F15c high fedilitize after F15e?

[TLTeo]

Considering the CFTs won't be coming off in DCS, this conversation is pointless anyway

[Hummingbird]

Hopefully the ability to take the CFT's off will come in the future.

 

Yes it will require FM tweaks, but that's not an impossible task, the ground work already being there.

[FoxOne007]

16 hours ago, Hummingbird said:

Hopefully the ability to take the CFT's off will come in the future.

 

Yes it will require FM tweaks, but that's not an impossible task, the ground work already being there.

Again, it won’t! They’re making an F-15E not an F-15C

[Hummingbird]

20 minutes ago, FoxOne007 said:

Again, it won’t! They’re making an F-15E not an F-15C

 

So by your logic, because the F-15E operationally always carries the CFTs, then we shouldn't have the possibility to fly without them in DCS? Well using that same logic we shouldn't have the possibility of flying ANY modern jet clean in DCS, because none of them are flown like that operationally.... see how silly that is?

 

The mere fact that they can be taken off justifies having that ability ingame, just as it does it for all the other modules. 

 

You know there are possibly some guys out there that might want to simulate an F-15D aggressor too.

Edited August 22, 2021 by Hummingbird

[TLTeo]

2 hours ago, Hummingbird said:

So by your logic, because the F-15E operationally always carries the CFTs, then we shouldn't have the possibility to fly without them in DCS? Well using that same logic we shouldn't have the possibility of flying ANY modern jet clean in DCS, because none of them are flown like that operationally.... see how silly that is?

Yes let's ignore the fact that aircraft have been able to jettison their fuel tanks for 80 years. Or that jets do fly without external tanks all the time. Or that developers themselves have stated that you can't compare the two.

[Mig Fulcrum]

Are you still discussing about CFTs? Lol

 

Razbam already said they won't come off and IRL they remove them only for maintenence. PERIOD.

Why still talking about it?

[Hummingbird]

6 hours ago, TLTeo said:

Yes let's ignore the fact that aircraft have been able to jettison their fuel tanks for 80 years. Or that jets do fly without external tanks all the time. Or that developers themselves have stated that you can't compare the two.

 

I didn't know the F-16 could jettison all its pylons, every single one... interesting... or the F-15, or F/A-18... Why are we able to take them all off and fly them completely bare bones again? Hmmmm... I wonder.. 

 

Seriously though, being as snobby and aggressive as some of you are being right now toward someone saying he hopes they add the ability to remove the CFTs in the future, is really disturbing to witness. You're acting like it was a demand instead of a wish/hope, despite the latter being spelled out for you. 

 

Praying none of you work within law enforcement! You'd arrest people for even looking at the other side of a crosswalk during a red light.. Unbelievable.. 

Edited August 22, 2021 by Hummingbird

[DSplayer]

You guys are getting drastically off topic. RAZBAM will not make the CFTs on the F-15E removable. I know everyone has their wishes but it just will not happen. Especially it will require a new FM for something that the F-15E rarely do and even when it does, it is only for maintenance (flying between depots, etc.). It's just not going to happen. 

I wish the F-15C could be high fidelity since it absolutely sucks to remember keybinds for stuff that you would generally be an MFD button or a switch. But I know that it isn't going to happen unless ED (or someone grants someone else a license) decides to do so. 

[FoxOne007]

12 hours ago, DSplayer said:

You guys are getting drastically off topic. RAZBAM will not make the CFTs on the F-15E removable. I know everyone has their wishes but it just will not happen. Especially it will require a new FM for something that the F-15E rarely do and even when it does, it is only for maintenance (flying between depots, etc.). It's just not going to happen. 

I wish the F-15C could be high fidelity since it absolutely sucks to remember keybinds for stuff that you would generally be an MFD button or a switch. But I know that it isn't going to happen unless ED (or someone grants someone else a license) decides to do so. 

Agreed, at least a great substitute to the F-15C is being developed In the form of the Eurofighter

[Tank50us]

On 8/22/2021 at 3:22 PM, Hummingbird said:

I didn't know the F-16 could jettison all its pylons, every single one... interesting... or the F-15, or F/A-18... Why are we able to take them all off and fly them completely bare bones again? Hmmmm... I wonder.. 

 

The thing is, these aren't tanks that can just be dropped like a normal drop tank. They're bolted on and plumbed directly into the main tanks, and you require special tools and kit to seal the tank back up again once the CFT is removed. This isn't something that's available to every field base, so it's not the sort of thing that can be expected. Heck, the whole point of CFTs is so that you don't have to worry about the extra drag a normal external tank would present, at the cost of being unable to dump the thing the moment a dogfight ensues. But, one thing to keep in mind is that the F-15E really isn't supposed to be the one doing the fighting anyway. Sure, it can do it if it has to, but the entire point of having an escort in the shape of an F-15C is that they are the ones turnin' and burnin' with the enemy, not you. Your weapons are there for the odd enemy fighter that slips through the net, not to tangle with all the migs. You're a bomb truck first and foremost, let the dedicated fighters do their job so you can do yours.

 

So seriously, can you guys just for once listen to the devs on this? They seem to know a bit more about what they're doing then you guys do. Just be glad we're getting a HiFi F-15 at all, they didn't have to take up the project at all ya know.

[Lurker]

All this talk about CFTs and no mention of the WSO, his avionics suite and his ejection seat? I'm guessing here, but wouldn't that affect the center of gravity of the plane by quite a bit? (Not to mention complete mass of the plane) 

 

Back on topic, I'm one of the I guess few people who couldn't care less for the F15E. I don't find stand off mud-moving a lot of fun. Or rather, any fun, at all. I'm not going to be buying it. A full fidelity F15C on the other hand would be awesome, but I would really love to see them do something more unique. 

[Tank50us]

On 8/31/2021 at 4:32 AM, Lurker said:

All this talk about CFTs and no mention of the WSO, his avionics suite and his ejection seat? I'm guessing here, but wouldn't that affect the center of gravity of the plane by quite a bit? (Not to mention complete mass of the plane) 

 

Back on topic, I'm one of the I guess few people who couldn't care less for the F15E. I don't find stand off mud-moving a lot of fun. Or rather, any fun, at all. I'm not going to be buying it. A full fidelity F15C on the other hand would be awesome, but I would really love to see them do something more unique. 

 

Actually, despite what I said about the Strike Eagle, it is still very much capable of holding its own in a full AA load. It's got an even more capable radar, has the full range of AAMs available to it, has a better avionics suite... in many ways it's the ultimate Eagle. Sure, it's a bit heavier, and less maneuverable than a C, but given that you have more tools in your belt before the merge to ID the guy means you have an edge before he can pick you up visually.

 

And let's not forget, that this aircraft does have a second seat, so if you're flying with someone else in the back seat you now have an extra set of eyes that can spot threats during a dogfight, or pick up missiles during other parts of the operation.

 

And finally, don't forget that the mud moving, while not always exciting, is far more important to the ground mission then shooting down enemy planes. After all, in order for your guys to take the hill, the other guys troops have to be driven off the hill, and that's much easier for your guys to do when you've delivered a few parting gifts to the other guys.

[Lurker]

I get all that. It's just a personal preference. Just because I'm not into it, doesn't mean I don't get why other people might be. Just not my cup of Tea as the British might say. 

[Tank50us]

12 hours ago, Lurker said:

I get all that. It's just a personal preference. Just because I'm not into it, doesn't mean I don't get why other people might be. Just not my cup of Tea as the British might say. 

 

well, one way to think of it, is as an F-15D with CFTs.... because that's basically what the prototype was (or was it a B?). Either way, I'd highly recommend it when it releases, or, if you're on stand alone, give her a two-week trial. Ya might just come to like the Mud Hen.

[Nahen]

On 9/2/2021 at 2:02 PM, Tank50us said:

And let's not forget, that this aircraft does have a second seat, so if you're flying with someone else in the back seat you now have an extra set of eyes that can spot threats during a dogfight, or pick up missiles during other parts of the operation.

 

Bay the way:

 

If those other eyes see your opponent yo it's too late for any fight. Today, contrary to what we get in DCS, 95-99% of air fights start and end out of sight. An example of the shooting down of MiGs over the former Yugoslavia.

And if someone cites cases of "dogfighting" during the Desert Storm, let him not forget that these were not equal air fights - it was a hunting with an battue. And only one "sensible fight" took place when the F / A-18 shot down by the MiG-25 fell because the NAVY pilots were relaxed and did not assume that anyone could hunt them this time.

[Rainmaker]

3 hours ago, Nahen said:

 

Bay the way:

 

If those other eyes see your opponent yo it's too late for any fight. Today, contrary to what we get in DCS, 95-99% of air fights start and end out of sight. An example of the shooting down of MiGs over the former Yugoslavia.

And if someone cites cases of "dogfighting" during the Desert Storm, let him not forget that these were not equal air fights - it was a hunting with an battue. And only one "sensible fight" took place when the F / A-18 shot down by the MiG-25 fell because the NAVY pilots were relaxed and did not assume that anyone could hunt them this time.

FWIW, every engagement I can think of over the last 30 years has ended WVR. It may have started BVR, but by the time the actual shootdown has happened, they have been in the 5-10 mile range. The only grey area fights I can think of that tip toe that line are ones at night. A lot of that is dictated by ROEs, etc so there are variables to that of course which prohibit things starting at max range of the capabilities. 

[GGTharos]

Or maybe you want to take higher Pk shots against low capability opponents.  Missiles also take quite a while to hit their targets.

 

A 15nm launch range will give you 30 sec TOF during which those aircraft will close to 5-8nm (depending on closure) by the time the package is received.

 

But this isn't about 'ending in WVR' ... this part doesn't matter as much, what matters is the fact that the shooting begins beyond the ability to visually identify the target.

Edited September 4, 2021 by GGTharos

[Hummingbird]

On 8/31/2021 at 7:45 AM, Tank50us said:

 

The thing is, these aren't tanks that can just be dropped like a normal drop tank. They're bolted on and plumbed directly into the main tanks, and you require special tools and kit to seal the tank back up again once the CFT is removed. This isn't something that's available to every field base, so it's not the sort of thing that can be expected. Heck, the whole point of CFTs is so that you don't have to worry about the extra drag a normal external tank would present, at the cost of being unable to dump the thing the moment a dogfight ensues. But, one thing to keep in mind is that the F-15E really isn't supposed to be the one doing the fighting anyway. Sure, it can do it if it has to, but the entire point of having an escort in the shape of an F-15C is that they are the ones turnin' and burnin' with the enemy, not you. Your weapons are there for the odd enemy fighter that slips through the net, not to tangle with all the migs. You're a bomb truck first and foremost, let the dedicated fighters do their job so you can do yours.

 

So seriously, can you guys just for once listen to the devs on this? They seem to know a bit more about what they're doing then you guys do. Just be glad we're getting a HiFi F-15 at all, they didn't have to take up the project at all ya know.

 

The same is true for many pylon types on these aircraft, they are non-jettisonable and almost never taken off as well, yet we're are able to completely remove those. 

 

Take a moment to consider why the F-15E performance manual includes EM charts for performance without CFT's? Because the ability to operate without them is there should the need somehow arise, however unrealistic that may seem.

 

Have you ever seen an F-16, F-15 or F/A-18 operated completely clean without pylons outside of an airshow display? No. Yet thankfully we're able to run every single one of them clean, and experience them this way. Yet wishing the same from another module (something which is std. for basically every module), is suddenly frowned upon because a few people love to sound clever... I don't get it. 

[TLTeo]

Yeah all these pictures do not exist and you're not comparing apples to oranges:

 

[Hummingbird]

Come on now..

 

Using your own logic:

 

 

 

 

Does this mean the F-15E flies like this often, or operationally? Does a F-15C fly without wing pylons often? No, but it can if need be. Same as the other teen series fighters can fly in all sorts of configurations if need be. And like I said before, some us might want to simulate an F-15D (Like the Japanese one in the pic above).

 

In short this is all about being able to do what can be done, and not being restricted to only what is usually done, which is a freedom we have with basically all modules so far; If a pylon can be taken off, the possibility is made available, end of. 

 

Why you guys want to continue to bark and be negative toward anyone expressing the wish for the CFT's to be removable, is beyond me. 

Edited September 5, 2021 by Hummingbird

[Tank50us]

52 minutes ago, Hummingbird said:

Why you guys want to continue to bark and be negative toward anyone expressing the wish for the CFT's to be removable, is beyond me. 

 

Because at the end of the Razbam has been working on this module for several years, and adding this feature would require Razbam to do even more work for the flight model, that could add months or even years more work. CFDs take a long time to do, and removing the CFTs would mean literally have to do an entirely new one. Do you really want Razbam to add another year or more to the development, a year or more where they aren't making a penny from the aircraft, on a feature that the aircraft just isn't used operationally with? Or would you rather that this be a feature that can be tacked on after they have it out?

Me personally, I would rather that Razbam had just gone the route of "minimum usability" to get the thing out as soon as reasonably possible. Rather than waiting for a decade for every ounce of capability that the aircraft has.

[TLTeo]

Most of those aren't even pictures of flying F-15Es without CFTs. Let's assume however the very, very, very unlikely case that you're correct and F-15Es take them off as often as Vipers take a wing pylon off; if that doesn't happen, your comparison is still entirely invalid.

 

You're still left with what multiple people in this thread have repeated: RB themselves, who are not exactly known for under-promising features, have gone on record saying it's a no go because it's too much work for them. Until that changes, there really is no merit to any of your arguments.

[GGTharos]

1 hour ago, Hummingbird said:

And like I said before, some us might want to simulate an F-15D (Like the Japanese one in the pic above).

 

What's stopping you from doing so with the CFTs attached?  You lose a little performance but with proper briefing and setup the F-15E works perfectly fine as a training jet.

[Hummingbird]

58 minutes ago, Tank50us said:

 

Because at the end of the Razbam has been working on this module for several years, and adding this feature would require Razbam to do even more work for the flight model, that could add months or even years more work. CFDs take a long time to do, and removing the CFTs would mean literally have to do an entirely new one. Do you really want Razbam to add another year or more to the development, a year or more where they aren't making a penny from the aircraft, on a feature that the aircraft just isn't used operationally with? Or would you rather that this be a feature that can be tacked on after they have it out?

Me personally, I would rather that Razbam had just gone the route of "minimum usability" to get the thing out as soon as reasonably possible. Rather than waiting for a decade for every ounce of capability that the aircraft has.

 

Like I've said before, I am hoping they add it as a possibility later on. Hence it wouldn't influence the release date at all.

 

In short I'm not asking RAZBAM to set everything aside to add this configuration straight away, I am merely suggesting they add it later, as it's a freedom we have and enjoy with the other modules in DCS. 

 

44 minutes ago, TLTeo said:

Most of those aren't even pictures of flying F-15Es without CFTs. Let's assume however the very, very, very unlikely case that you're correct and F-15Es take them off as often as Vipers take a wing pylon off; if that doesn't happen, your comparison is still entirely invalid.

 

You're still left with what multiple people in this thread have repeated: RB themselves, who are not exactly known for under-promising features, have gone on record saying it's a no go because it's too much work for them. Until that changes, there really is no merit to any of your arguments.

 

Most of them should be F-15E's. But you do realize you posted pictures of several versions of the F-16 as well, right? Or that the entire point was that whilst the F-15E doesn't fly operationally without the CFT's, neither do F-16's or F/A-18's fly operationally without wing pylons, yet we're able to configure them completely clean in DCS.

 

In short the argument that because F-15E's don't fly without CFT's operationally, they shouldn't be allowed to do so at all in DCS, is the one that's invalid if you ask me.

 

Edited September 5, 2021 by Hummingbird

[Hummingbird]

42 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

 

What's stopping you from doing so with the CFTs attached?  You lose a little performance but with proper briefing and setup the F-15E works perfectly fine as a training jet.

 

F-15D's are often used as aggressors, hence it would be nice to do DACT with, something I personally practice a lot. 

Edited September 5, 2021 by Hummingbird