F15c high fedilitize after F15e?

[Fri13]

5 hours ago, Hummingbird said:

Well I have to say the following puts it rather bluntly that the EF was dealing out a proper spanking:

 

1) "Typhoon proved to be the real winner in the exercise, despite aircraft performance being reduced for security purposes"

 

So maneuverability and speed were limited, but it still was capable to perform the challenges it was required.

 

5 hours ago, Hummingbird said:

2) "At no time did a Typhoon pilot feel threatened"  

 

That can be seen in couple ways, if not from the aerodynamical point where it managed to use its maneuver and speed to complete its challenges, or even with some electronic point like radar range, targeting system capabilities etc etc where it could easily find threats before becoming a prey to them etc.

 

5 hours ago, Hummingbird said:

3) "Typhoons were always on top in air combat"

 

"on Top" doesn't yet say much. If there is 100 different participants and you belong to top 10, then you are in "always on top", but it doesn't make you best. 

If you have 10 participants and you reach always as 1-3 places, then it is still "always on top". If you are 80% of the time #1 but 20% of times just 2nd or 3rd, it still counts "always on top".

If you are just only participant, then you are automatically on top, even if you are always the #1. 

Only thing that it is saying is that EF was not underdog, it didn't perform badly or was in severe problems. 

Again it depends that what were the tests and challenges. 

 

5 hours ago, Hummingbird said:

So whilst the F-15E might have proven more difficult than the others, it would appear from the text that it was still easy meat for the EF which never lost.

 

But we can't draw a conclusion that EF was better in BVR, or in WVR or anything. Just that in the non-disclosed challenges the EF was capable (regardless its artificial performance limitations) to win in the exercises. 

It doesn't mean that it is EF vs F-15E situation. It can be that they were "X vs Time" or "X vs mission goals".

Unless every parameter in each challenge is known, those are not saying anything meaningful. 

 

Example simulate a 10 air targets as bombers that you need to shoot down. If A can carry 10 BVR missiles and B can carry 6 BVR missiles, then situation is bad for the B. If it is 2 fighters vs 10 bombers, then it is 20 missiles vs 12 missiles and there is much better change again that A wins because they can have 50% hit change when others need to basically hit on each missile. 

 

It would then be possible write "EF was always on top in air combat" in such BVR simulated exercise.

 

This all unless I have missed something that it has been specifically stated that it has been 2x EF vs 2x F-15E starting at 50 nmi and simulate the combat shots, and then same for the WVR starting at the merge etc. But unless all those are specified and known, knowing the results doesn't tell anything about the competition why something was "better than other". 

 

 

 

[Nahen]

Simple question: How many enemy planes did shotdown EF hit in real combat and how many F-15s? How many losses did EF and how many F-15 suffered?

As of today, EF is an expensive toy that has not proved successful even once. Exercises, proving grounds, training, simulations ... Perhaps EF is better than the F-15 ... in a simulated fight for today ... answer yourself ...

What is there to discuss? You compare what the result would be in a fight between an airplane used in real combat, with real airkills, and an airplane that basically stands on a shelf between books ...

 

[TLTeo]

LOL what comparison. The EF has not been part of any war that involved a/a combat. The F-15 has. By that same logic, the Sopwith Camel is a better fighter than the F-15 because it has shot down more planes than the F-15.

[Hobo 1-1]

On 6/27/2021 at 2:07 AM, Hummingbird said:

 

Nowhere was it claimed that the F-15E beat the EF in BFM, it reads that that the F-15E was a tougher opponent than the MiG29, F/A-18 & F-16 during the exercise, which no doubt encompassed a lot of simulated BVR engagements where the Singaporian F-15E with its AESA radar is no slouch. 

 

If I said the sky was a classic sky blue to my wife standing in line somewhere, you're that "helpful" guy who leans over and says "well, actually it's what we refer to as a 'light blue' as 'sky blue' is rather redundant".

You win the obtuse award for the day. Bravo. 

[Hummingbird]

2 hours ago, Palmetto 1-1 said:

If I said the sky was a classic sky blue to my wife standing in line somewhere, you're that "helpful" guy who leans over and says "well, actually it's what we refer to as a 'light blue' as 'sky blue' is rather redundant".

You win the obtuse award for the day. Bravo. 

 

Only problem is you told her the sky was red;

 

"I'm not trying to be hostile to you or what you linked to. I’m taking issue with it's claims (F-15E outperformed a Typhoon in BFM)."

 

So it turns out I was actually that helpful guy who made you realize you were colourblind 

Edited June 28, 2021 by Hummingbird

[Spurts]

back to the topic.  If we get the option to remove the CFTs then we have a slightly heavier F-15D, and if we get the -229 powered Mudhen instead of the -220 powered model then it is an overpowered, slightly heavier, F-15D.

[Rainmaker]

13 hours ago, Spurts said:

back to the topic.  If we get the option to remove the CFTs then we have a slightly heavier F-15D, and if we get the -229 powered Mudhen instead of the -220 powered model then it is an overpowered, slightly heavier, F-15D.

No, you have a better performing E model in terms of flying.  That doesnt make everything else that different any closer to one another. 

[Jester2138]

On 6/7/2021 at 6:29 PM, F-2 said:

This is from the April of 2012 issue of Eurofighter world. It seems the F-15SG was a tougher opponent then the hornet, Viper, and mig-29.

That is immediately ignored with prejudice for the blatantly ridiculous implication that an F-15E was a tougher BFM opponent than a F-16C or Mig-29. If they're talking about BVR then it could make sense. But definitely not BFM.

A totally silly idea. Sorry to bust your bubble if you're hoping a F-15E will be a BFM champ in DCS. If it is, then it discredits the game's accuracy in a major way.

Edited July 3, 2021 by Jester2138

[SgtPappy]

On 6/28/2021 at 2:40 PM, Palmetto 1-1 said:

If I said the sky was a classic sky blue to my wife standing in line somewhere, you're that "helpful" guy who leans over and says "well, actually it's what we refer to as a 'light blue' as 'sky blue' is rather redundant".

You win the obtuse award for the day. Bravo. 

Why so hostile... I don't read the discussion as being overly obtuse. It just seems like a whole bunch of nerdy people discussing our nerdy passion - aircraft. It's a bit par for the course for people to point out details and how they understood an article/other source of info. 

 

If the language triggers you and nothing wrong or unfair was actually stated, you need to identify why it triggers you or talk to the other person without insulting them - after all this is a forum designed for us to discuss these exact topics with scrutiny. You and your wife probably didn't go into that line to talk to a stranger about the colour of the sky, but when you come here, you are more or less signing up to discussion and opinions of others on aircraft/simulation. 

 

On 7/1/2021 at 8:49 AM, Spurts said:

back to the topic.  If we get the option to remove the CFTs then we have a slightly heavier F-15D, and if we get the -229 powered Mudhen instead of the -220 powered model then it is an overpowered, slightly heavier, F-15D.

I've heard that we might not be able to remove the CFT's which would make it a bit tough then to fight competitive BFM. But at this point, it's too early to speculate what features really will show up. I can see people removing them online in general and using the F-15E as an F-15C - something I might do a lot until a holy grail FF F-15C exists anywhere but in my dreams 

Edited July 13, 2021 by SgtPappy

[Jester2138]

I'm pretty sure Razbam has already said they won't make CFTs removable due to lack of data. I'm not even sure they are removable outside of heavy maintenance because there are weapons pylons on the CFTs.

A situation like F-15Es going on an A2A mission w/o the CFTs is far removed from reality, and I wouldn't want to see it in DCS, no matter how much I may want the F-15C. Strike Eagles are not Eagles.

Edited July 14, 2021 by Jester2138

[Nahen]

The F-15C is lighter and more agile than the F-15E. The F-15E has a reinforced airframe structure which weighs almost 3 tons more. The F-15E without CFT tanks and with A-A armament will never be an equivalent of the F-15C

 

These two planes have completely different flight characteristics.

Edited July 14, 2021 by Nahen

[=DROOPY=]

A Strike Eagle driver once told me....and I'm paraphrasing here because its been several years since the conversation and pre-F-15EX announcement, but his take was that with current tactics considered, as well as the capabilities of the F-22/F-35, that if it ever came to the point of being in a Strike Eagle and going into the merge against a lethal air-to-air adversary...catastrophic failures have occurred at so many levels, that its almost inconceivable.

 

In my 35 years of studying military aviation subjects, and 7 years as an aviation photographer, and living next one of the largest bases in the United States, I've seen exactly one  clean Strike Eagle. They were inbound from Nellis, dropped into TIK for fuel, and were heading out to Robins AFB to go into Depot level MX. 

 

Removable conformals in DCS, would be completely unrealistic in my opinion....which then makes me question the whole point of DCS.

Edited July 27, 2021 by =DROOPY=

[Hummingbird]

On 7/14/2021 at 8:45 PM, Nahen said:

The F-15C is lighter and more agile than the F-15E. The F-15E has a reinforced airframe structure which weighs almost 3 tons more. The F-15E without CFT tanks and with A-A armament will never be an equivalent of the F-15C

 

These two planes have completely different flight characteristics.

 

 

The flight characteristics are gonna be basically the same (due to identical aerodynamic layout), but the flight performance will not. 

 

On that note: A while ago I asked RAZBAM wether ED would help them with the FM, as ED's F-15C has a very accurate FM (esp. in terms of flight performance). The fear being that RAZBAM's F-15E FM will differ a lot from ED's F-15C, which would appear extremely strange and raise doubts as to its authenticity/accuracy.

Edited July 28, 2021 by Hummingbird

[Jester2138]

21 minutes ago, Hummingbird said:

 

The flight characteristics are gonna be basically the same (due to identical aerodynamic layout), but the flight performance will not. 

 

On that note: A while ago I asked RAZBAM wether ED would help them with the FM, as ED's F-15C has a very accurate FM (esp. in terms of flight performance). The fear being that RAZBAM's F-15E FM will differ a lot from ED's F-15C, which would appear extremely strange and raise doubts as to its authenticity/accuracy.

 

Not sure what you mean. The Mudhen has a quite different performance profile from the Eagle and Razbam should be developing the Mudhen's FM from scratch IMO.

[Hummingbird]

On 7/28/2021 at 5:49 AM, Jester2138 said:

Not sure what you mean. The Mudhen has a quite different performance profile from the Eagle and Razbam should be developing the Mudhen's FM from scratch IMO.

 

Like I said performance will ofcourse differ, mainly due to differences in weight, but the flight characteristics should be virtually the same due to the near identical aerodynamic layout between the two. 

 

The problem occurs if Razbam's F-15E behaves noticably different in flight than ED's F-15C, as in having little or no similarity in flight control feel, as they should be virtually the same here. 

 

For example a clean 40,000 lbs F-15E should fly almost exactly like a clean 40,000 lbs F-15C, as bar the larger canopy the aerodynamic layout is the same, thus flight behavior (as well as performance in this case) should be similar. 

 

 

Edited August 3, 2021 by Hummingbird

[Spurts]

5 hours ago, Hummingbird said:

For example a clean 40,000 lbs F-15E should fly almost exactly like a clean 40,000 lbs F-15C, as bar the larger canopy the aerodynamic layout is the same, thus flight behavior (as well as performance in this case) should be similar. 

 

 

 

Not really.  What you said is only true if the CFTs are removed.  The CFTs actually change the lift curve and the pitch moment curve (the Manual states that pitch response is higher with the CFTs, implying they add a degree of instability).  Also the likely version we will be getting is far more powerful than any F-15C.  The PFMs I'm sure also take into account things like different mass distributions for a different moment of inertia, even at the same weight, and once the CFTs are added the different airflow hitting the H-Stabs.

[FoxOne007]

16 hours ago, Hummingbird said:

 

The problem occurs if Razbam's F-15E behaves noticably different in flight than ED's F-15C, as in having little or no similarity in flight control feel, as they should be virtually the same here. 

 

 

 

Why would it be a problem, big chance it will fly completely different, the F-15C’s FM is no where near on par with one from any FF module. It’s just A flight model. I am going to assume the F-15E will have a much more accurate one since they will have access to docs and SME’s to help them make it accurate

[Hummingbird]

9 minutes ago, FoxOne007 said:

Why would it be a problem, big chance it will fly completely different, the F-15C’s FM is no where near on par with one from any FF module. It’s just A flight model. I am going to assume the F-15E will have a much more accurate one since they will have access to docs and SME’s to help them make it accurate

 

ED also had access to SME's AFAIK, and I got the word from a former F-15C pilot that the FM is very accurate.  Furthermore the STR & ITR performance of ED's F-15C is litterally spot on the charts.

[GGTharos]

11 minutes ago, FoxOne007 said:

the F-15C’s FM is no where near on par with one from any FF module.

 

Yes it is.

 

11 minutes ago, FoxOne007 said:

It’s just A flight model.

 

Yes, that's what FM stands for.

 

11 minutes ago, FoxOne007 said:

I am going to assume the F-15E will have a much more accurate one since they will have access to docs and SME’s to help them make it accurate

 

And the F-15C was built up from SME input too ... on top of the aircraft's basic performance charts, the NASA study papers on it, etc.

[Hummingbird]

10 hours ago, Spurts said:

Not really.  What you said is only true if the CFTs are removed.  The CFTs actually change the lift curve and the pitch moment curve (the Manual states that pitch response is higher with the CFTs, implying they add a degree of instability).  Also the likely version we will be getting is far more powerful than any F-15C.  The PFMs I'm sure also take into account things like different mass distributions for a different moment of inertia, even at the same weight, and once the CFTs are added the different airflow hitting the H-Stabs.

 

It is without CFT's I'm talking about. As for changing mass distribution, once more I'm sure ED's F-15C FM has this modelled as well. 

 

 

Edited August 3, 2021 by Hummingbird

[Rainmaker]

8 hours ago, Hummingbird said:

 

It is without CFT's I'm talking about. As for changing mass distribution, once more I'm sure ED's F-15C FM has this modelled as well. 

 

 

 

The CFTs won’t be coming off...and they alter the FM/performance a lot so there is really no comparison to be made. 

[Nahen]

Gentlemen, start comparing the characteristics of the F-15C and F-15E by comparing the WEIGHT of the empty machines of these two versions ... E is about 3 tons heavier. If someone thinks that it does not affect the flight characteristics, and especially the maneuverability, congratulations ...

[Hummingbird]

On 8/4/2021 at 7:57 AM, Rainmaker said:

The CFTs won’t be coming off...and they alter the FM/performance a lot so there is really no comparison to be made. 

 

Ofcourse we will be able to take them off, anything else would be pretty silly. And again, whilst performance is altered, flying characteristics will be largely the same, and downright identical if the CFT's are off.

 

On 8/12/2021 at 5:27 PM, Nahen said:

Gentlemen, start comparing the characteristics of the F-15C and F-15E by comparing the WEIGHT of the empty machines of these two versions ... E is about 3 tons heavier. If someone thinks that it does not affect the flight characteristics, and especially the maneuverability, congratulations ...

 

Seriously, why don't people read what is being written before they respond ??  Ofcourse PERFORMANCE (i.e. STR/ITR/climb rate etc) at different weights will be different, however the flight characteristics will be the same. Hence why I made the comparison of a 41,000 lbs E vs C version..

Edited August 18, 2021 by Hummingbird

[Rainmaker]

6 hours ago, Hummingbird said:

 

Ofcourse we will be able to take them off, anything else would be pretty silly. And again, whilst performance is altered, flying characteristics will be largely the same, and downright identical if the CFT's are off.

 

 

Seriously, why don't people read what is being written before they respond ??  Ofcourse PERFORMANCE (i.e. STR/ITR/climb rate etc) at different weights will be different, however the flight characteristics will be the same. Hence why I made the comparison of a 41,000 lbs E vs C version..

 

You realize I am actually one of the people that has access to all the performance data, right?!?  Not only FM charts but also the books that go into pretty good detail on what the differences are? What do you mean performance is different but characteristics are the same?  If you mean that physics stays the same, sure?  Lift is lift, drags is drag, etc.  AFCS is not the same between the two for starters.  Mech is.  You let me know when you find C model charts with -229 motor performance...I'll wait.
 

And no, you won’t be able remove them, in any way other than graphically, which is pretty silly IMO.  RB has already said as much.  The point of any comparison is moot.  The C in DCS is also not accurate in all places either FWIW. 

Edited August 19, 2021 by Rainmaker

[Hummingbird]

6 hours ago, Rainmaker said:

You realize I am actually one of the people that has access to all the performance data, right?!?

 

I wouldn't be speaking if I didn't own the performance manuals for both myself.

 

I will repeat what I've said, the flight characteristics of the E & C are basically identical when flying under the same configuration (no CFT's), and not that much different with CFT's either. Available AoA, surface stall angles, buffet regions etc are the same.. why? Because the shape is the same, and how an aircraft flies is determined by how the fluid medium we call "air" interacts with said shape. Hence it will only be between one with and one without CFT's you'd notice a difference, as providing the CoG stays around the same, a difference in weight only changes performance, not flight characteristics.

 

 

Edited August 19, 2021 by Hummingbird