Option to remove CFTs

[_DK_]

I think we all acknowledge that we won't get removable CFT's for DCS by Razbam; we were discussing the merits and vices of the F-15E in an air-to-air configuration over the F-15C depending on stores load. The USAF have not exercised the capability to remove the CFT's but other air forces have attended exercises with them removed which substantiates that it isn't a fictional idea which is never applicable in reality.

[carss]

On 9/22/2021 at 10:17 PM, =DROOPY= said:

Literally....the only time the conformals come off the Strike is for maintenance purposes. 

Even the official USAF Strike Eagle Demo performances were done with CFT's installed.

No reason to make them removable. 

 

Date of photo:

24 May 2008

 

 

Here in this video you can clearly see an F-15E take off without CFTs, and the performance is impeccable! From reheat to airborne in less than 7 seconds

https://youtu.be/osFNW14QBHw

[MAXsenna]

 
 
Here in this video you can clearly see an F-15E take off without CFTs, and the performance is impeccable! From reheat to airborne in less than 7 seconds

Well, he points out that they do it for maintenance. And "engine test" sounds very much like maintenance.
Apologies, couldn't resist.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Nahen]

In addition for the public airshows, where, when and how many times a year do the F-15E fly without CFT? How often do they fly without CFT on combat missions?

[Deano87]

4 hours ago, Nahen said:

How often do they fly without CFT on combat missions?

Never

[Spurts]

 

8 hours ago, Nahen said:

In addition for the public airshows, where, when and how many times a year do the F-15E fly without CFT? How often do they fly without CFT on combat missions?

and Wing tanks and targeting pods

3 hours ago, Deano87 said:

Never

unless 2xGBU-28s are being carried you can include my above additions.

[carss]

On 4/15/2022 at 1:40 PM, MAXsenna said:

Well, he points out that they do it for maintenance. And "engine test" sounds very much like maintenance.
Apologies, couldn't resist.

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk
 

An engine test is not a flight, it's just an engine run on the ground and nothing more than that

[MAXsenna]

An engine test is not a flight, it's just an engine run on the ground and nothing more than that

Guess you didn't bother to read the comments...

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[FoxOne007]

On 4/17/2022 at 1:41 AM, carss said:

An engine test is not a flight, it's just an engine run on the ground and nothing more than that

It’s called an FCF or Functional Check Flight, you should look that up. And i’ll help you out of your dreams. We’re not getting removable CFT’s, regardless of how much the community begs for it

[Nahen]

Let me just say this - for me, only Air to Air flying counts. The F-15C is all I need. The F-15E, in spite of maintaining the full air combat capabilities of the "C" version, by, among other things, increasing the airframe weight and changing the air resistance coefficient by CFT tanks, is not a typical air superiority aircraft like the "C" version. The idea was to create a powerful strike machine that could defend itself, or that could fight its way through the air to its target. The fact of using the "C" version for the cover of the "E" version during the operation over Iraq proves one thing very clearly - it makes no sense to use the "E" version without CFT tanks - it is better to give them cover of the "C" version. Therefore, I do not see the point and do not need to beg for a removable CFT because it is not an air combat machine. And after removing the CFT, Eagles potential of ground strike drastically decreases - so I am absolutely in favor of CFT being permanent and that's it.

[Talon Karde]

I just can't understand why people want to use Strike Eagle for a mission which IS NOT its mission... Moreover, weaponts anchor points are ON THE CFT !

Want a fighter / bomber? Go for F-16 or F/A-18...

[Fromthedeep]

3 hours ago, Talon Karde said:

I just can't understand why people want to use Strike Eagle for a mission which IS NOT its mission

Because everyone thinks that the C model is glorious and much more preferable in a video game setting than the Beagle.

Edited April 19, 2022 by Fromthedeep

[Eagle7907]

Assaulting the deceased equus ferus caballus, I see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Swordsman422]

On 4/19/2022 at 9:32 AM, Fromthedeep said:

Because everyone thinks that the C model is glorious and much more preferable in a video game setting than the Beagle.

 

I fall under the umbrella of "everyone." I'd rather have the Strike Eagle and no option to remove the CFTs.

[Dragon1-1]

On 4/19/2022 at 11:33 AM, Talon Karde said:

I just can't understand why people want to use Strike Eagle for a mission which IS NOT its mission...

Because it's not looking like we're getting the F-15C anytime, soon, so people want a poor man's substitute in a Mudhen configured for air to air.

The point is not getting a fighter-bomber, is to get a plausible approximation of a pure fighter that, currently, nobody is planning to make. 

[Nahen]

I fly in the DCS only with the F-15C. When the F-15E comes out - I'll buy it, I'll fly - I'll play - and then I'll fly again "C": P
Well, unless the ED castrates the C version from speed, radar parameters, then I will return to the good old F-15 Strike Eagle III from Microprose ... or Jane's
: P

[CarbonFox]

So the F-15C carries about 13,455 pounds of internal fuel. How much extra fuel does the Strike Eagle carry by comparison? I've yet to see figures on the additional fuel weight.

Not sure I'll use the Strike Eagle for A2A. I'm more interested in the fact that it can carry every air-to-ground ordinance that the Hornet can but will bring a big advantage in ferry range and more payload capacity.

[Rainmaker]

2 hours ago, CarbonFox said:

So the F-15C carries about 13,455 pounds of internal fuel. How much extra fuel does the Strike Eagle carry by comparison? I've yet to see figures on the additional fuel weight.

Not sure I'll use the Strike Eagle for A2A. I'm more interested in the fact that it can carry every air-to-ground ordinance that the Hornet can but will bring a big advantage in ferry range and more payload capacity.

The CFTs add a little over 9K in total fuel. Typical min for a full load with CFTs is 22.5K

[Deano87]

On 5/4/2022 at 5:39 PM, Nahen said:

I fly in the DCS only with the F-15C. When the F-15E comes out - I'll buy it, I'll fly - I'll play - and then I'll fly again "C": P
Well, unless the ED castrates the C version from speed, radar parameters, then I will return to the good old F-15 Strike Eagle III from Microprose ... or Jane's
: P

You don't fly any of the other full fidelity modules?

[Nahen]

3 hours ago, Deano87 said:

You don't fly any of the other full fidelity modules?

I flew the F-16C about two years ago when there were periodic / holiday free test. Now you can "borrow" each test module at any time. Today, the F-16C is finally flying almost as it should, with most of the systems up and running. 

But it's not the F-15A / C;) Navy planes... I don't fly from any boat since I can fly from hard land - the navy and its machines have never excite me on. Anyway, I have entered the "eternal love" of USAF pilots for USNAVY pilots;)
The F-15A / C is the only plane (and also the YF-23 outgoing before) with named "modern" planes, which seduced me some 40 years ago and that's how I stayed.
And yes, I only fly the F-15C in DCS. I don't need anything else - well, maybe if someone tried to make a full-fidelity version it would be nice. I'm waiting for an "E" but only because of my "brand attachment".
As I wrote - I will probably fly the Strike Eagle a bit, but still the BVR and the F-15C are the only things that amuse me.

 

Besides, I think that if someone fly several modules "at a time", he will never master any of them perfectly.

Edited May 6, 2022 by Nahen

[MAXsenna]

9 minutes ago, Nahen said:

I flew the F-16C about two years ago when there were periodic / holiday free test. Now you can "borrow" each test module at any time. Today, the F-16C is finally flying almost as it should, with most of the systems up and running. 

But it's not the F-15A / C;) Navy planes... I don't fly from any boat since I can fly from hard land - the navy and its machines have never excite me on. Anyway, I have entered the "eternal love" of USAF pilots for USNAVY pilots;)
The F-15A / C is the only plane (and also the YF-23 outgoing before) with named "modern" planes, which seduced me some 40 years ago and that's how I stayed.
And yes, I only fly the F-15C in DCS. I don't need anything else - well, maybe if someone tried to make a full-fidelity version it would be nice. I'm waiting for an "E" but only because of my "brand attachment".
As I wrote - I will probably fly the Strike Eagle a bit, but still the BVR and the F-15C are the only things that amuse me.

 

Besides, I think that if someone fly several modules "at a time", he will never master any of them perfectly.

 

Such a dedicated fan deserves a Full Fidelity F-15C

C'mon ED!!! 

[Voyager]

On 4/19/2022 at 4:33 AM, Talon Karde said:

I just can't understand why people want to use Strike Eagle for a mission which IS NOT its mission... Moreover, weaponts anchor points are ON THE CFT !

Want a fighter / bomber? Go for F-16 or F/A-18...

I think it's mostly because the FC3 F-15C is getting dropped from things like SATAL because it's electronics package is pretty magical. 

Likely the interest in a A2A mode F-15E will drop once a full fidelity F-15C is in the works. 

[Nahen]

18 minutes ago, Voyager said:

I think it's mostly because the FC3 F-15C is getting dropped from things like SATAL because it's electronics package is pretty magical. 

Likely the interest in a A2A mode F-15E will drop once a full fidelity F-15C is in the works. 

I think, after many talks with the pilots of the 493rd SQ, who came to Poland in the nineties with visits to the 23 PLM (23rd Fighter Aviation Regiment flying on MiG-23ML) near Słupsk, that it was rather F-16, F-18 and all the rest have "magical" electronics that do not respond in any way DCS the real possibilities of these planes. Currently, the radar in the F-15C, when it comes to the possibilities and ranges of detecting various objects, depending on their size, flight altitude and speed, is the closest to reality. But well, ED rather castrates the parameters in this regard, so that such MiG / Su could initiate any fight than it reflects reality.
This is one of the reasons why I fly the F-15C and not the blind F-16, F-18, etc.

MiG-21 bis pilots claimed that their weak radar was able to detect a fighter-sized target (1980s-1990s) from a distance of about 80 km (~ 35-40 miles). Virtual pilot in DCS F-16/18, when do it without Datalink, be happy like a child

When I showed the pilots of the 493rd, when they were in Redzikowo again after 1994, the Russian study on the F-15, in which the given wasmaximum possible detection range of the MiG-23/29 fighter from a distance of about 80 miles, they snorted with laughter: D That's it for the subject of "magic" electronics "in the F-15 in DCS;)

3 hours ago, MAXsenna said:

Tak oddany wentylator zasługuje na Full Fidelity F-15C

No dalej ED!!! 

I am not delusing myself I'll wait for the guys who create clickable cokpits for FC3 modules and that's rather all you can expect   Anyway, I have everything on HOTAS anyway   

[MAXsenna]

I am not delusing myself I'll wait for the guys who create clickable cokpits for FC3 modules and that's rather all you can expect   Anyway, I have everything on HOTAS anyway   

Oh! You can dream can't you?
Anyway, I'm sure it eventually come. Maybe after MAC is released. I cross my fingers for you, (and all the rest of us)!
Anyway, have you tried the FC3 click able cockpit mod? Not sure if it works with the Eagle.
Cheers!


Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[Nahen]

2 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Oh! You can dream can't you?
Anyway, I'm sure it eventually come. Maybe after MAC is released. I cross my fingers for you, (and all the rest of us)!
Anyway, have you tried the FC3 click able cockpit mod? Not sure if it works with the Eagle.
Cheers!


Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk
 

Currently, in progress the cockpit for the Su-27/33 or MiG-29. F-15 is underway, but not finished. How will it be finished I will try;) It's like asking if I want a finished module "E" or only with basic functions? I am waiting so much that I want it completely ready or at least 90% ready.