F-15E vs. F-18C

[Coole28]

8 hours ago, Ignition said:

I wasn't asking about SDB II, only the first version. Why?

Also, the Eurofighter its going to get a 2018 METEOR, so... yeah....

 

You mean the SDB I?  I never said anything about the module not getting that, as far as I’m aware RAZBAM is still planning on adding them as long as they can get proper documentation and ED approves it.  Only the Laser SDB and SDB II are way out of the timeline, and certainly harder to get documentation on.

As for the Eurofighter, unless I missed something in the past couple months the METEOR hasn’t been confirmed yet.  Truegrit/Heatblur want to add it (so much so that their concept art shows the plane launching one), but they stated it all depends on getting the proper documentation.  AIM-120 is the only BVR missile they confirmed so far.  It’s not a good comparison to the RAZBAM F-15E anyway; Truegrit states their plans are to model their Eurofighter as the most modern they can, while RAZBAM specifically stated they are modeling their F-15E on what a ~2006 bird would be capable of, which would exclude newer SDB variants.  Eurofighter (possibly) getting 2018+ tech doesn’t therefore mean the F-15E should also get 2018+ tech.

[Ignition]

2 hours ago, Coole28 said:

You mean the SDB I?  I never said anything about the module not getting that, as far as I’m aware RAZBAM is still planning on adding them as long as they can get proper documentation and ED approves it.  Only the Laser SDB and SDB II are way out of the timeline, and certainly harder to get documentation on.

As for the Eurofighter, unless I missed something in the past couple months the METEOR hasn’t been confirmed yet.  Truegrit/Heatblur want to add it (so much so that their concept art shows the plane launching one), but they stated it all depends on getting the proper documentation.  AIM-120 is the only BVR missile they confirmed so far.  It’s not a good comparison to the RAZBAM F-15E anyway; Truegrit states their plans are to model their Eurofighter as the most modern they can, while RAZBAM specifically stated they are modeling their F-15E on what a ~2006 bird would be capable of, which would exclude newer SDB variants.  Eurofighter (possibly) getting 2018+ tech doesn’t therefore mean the F-15E should also get 2018+ tech.

oh ok, it was a missunderstanding then, I was only talking about SDB I, I know the later version is more recent.

For the METEOR I ment it is a really new weapon and as you said about good luck getting proper documentation.

[Beamscanner]

IRL the F/A-18 has more modern avionics, and the F-15E generally has better performance overall. 

 

In DCS

The Razbam DCS F-15E will likely be simulated much better than the DCS F/A-18C. 

The F-15E will have better:

• A/A Radar simulation (simulates range and doppler space)
• SAR simulation
• RWR simulation (example: AV-8 has better simulated ALR-67 than the F/A-18C)

The DCS F/A-18C gets a lot of the nuanced details wrong (ex MSI logic, RWR logic, Radar GMT/MAP, TPOD targeting, etc.). 

 

I would go with the F-15E, personally. 

[falcon_120]

IRL the F/A-18 has more modern avionics, and the F-15E generally has better performance overall. 
 
In DCS
The Razbam DCS F-15E will likely be simulated much better than the DCS F/A-18C. 
The F-15E will have better:

• A/A Radar simulation (simulates range and doppler space)
• SAR simulation
• RWR simulation (example: AV-8 has better simulated ALR-67 than the F/A-18C)

The DCS F/A-18C gets a lot of the nuanced details wrong (ex MSI logic, RWR logic, Radar GMT/MAP, TPOD targeting, etc.). 
 
I would go with the F-15E, personally. 

What exactly do you mean by better simulated ALR67? Just curious not saying you are wrong.

From my experience they work similar, and in the case of Razbam RWR it annoys me a little how is simulated in terms of precision, as you get a perfect azimuth all of the time. Which surprise me given how well they have simulated aspect of radars.

In this regard I think Heatblur is the reference of a good RWR simulation and it's limitations in precision in azimuth.



Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[Nahen]

6 hours ago, Beamscanner said:

IRL the F/A-18 has more modern avionics, and the F-15E generally has better performance overall. 

 

??? Max speed? Max altitude? Max range? Max loadout (in kg/lbs)? What do you mean by better performance?

The F/A-18 and F-15E are completely different planes - none of them has "better avionics", each has a different one, dedicated to a given machine.

And by the way:

Someone mentioned that Strike Eagle doesn't have anti-radiolocation like HARM missiles. He doesn't need them, he has F-16s for that in USAF

But I don't know how many they take on board :)

Edited November 20, 2022 by Nahen

[Bremspropeller]

30 minutes ago, Nahen said:

Someone mentioned that Strike Eagle doesn't have anti-radiolocation like HARM missiles. He doesn't need them, he has F-16s for that in USAF

Exactly. It's not like it hadn't been tested some time ago:

[JOYFUL_CLOVR]

On 10/7/2022 at 10:33 AM, Coole28 said:

You mean the SDB I?  I never said anything about the module not getting that, as far as I’m aware RAZBAM is still planning on adding them as long as they can get proper documentation and ED approves it.  Only the Laser SDB and SDB II are way out of the timeline, and certainly harder to get documentation on.

As for the Eurofighter, unless I missed something in the past couple months the METEOR hasn’t been confirmed yet.  Truegrit/Heatblur want to add it (so much so that their concept art shows the plane launching one), but they stated it all depends on getting the proper documentation.  AIM-120 is the only BVR missile they confirmed so far.  It’s not a good comparison to the RAZBAM F-15E anyway; Truegrit states their plans are to model their Eurofighter as the most modern they can, while RAZBAM specifically stated they are modeling their F-15E on what a ~2006 bird would be capable of, which would exclude newer SDB variants.  Eurofighter (possibly) getting 2018+ tech doesn’t therefore mean the F-15E should also get 2018+ tech.

Both the Meteor and the IRIS-T are confirmed with EA release of the EF2K.

[Krez]

The F/A-18 and F-15E are two completely different aircraft, designed for different roles, by different services. To try and compare them to say which one is better is silly.

 

[Nahen]

2 hours ago, Krez said:

The F/A-18 and F-15E are two completely different aircraft, designed for different roles, by different services. To try and compare them to say which one is better is silly.

 

Which does not change the fact that the F-15C/E will kick ass of the F/A-18C/E

[Kev2go]

13 hours ago, Beamscanner said:

IRL the F/A-18 has more modern avionics, and the F-15E generally has better performance overall. 

 

In DCS

The Razbam DCS F-15E will likely be simulated much better than the DCS F/A-18C. 

The F-15E will have better:

• A/A Radar simulation (simulates range and doppler space)
• SAR simulation
• RWR simulation (example: AV-8 has better simulated ALR-67 than the F/A-18C)

The DCS F/A-18C gets a lot of the nuanced details wrong (ex MSI logic, RWR logic, Radar GMT/MAP, TPOD targeting, etc.). 

 

I would go with the F-15E, personally. 

 define more modern "avionics?

 

actual MSI maybe? besides "MSI"i dont see what the Legacy Hornet has that would really make it "more modern" , considering Aim9x and JHMCS are planned IRRC.

[Beamscanner]

Got to love the responses haha!

 

17 hours ago, falcon_120 said:

 

 

What exactly do you mean by better simulated ALR67? Just curious not saying you are wrong.

From my experience they work similar, and in the case of Razbam RWR it annoys me a little how is simulated in terms of precision, as you get a perfect azimuth all of the time. Which surprise me given how well they have simulated aspect of radars.

In this regard I think Heatblur is the reference of a good RWR simulation and it's limitations in precision in azimuth.

 

 

Heatblur did the best RWR simulation to date. But since were only comparing the F/A-18 and the F-15E, Im only focused on ED and Razbam. The ALR-67 threat ring logic is wrong in the F/A-18C. Razbam (and heatblur) implemented the correct threat ring logic into their ALR-67s. The rings should take threat and range into account, but EDs only takes threat type into account. 

15 hours ago, Nahen said:

??? Max speed? Max altitude? Max range? Max loadout (in kg/lbs)? What do you mean by better performance?

The F/A-18 and F-15E are completely different planes - none of them has "better avionics", each has a different one, dedicated to a given machine.

And by the way:

Someone mentioned that Strike Eagle doesn't have anti-radiolocation like HARM missiles. He doesn't need them, he has F-16s for that in USAF

But I don't know how many they take on board :)

 

Dont mis-quote me please. I didn't say "better avionics". I said more modern avionics. 

 

The F/A-18C generally has more modern avionics. The Hughes/Raytheon radar family history is as follows. APG-63 -> 65 -> 70 -> 73. Lessons learned + Computer processing growth means a more modern radar in the Hornet, even though the max detection range will still be better in the F-15 (larger antenna). ie more modern vs better performance.

 

Generally, I mean all of the above better performance. Speed, altitude, range, endurance, loadout (bar maneuverability). 

 

4 hours ago, Kev2go said:

 define more modern "avionics?

 

actual MSI maybe? besides "MSI"i dont see what the Legacy Hornet has that would really make it "more modern" , considering Aim9x and JHMCS are planned IRRC.

MSI, more trackfile processing, more computational capacity, integrated Radar/RWR, fully digitized aircraft with all system BIT. Dont get me wrong, the F-15E is a beast, and JHMCS and 9X are very modern systems. I think the F-15E will outperform the F/A-18C in most activities. Though if DCS implemented the F/A-18s features properly, I think it'd have some pretty awesome features you don't see in the Strike Eagle. (mainly to do with MSI)

 

 

I guess speaking in generalities is a no no here and will get the armchair experts into a frenzy. 

[wilbur81]

6 hours ago, Nahen said:

Which does not change the fact that the F-15C/E will kick ass of the F/A-18C/E

These two Eagle Drivers would beg to differ. The Eagle is certainly superior in the BVR arena... not in close.

[Bananabrai]

22 hours ago, Beamscanner said:

The F-15E will have better:

• RWR simulation (example: AV-8 has better simulated ALR-67 than the F/A-18C)

The DCS F/A-18C gets a lot of the nuanced details wrong (ex MSI logic, RWR logic, Radar GMT/MAP, TPOD targeting, etc.). 

So this is about the threat ring logic only? Or is there something else?
Because for me, the Harrier's RWR also seems to be too precise, which is more disturbing for me, than the incorrect threat ring logic on the Hornet. 

[QuiGon]

On 10/7/2022 at 12:55 AM, Deano87 said:

Lots.. Max Mk-82 loadout is 15, or 13 if you want to take 2 bags on the wing pylons. That would also include 4 Air to air missiles of either Aim-9 or 120 flavour, Aim-7s have to go on the CFT pylons.

With the extensive payload possibilities of the Mudhen it's relatively easy with the more heavy weight loadouts to get beyond max takeoff weight and have to reduce fuel to have a sensible takeoff weight and then hit the tanker post takeoff to gas up.

 

Hmm, that's less than a Tomcat can carry (18x Mk-82).

Edited November 21, 2022 by QuiGon

[falcon_120]

Which does not change the fact that the F-15C/E will kick ass of the F/A-18C/E

I think a group of E hornets with their AESA, MSI combination can do very nasty things to a group of eagles even in Bvr, the same can be applied the other way. But I see it close, with modern avionics sheer speed is not so important anymore, it's a game of Electronic attack, EW, towed decoys and shooting without activating your radar (a buddy will "buddy dessignate" for you if you allow me the analogy with buddy lasing).

So it's more about which have the better tactics and better works their systems before the other that day.

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[Nahen]

8 hours ago, wilbur81 said:

These two Eagle Drivers would beg to differ. The Eagle is certainly superior in the BVR arena... not in close.

 

2 hours ago, falcon_120 said:

I think a group of E hornets with their AESA, MSI combination can do very nasty things to a group of eagles even in Bvr, the same can be applied the other way. But I see it close, with modern avionics sheer speed is not so important anymore, it's a game of Electronic attack, EW, towed decoys and shooting without activating your radar (a buddy will "buddy dessignate" for you if you allow me the analogy with buddy lasing).

So it's more about which have the better tactics and better works their systems before the other that day.

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk
 

Still in BVR, the basis is speed and altitude.

Still the F-15C is the most effective fighter of the era of jet fighters.

And I'd venture to say that apart from the F-22 and F-35, no non-stealth fighter can surpass the F-15C/EX in air combat.

And let me add that air combat is not same as dogfight. Dogfight - VvR - is panic, stupidity and imbecility. No one with the potential of the F-15C will enter a fight "for fun" where the odds are always 50/50.
The F-15 was made for ranged combat. And since he's doing pretty well in a dogfight, well, none of the pilots in their right mind will be pushing to it.

[Spurts]

2 hours ago, falcon_120 said:

I think a group of E hornets with their AESA, MSI combination can do very nasty things to a group of eagles even in Bvr, the same can be applied the other way. But I see it close, with modern avionics sheer speed is not so important anymore, it's a game of Electronic attack, EW, towed decoys and shooting without activating your radar (a buddy will "buddy dessignate" for you if you allow me the analogy with buddy lasing).

So it's more about which have the better tactics and better works their systems before the other that day.

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk
 

You do know that F-15C/E also have AESA radars, EW, Datalink, etc, right?  The Eagles ability to actually be supersonic is the game changer there.  For all the Rhino's electronic wizardry it is subsonic with any real payload.  The way I heard it put best from someone who flew all models of both Tomcat and Hornet/Rhino is that "The Rhino is an incredibly dangerous and lethal jet, to anything that flies into it.  It simply lacks the ability to reposition and control airspace."

[Kev2go]

10 hours ago, QuiGon said:

Hmm, that's less than a Tomcat can carry (18x Mk-82).

 

 

hmmm but how many "smart" or "guided" munitions can the cat carry? and what sensors or attack suite does it have for utilizing those varying munitions vs the SE?

 

15 hours ago, Beamscanner said:

 

MSI, more trackfile processing, more computational capacity, integrated Radar/RWR, fully digitized aircraft with all system BIT. Dont get me wrong, the F-15E is a beast, and JHMCS and 9X are very modern systems. I think the F-15E will outperform the F/A-18C in most activities. Though if DCS implemented the F/A-18s features properly, I think it'd have some pretty awesome features you don't see in the Strike Eagle. (mainly to do with MSI)

 

I guess speaking in generalities is a no no here and will get the armchair experts into a frenzy. 

 

Nothing to do with being an armchair by having aksed you to  further elaborate. It wanted to be sure you were not conflating "modern" with "more capable" because although the implication at times is such, not always the case.

With that aside It is interesting to see that F15E is a later development than Hornet was ( 1983 vs 1989 IOC, so you would think F15E avionics would be a notch above), but didnt get MSI, whereas down the road the legacy Hornet did .  Perhaps that had to do with the thought that lacking MSI wasnt as big of a deal when you had a second human to manage workload?  Not to say that having a proper MSI wouldn't be a nice to have in the SE.

Edited November 21, 2022 by Kev2go

[QuiGon]

31 minutes ago, Kev2go said:

hmmm but how many "smart" or "guided" munitions can the cat carry? and what sensors or attack suite does it have for utilizing those varying munitions vs the SE?

4 LGBs. That's it
It can't compete with the SE in regards to smart munitions, sensors or attack suite. The SE is way ahead in these categories

Edited November 21, 2022 by QuiGon

[Rainmaker]

4 hours ago, QuiGon said:

4 LGBs. That's it
It can't compete with the SE in regards to smart munitions, sensors or attack suite. The SE is way ahead in these categories

 

There’s way to much ‘glory’ being given to MSI as being some sort of revolutionary thing that has all these solutions to real life problems.  As for the ‘processing’ power topic, I would put the E’s systems up against just about anything. The jet has seen plenty of upgrades in these areas along the way, with more on the horizon. Comparing initial field implementation of either aircraft is just inaccurate by a huge amount. 

Edited November 22, 2022 by Rainmaker

[Rainmaker]

20 hours ago, Beamscanner said:

 

 

The F/A-18C generally has more modern avionics. The Hughes/Raytheon radar family history is as follows. APG-63 -> 65 -> 70 -> 73. Lessons learned + Computer processing growth means a more modern radar in the Hornet, even though the max detection range will still be better in the F-15 (larger antenna). ie more modern vs better performance.

 

Generally, I mean all of the above better performance. Speed, altitude, range, endurance, loadout (bar maneuverability). 

 

MSI, more trackfile processing, more computational capacity, integrated Radar/RWR, fully digitized aircraft with all system BIT. Dont get me wrong, the F-15E is a beast, and JHMCS and 9X are very modern systems. I think the F-15E will outperform the F/A-18C in most activities. Though if DCS implemented the F/A-18s features properly, I think it'd have some pretty awesome features you don't see in the Strike Eagle. (mainly to do with MSI)

 

 

I guess speaking in generalities is a no no here and will get the armchair experts into a frenzy. 

Your data is wrong on many accounts in this post. 

Edited November 22, 2022 by Rainmaker

[Fromthedeep]

16 minutes ago, Rainmaker said:

The jet has seen plenty of upgrades in these areas along the way, with more on the horizon. Comparing initial field implementation of either aircraft is just inaccurate by a huge amount

Isn't the model that we're getting pre ADCP1? The CC was about as fast as a 486.

 

25 minutes ago, Rainmaker said:

The jet has seen plenty of upgrades in these areas along the way, with more on the horizon

At that point the comparison is made to the Super Hornet and that's a drastically superior platform in this regard.

[Rainmaker]

10 minutes ago, Fromthedeep said:

“At that point the comparison is made to the Super Hornet and that's a drastically superior platform in this regard.“

 

You think or you know?

Edited November 22, 2022 by Rainmaker

[Nahen]

Pit one F-15E against one Super Hornet 150 miles apart, give each a full set of A-A weapons and we'll see who gets back to the airfield... I'm betting on Strike Eagle... The Hornet will fall before can fire successfully self rockets

[Nahen]

I get the impression that some people forget the origins of the F-15E...they forget that the Strike Eagle is based on the best air superiority fighter that ever (until the F-22) flew. The F-15E hasn't lost any of its BvR combat capability, I'd venture to say it has gained an additional advantage - even higher speed. All F/A-18s are just the naval equivalent of the F-16. And unfortunately, even their greatest supporters, I don't know how they cursed reality, these planes have no chance in a hypothetical clash with the F-15C / E, not to mention the EX.
A multi-role fighter is a completely different thing than a strike aircraft made from an air superiority fighter - from the best air superiority fighter.
The avionics of both of these machines are suitable for each of them. And any plane it's as good as the whole machine and its pilot put together. So as long as Hornet doesn't annoy StrikeEagle, it be the best at my job, just like Strike Eagle at his... but Hornet no point in fighting with F-15, its no his clas.