-15C from Lakennheath, pilots 492 and 494 began (about half a year ago) to perform training flights without CFT due to the need to replace the F-15C - I also wrote about it there. But it still doesn't change the fact that F-15Es have never been used anywhere without CFT.

So again, the F-15C pilots have NEVER been by official trained in attacking ground targets, and never attacking ground targets with the F-15A/B/C/D was part of the OFFICIAL training in the USAF. There were tests for various programs run by the air force, but they were never regular and official training.

I see.

As I thought, this is a waste of time and not much fun anymore. You’ve worn me down so I’m out. 

Good luck, buddy. 

[Superbug Echo]

[PhenexM86]

On 1/16/2023 at 2:37 PM, jojyrocks said:

The Israelis  are the ONLY ones modified their F-15C and D to be ground attack capable, that is carrying dumb bombs.

 

Real US F-15C only can do improvised rough ground strafe, it is pure air to air configured and designed aircraft.

Well... Here is an F-15DJ from the JASDF null

[Nahen]

9 minutes ago, BanagherLinks said:

Well... Here is an F-15DJ from the JASDF null

Is it an F-15C?

 

[F-2]

35 minutes ago, Nahen said:

Is it an F-15C?

 

The F-15J is a licensed produced F-15C.

[Dragon1-1]

There are multiple accounts, including one from an RL Strike Eagle driver, of USAF F-15C squadrons actually training in limited air to ground operations. The aircraft is fully equipped for that, although not optimized. Guns, dumb bombs and LGBs, no self-lasing, somewhat rudimentary bombing avionics (still better than what F-4s had to work with, and those were dedicated fighter-bombers!) and little training time, but the capability was there.

USAF didn't advertise this mostly for political/funding reasons, but it was a thing. Strike Eagle came about precisely because some people figured it was actually pretty great at this job, particularly the D version with two seats. This wasn't just from export experiences, the USAF had first hand experience.

[Nahen]

8 minutes ago, F-2 said:

The F-15J is a licensed produced F-15C.

And you want to bet you don't? F-15C and F-15J are completely different configured aircraft. Read a little - preferably in Japanese sources and compare them with each other. The F-15J doesn't have much in common with the F-15C other than the airframe, engines, and basic avionics. It has added completely new systems, such as those collecting data from the space around the aircraft, or just an expanded part of the avionics supporting the possibility of attacking ground targets. They differ more or less like the F-15E from the F-15QA or F-15SA. The difference is that the Japanese F-15j are more "extensive" in terms of avionics, sensors, etc. than the standard F-15C.

[Cab]

10 minutes ago, Nahen said:

And you want to bet you don't? F-15C and F-15J are completely different configured aircraft. Read a little - preferably in Japanese sources and compare them with each other. The F-15J doesn't have much in common with the F-15C other than the airframe, engines, and basic avionics. It has added completely new systems, such as those collecting data from the space around the aircraft, or just an expanded part of the avionics supporting the possibility of attacking ground targets. They differ more or less like the F-15E from the F-15QA or F-15SA. The difference is that the Japanese F-15j are more "extensive" in terms of avionics, sensors, etc. than the standard F-15C.

Keeper Of All Eagle Knowledge, please provide a source for the J being a “completely different configured aircraft” from the C when it rolled off the production line.

[F-2]

20 minutes ago, Nahen said:

And you want to bet you don't? F-15C and F-15J are completely different configured aircraft. Read a little - preferably in Japanese sources and compare them with each other. The F-15J doesn't have much in common with the F-15C other than the airframe, engines, and basic avionics. It has added completely new systems, such as those collecting data from the space around the aircraft, or just an expanded part of the avionics supporting the possibility of attacking ground targets. They differ more or less like the F-15E from the F-15QA or F-15SA. The difference is that the Japanese F-15j are more "extensive" in terms of avionics, sensors, etc. than the standard F-15C.

Maybe now they are, and only the 80-100 or so they modified. But the original aircraft produced from the early 80s were MSIP I equivalent with some Japan specific changes mostly related to the electronic warfare and added Data link. JMSIP in the early 2000s brought about 80 planes to a similar standard to ongoing upgrades in the US, apg-63(v)1, increased computing power, and provisions for Japanese specific weapons like AAM-4 and AAM-5. It’s only now 40 years after introduction that these aircraft are becoming EX like.

Here is a photo from 2010 with mk82, long before EX standard

 

http://takaoka.zening.info/JSDF/JASDF/Mark_82_bomb/

2004

http://tonkatsu298.pya.jp/07chi02.html
 

https://f.hatena.ne.jp/uruya/20130804115221 2013

 

https://www.asahi-net.or.jp/~qk4j-fry/2006cts/soubi.htm

2006