1985 vs 2005 - aka will the DCS: F-15C allow us to disable modern features?

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

5 minutes ago, St4RgAz3R said:

This is due to the unfortunate events we all know

No it’s due to RAZBAM’s decision to model an early iteration first and then slowly incorporate more functionality and more modern systems (digital UFC, newer TPOD etc) as they progress through early access. And it was that process that was indeed interrupted.

But I applaud the approach they took and I wish ED would follow suit: start with an early ‘90s version first and then add in the shiny toys while allowing people the choice which era they wish to represent through Special Options.

2 minutes ago, bies said:

When original 1985-2004 MSIP II;

• very relevant historically

Yes, exactly. In the end that’s what a lot of people here care deeply about: proper context outweighs having the latest toys.

Edited January 19 by Raven (Elysian Angel)
Typo

[bies]

There is no need to argue. Both will be the great, especially because differences would be relatively easy to implement by just disabling some functions. It was in essence the same aircraft, just modernized. With the same cockpit and airframe. Personally i would prefer original 1985-2004 Cold War / Desert Storm / Allied Force MSIP II as it fits the wole DCS enviroment.

And because the newer 2005+ has some disadvantages;

• it has close to zero historical relevance, it didn't take part in any real air combat.
• it doesn't have any proper timeframe opponents in DCS, not even AI. (with multirole F/A-18C, F-16C, F-15E it wasn't so obvious as they could go for ground and sea targets when F-15C is pure A-A platform)
• it serves in times when F-15C started to simply get dated after 30 years (!) of service, F-22 was already operational consuming all the budget and relegating the Eagle to second-grade missions.

When original 1985-2004 MSIP II;

• very relevant historically, achieved all ~38 F-15C air kills and it's a legend of real air combat.
• it has full proper timeframe enviroment, with maps like Gulf War in Iraq, Bekaa Valley in Lebanon, Fulda Gap Cold War.
• it has proper flayable opponents from enemy side, like MiG-29 9.12, Mirage F.1, MiG-21bis, Su-25, Su-27S, Su-17M, L-39, Mi-24P, and allied Tornado IDS, F-14A/B, A-6E, A-7E, Viggen, F-4E etc.
• It has all proper timeframe AI assets, air, ground, sea like MiG-23M, MiG-25PD, Tu-22M, Tu-95, Tu-142, Tu-160, S-200, S-300P, Osa, Kub, Buk, SCUD, F-117, F-16, B-1, B-52, Patriot PAC 1, Hawk etc.
• It's a timeframe when the F-15C was still the best fighter in the world.

Edited January 19 by bies

[F-2]

3 hours ago, bies said:

Just to be clear, there were 4 main F-15C standards:

1. 1979 to 1984: Initial F-15C, similar to F-15A but a bit heavier, reinforced wing for 9G, a bit more internal fuel, added internal AN/ALQ-135 ECM, AN/ALR-45 flares/chaff, upgraded APG-63. Used in combat only by Saudi Arabia during 1991 Gulf War with 2 air kills Mirage F1.
2. 1985 to 2004: F-15C MSIP II, added new F100-PW-220 engines, PACS armament control, MPCD display, AN-ALR-56C RWR, AN/ARL-47 flare/chaff, improved AN/ALQ-135 band 4 ECM, NCTR IFF, PSP processor, ACSG HOTAS, pugraded HUD, partial NVG integration, AMRAAM integration and wiring. This variant achieved nearly all F-15C air kills, it was used in late Cold War in Europe, 1991 Gulf War operation Desert Storm with 36 air kills, 1993-1995 Balkan War operation Deny Flight, 1999 operation Allied Force with 2 air kills MiG-29.
3. 2005 to 2016: mid life upgrade, added Link-16, JHMCS, GPS-navigation, AIM-9X integration, APG-63v(1) with reliability and ECCM upgrade, newer computer. Used in Operation Iraq Freedom, no air kills as Iraq basically didn't have aviation anymore.
4. 2017 to 2026 pahse out: Golden Eagle, added AN/APG(v)3 AESA LPI radar, PAD Passive Attack Display with sensor fusion, AIM-120D integration, Sniper pod, new digital HUD classified AN/ALQ-135 ECM and AN/ALR-56C upgrades, classifed EPAWSS self protection. Used in patrols over Syria operation Inherent Resolve, no air kills.

 

 

Saudi Eagles did also kill some Iranian F-4 in a 1984 skirmish. 
https://militarymatters.online/military-history/eagle-vs-phantom-5-june-1984/

 

I only bring it up because I think that’s the first time an F-15C was used in battle.

[St4RgAz3R]

38 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

But I applaud the approach they took and I wish ED would follow suit: start with an early ‘90s version first and then add in the shiny toys while allowing people the choice which era they wish to represent through Special Options.

I sure applaud it too. I wish more developers do like aerges did, and brought 3 variants of the same jet and now will deliver the 4th more modern one. It would be great in the f-15c too, to have both versions earlier and later and let the people decide what they want. But if that's not possible from ED's side i would surely like to have the more functionality of the newer version. People could still fly the flaming cliffs version if they like, it won't go away.

[Kurnass1977]

Il 19/01/2025 at 14:24, F-2 ha scritto:

Saudi Eagles did also kill some Iranian F-4 in a 1984 skirmish. 
https://militarymatters.online/military-history/eagle-vs-phantom-5-june-1984/

 

I only bring it up because I think that’s the first time an F-15C was used in battle.

In reality IAF used his first batch of F-15C/Ds along his As during the clash over the Bekaa in 1982 and scored many kills, if you need to know the number I'll check my ref books...

Personally I'm quite happy of the ED's decision, this way close the circle of FF "Teen-series" of which I passed my childhood reading of in my dad books ( and when all my passion started) !

Edited January 22 by Kurnass1977

[Ornithopter]

As already pointed out, Aerges, Aviodev, and Heatblur offer multiple versions of the same aircraft, for the price of one.  Maybe that isn't the most profitible way of developing a plane initially, but the value and flexibility it adds is immense, and at least for me, keeps me coming back for more.  I think ED should definitely do both an earlier and later version of the F-15C.

[F-2]

37 minutes ago, Kurnass1977 said:

In reality IAF used his first batch of F-15C/Ds along his As during the clash over the Bekaa in 1982 and scored many kills, if you need to know the number I'll check my ref books...

Personally I'm quite happy of the ED's decision, this way close the circle of FF "Teen-series" of which I passed my childhood reading my dad books ( and when all my passion started) !

Did they have F-15C? I thought they were A. Or was it both.

[TotenDead]

7 часов назад, bies сказал:

Just to be clear, there were 4 main F-15C standards:

1. 1979 to 1984: Initial F-15C, similar to F-15A but a bit heavier, reinforced wing for 9G, a bit more internal fuel, added internal AN/ALQ-135 ECM, AN/ALR-45 flares/chaff, upgraded APG-63. Used in combat only by Saudi Arabia during 1991 Gulf War with 2 air kills Mirage F1.

 

Hm, wasn't the F-15A a 9G aircraft? What was its limit then?

[KarateCriminal]

7 hours ago, bies said:

Just to be clear, there were 4 main F-15C standards:

1. 1979 to 1984: Initial F-15C, similar to F-15A but a bit heavier, reinforced wing for 9G, a bit more internal fuel, added internal AN/ALQ-135 ECM, AN/ALR-45 flares/chaff, upgraded APG-63. Used in combat only by Saudi Arabia during 1991 Gulf War with 2 air kills Mirage F1.
2. 1985 to 2004: F-15C MSIP II, added new F100-PW-220 engines, PACS armament control, MPCD display, AN-ALR-56C RWR, AN/ARL-47 flare/chaff, improved AN/ALQ-135 band 4 ECM, NCTR IFF, PSP processor, ACSG HOTAS, pugraded HUD, partial NVG integration, AMRAAM integration and wiring. This variant achieved nearly all F-15C air kills, it was used in late Cold War in Europe, 1991 Gulf War operation Desert Storm with 36 air kills, 1993-1995 Balkan War operation Deny Flight, 1999 operation Allied Force with 2 air kills MiG-29.
3. 2005 to 2016: mid life upgrade, added Link-16, JHMCS, GPS-navigation, AIM-9X integration, APG-63v(1) with reliability and ECCM upgrade, newer computer. Used in Operation Iraq Freedom, no air kills as Iraq basically didn't have aviation anymore.
4. 2017 to 2026 pahse out: Golden Eagle, added AN/APG(v)3 AESA LPI radar, PAD Passive Attack Display with sensor fusion, AIM-120D integration, Sniper pod, new digital HUD classified AN/ALQ-135 ECM and AN/ALR-56C upgrades, classifed EPAWSS self protection. Used in patrols over Syria operation Inherent Resolve, no air kills.

 

 

Very minor correction since it is not really relevant to DCS purposes. EPAWWS was cancelled for the F-15C and only the F-15E is getting it. Is already standard fit for the EX.

[bies]

21 minutes ago, TotenDead said:

Hm, wasn't the F-15A a 9G aircraft? What was its limit then?

7,33G. It was still considered very high at that era, pilots often exceeded the limits even during training, because the air superiority training (and people) was very competitive, and F-15 didn't have a G-limiter, just audio warning. In a few years many airframes were flying on a second set of wings as original were bent  On the other hand F-15A was a bit lighter and it has even greater low speed/high AoA maneuverability then later models.

F-15 maneuverability when it entered service and came to Europe in mid 1970s was quite a shock for other fighters pilots they trained with. EE Lighting pilot described his first BFM against the F-15A - i started behind him (offensive) and i didn't see him turning, he just started to change shepe (aspect) and we were neutral.

Since 1979 F-15C was full* envelope 9G.

Edited January 19 by bies

[Kurnass1977]

Il 19/01/2025 at 15:53, F-2 ha scritto:

Did they have F-15C? I thought they were A. Or was it both.

The first four F-15s for the IAF under the " Peace Fox 1" program were airframe of the development test program brought up to F-15A standard ( identifiables by the smaller speedbrake) and arrived in Israel in the December 1976, followed in 15 December 1977 by the first of eventually 19 As and 2 Bs production planes. The second batch was accepted by IAF in 1981 and 1982 and comprised 9 F-15Cs and 6 F-15Ds. These will be the initial birds to form the second Baz ( the Israeli name of the Eagle) squadron but the start of Operation Peace for the Galilee postponed the opening of the new unit.

During 1984 and 1985 another 9 Cs and 2 Ds joined the inventory;some attrition replacemet, all F-15Ds arrived in 1991 followed by nine F-15As and five Bs in 1992 as a "prize" to not intervene during the Desert Storm'Iraqi Scud attacks. Of these planes the single seaters were put in storage. the two seaters were brought to the already in service ones standard. The latters were used as precision strike aircraft, not only as air superiority plane and later recon birds ( few Ds modified ),with the crews specialised in the use of the GBU-15

So mate, in 1982 Israel already had the C model

Edited January 22 by Kurnass1977

[TotenDead]

3 часа назад, bies сказал:

7,33G. It was still considered very high at that era, pilots often exceeded the limits even during training, because the air superiority training (and people) was very competitive, and F-15 didn't have a G-limiter, just audio warning. In a few years many airframes were flying on a second set of wings as original were bent  On the other hand F-15A was a bit lighter and it has even greater low speed/high AoA maneuverability then later models.

 

 

Well, I don't know if 7.3G could really be considered high since planes like the F-16 and the MiG-23 had ~8.5-9 G limits, but yeah, that's better than, for example, 6.5G of the F-14 

 

3 часа назад, bies сказал:

F-15 maneuverability when it entered service and came to Europe in mid 1970s was quite a shock for other fighters pilots they trained with. EE Lighting pilot described his first BFM against the F-15A - i started behind him (offensive) and i didn't see him turning, he just started to change shepe (aspect) and we were neutral.

Since 1979 F-15C was full* envelope 9G.

I'm sure the F-15A was a formidable opponent for most of european fighters, but Lightning was really a fat pig, so the result isn't surprising

[bies]

1 hour ago, TotenDead said:

Well, I don't know if 7.3G could really be considered high since planes like the F-16 and the MiG-23 had ~8.5-9 G limits, but yeah, that's better than, for example, 6.5G of the F-14

F-16A entered service later, in 1979 together with 1979 F-15C with 9G.

MiG-23ML, the newest variant of the era, Air-to-Air Load (R-23/24 + R-60) In subsonic 16° sweep: +6.0G, 45° sweep: +6.5G, 72° sweep: +7G. In transsonic and supersonic even less. MiG-23 was overall very limited through the envelope and citing just one single biggest perfect condition G-load is, in case of MiG-23, is very misleading. And its limits were not optional like for the F-15, MiG-23 exceeding this limits was close to catastrofic failure.

MiG-21bis had sturdy wing and simple construction, but as every Soviet fighter, pilot has remember about many different limits e.g. "at M>0.8, the G limit is 7 at a fuel state of ≤800 liters".

Edited January 19 by bies

[felixx75]

The F-15C once again shows how it always is with newly announced modules. You always want exactly what you don't get.
If ED had announced an F-15A, there would be a thread saying that a new or newer F-15C would be much better, etc...
It's always funny to read 

9 hours ago, bies said:

• it has close to zero historical relevance, it didn't take part in any real air combat.
• it doesn't have any proper timeframe opponents in DCS, not even AI. (with multirole F/A-18C, F-16C, F-15E it wasn't so obvious as they could go for ground and sea targets when F-15C is pure A-A platform)
• it serves in times when F-15C started to simply get dated after 30 years (!) of service, F-22 was already operational consuming all the budget and relegating the Eagle to second-grade missions.

Actually, all these points are pretty irrelevant for DCS as a game...
The fact that there would be no corresponding opponents would only be relevant in PvP, if at all. In all other scenarios, it's up to the mission builder to create interesting battles. Or did the USA complain that Iraq had no proper counterparts...

[fargo007]

On 1/18/2025 at 2:55 PM, SuperKermit said:

Fine. And what does this mean? You are the guy that can shoot the farthest out and can turn cold even earlier than the other guy in an F-18. Now that must be thrilling!

 

To many people, it clearly is. That's exactly why this aircraft is coming to DCS. 

 

 

Edited January 20 by fargo007

[Exorcet]

5 hours ago, TotenDead said:

 

Well, I don't know if 7.3G could really be considered high since planes like the F-16 and the MiG-23 had ~8.5-9 G limits, but yeah, that's better than, for example, 6.5G of the F-14

The Eagle is a high altitude fighter, 7 G is more than it can sustain at combat altitude.

[SuperKermit]

vor 6 Stunden schrieb fargo007:

To many people, it clearly is. That's exactly why this aircraft is coming to DCS. 

I understand that many people always want "THE BEST".

However, by the time the Eagle got all these gadgets like Link-16, JHMCS and AIM-9X integration it was not the US' prime A2A fighter anymore. Some other airframe took over that role.

In contrast I figure that there are many others that would love to enjoy flying the F-15 in a state when it indeed WAS the top-league air superiority fighter against the opponents of its time. DCS is supposed to be a simulation trying to replicate real life scenarios, right?

And by the way - if the F-15C MSIP II is put into an 80s/90s scenario against its contemporary oppenents it probably is still (one of) the best 

It's just not the omnipotent über-plane some people would like to have. And you will have to adopt to the strategies and tactics of the time.

Edited January 20 by SuperKermit

[TotenDead]

12 часов назад, bies сказал:

F-16A entered service later, in 1979 together with 1979 F-15C with 9G.

Hm, well, it's only a 3 year difference. Was the F-15A rushed into service? 15C looks like a fix in terms of G limit, as if it finally reached the desired capabilities in that regard

12 часов назад, bies сказал:

MiG-23ML, the newest variant of the era, Air-to-Air Load (R-23/24 + R-60) In subsonic 16° sweep: +6.0G, 45° sweep: +6.5G, 72° sweep: +7G. In transsonic and supersonic even less.

Well, you are partially right here. Those limits apply to the MiG-23M, but they were kept on 23ML for a few first years of its service. Those were increased to 8.5G later

12 часов назад, bies сказал:

MiG-23 was overall very limited through the envelope and citing just one single biggest perfect condition G-load is, in case of MiG-23, is very misleading. And its limits were not optional like for the F-15, MiG-23 exceeding this limits was close to catastrofic failure.

Do you refer to anything specific? It had that extra 50% safety margin like any fighter plane if you're talking about its G limit. The other problem I can think of was a sudden departure followed by a flat spin which was fixed in 1978-1979 with introduction of a new dampening system

[bies]

5 minutes ago, TotenDead said:

Hm, well, it's only a 3 year difference. Was the F-15A rushed into service? 15C looks like a fix in terms of G limit, as if it finally reached the desired capabilities in that regard

Yes, things were going fast during the Cold War. A cold, but still like a war. F-15A production started 1974, 1976 became fully operational and in strenght in Europe, 1979 production of both F-15C and F-16A started. F-15A went to second-grade units, air defence, National Air Guard.

1942 Zero was the best carrier fighter of the world. 1943 despite modernization lost its edge. 1944 it became hopelessly outdated.

10 minutes ago, TotenDead said:

Well, you are partially right here. Those limits apply to the MiG-23M, but they were kept on 23ML for a few first years of its service. Those were increased to 8.5G later

True, but pilot's opinion about "increasing the limit" wasn't particularly enthusiastic. The increase itself and 1979 MiG-23MLA was the motivated by 1979 9G F-15C and F-16A.

 

13 minutes ago, TotenDead said:

Do you refer to anything specific? It had that extra 50% safety margin like any fighter plane if you're talking about its G limit. The other problem I can think of was a sudden departure followed by a flat spin which was fixed in 1978-1979 with introduction of a new dampening system

Interviews with WarPac and Soviet pilots later on - aircraft like the F-15 was nerly full envelope 9G, F-16 was full envelope 9G plus care free, MiG-29 had some holes in the envelope you needed to remember, regarding subsonic/transsonic/supersonic speeds, assymetrical turn, amount of fuel and missiles, Su-27 has significantly more of them, especially fuel and missiles under the wings, but speeds as well, when MiG-23 was full of them, different for different speeds, different wing swept angle, different weights, missiles. Even the speed was to be closely monitored as MiG-23 would just accelerate, and MiG-23 accelerated faster then MiG-29 and much faster then Su-27, to the poin it would melt or destroy the engine or desintegrate. Fascinating machine.

And when later variants like ML/MLA had properly reinforced construction, the earlier one were often a death traps for the pilots accidentially exceeding the limits. Including Colonel Vladimir Ilyushin, son of the famous Soviet aircraft designer Sergei Ilyushin. Or Lieutenant General Anatoly Surzhikov, Deputy Commander of the Soviet Air Defense Forces (!) who died in a crash of MiG-23M when he tried to increase dwindling morale of MiG-23 pilots after series of deadly accidents...

[TotenDead]

33 минуты назад, bies сказал:

 

True, but pilot's opinion about "increasing the limit" wasn't particularly enthusiastic.

It was more physically demanding then the MiG-29, probably due to the back of the ejection seat angle. Anyway, that capability was there.

33 минуты назад, bies сказал:

The increase itself and 1979 MiG-23MLA was the motivated by 1979 9G F-15C and F-16A.

 

Mainly due to the latter one probably, I believe 15C made its first flight when the MiG-23 was already allowed to pull 8.5Gs. 
Speaking of capabilities, the F-14 was still a 6.5G fighter in the 90s so it's probably not only about motivations but also airframe reserves

 

33 минуты назад, bies сказал:

Interviews with WarPac and Soviet pilots later on - aircraft like the F-15 was nerly full envelope 9G, F-16 was full envelope 9G plus care free, MiG-29 had some holes in the envelope you needed to remember, regarding subsonic/transsonic/supersonic speeds, assymetrical turn, amount of fuel and missiles, Su-27 has significantly more of them, especially fuel and missiles under the wings, but speeds as well, when MiG-23 was full of them, different for different speeds, different wing swept angle, different weights, missiles.

 

I can't really argue on those topics, but I'd say that 9G maneuvers are more probable in a subsonic dogfight then while going supersonic. And that there must be some kind of limitations when one operates F-15/16 with certain fuel and weapon load outs. Though, of course extra capabilities are capabilities and will benefit in certain situations

 

33 минуты назад, bies сказал:

Even the speed was to be closely monitored as MiG-23 would just accelerate, and MiG-23 accelerated faster then MiG-29 and much faster then Su-27, to the poin it would melt or destroy the engine or desintegrate. Fascinating machine.

 

Well, the aircraft had a powerful engine and little drag due to 74,4 degrees wing sweep. Overspeed wouldn't momentarily damage the airframe though, the plane could reach M2.6 at high altitude for a short period of time even though it had M2.35 speed limit in the flight manual. But if one ignored overspeed for some time the canopy could start to melt. 

33 минуты назад, bies сказал:

And when later variants like ML/MLA had properly reinforced construction, the earlier one were often a death traps for the pilots accidentially exceeding the limits. Including Colonel Vladimir Ilyushin, son of the famous Soviet aircraft designer Sergei Ilyushin.

Are you talking about the one who died in 2010?

33 минуты назад, bies сказал:

Or Lieutenant General Anatoly Surzhikov, Deputy Commander of the Soviet Air Defense Forces (!) who died in a crash of MiG-23M when he tried to increase dwindling morale of MiG-23 pilots after series of deadly accidents...

To be honest, I couldn't find neither the accident nor the man... But I know that most of the crashes were due to departures and stalls, not to overspeeds or overpulls. If we're talking about the very early MiG-23Ms which shared MiG-23 '71 main structural component - the fuel tank №2, it was reinforced in 1974 which mostly fixed the problem. Mostly - because metal fatigue was still an issue (caused fuel leaks from time to time), but not to the point when the aircraft would dismember in flight

 

Спойлер

null

 

[bies]

29 minutes ago, TotenDead said:

Speaking of capabilities, the F-14 was still a 6.5G fighter in the 90s so it's probably not only about motivations but also airframe reserves

True, F-14 was expensive, they were just saving the airframes, it has peacetime +6.5G, wartime +7.5G, transient over-G +8G.

With MiG-23 crashes I wrote it from memory, i may be wrong, there were so many MiG-23 fatal accidents on MiG-23, especially on earlier models, they were limiting max G many times, sometimes even as early as +3,5G, for 23S +5G. 23M was briefly cleared to +7 in 1977, but they've found cracks and reduced it again in years 1977-1980 etc.

[TotenDead]

7 минут назад, bies сказал:

True, F-14 was expensive, they were just saving the airframes, it has peacetime +6.5G, wartime +7.5G, transient over-G +8G.

Welp, there're a few different NATOPS, they only say 6.5 or less and there's not a single mention of any war time G limit

 

Спойлер

Wanted to add the later ones, but those would be post 1980, so... Any way, the plane never reached the projected 7.0 G limit. And, if I understand it correctly, was limited to 2G with flaps down

[KlarSnow]

Just to clear up the confusion on 9G on the F-15A/C in here. All F-15s were and are 9G capable. In the early 1980s the OWS (overload Warning system) was retrofitted to all F-15's that were not built with it (all A's, some C's that were not built with it) This system gave real time monitoring of actual current dynamic G on the aircraft, with warning when approaching over-G. This unlocked the full 9G potential of the aircraft. If the OWS is not functioning properly (or not installed) the aircraft is supposed to be flown under 7.33 G's (both A and C) to ensure a margin from the actual over-G since there is no warning or dynamic display of where the G limit is. This is all laid out in the TCTO's and the ops limits from about 1985 onwards, with no difference between the A and the C once the OWS was installed. The OWS is the beeping you hear as you approach the G limit and the displayed allowed vs current G in the lower left of the HUD.

There is some discussion of this in the Eagle Talk magazine from the late 70's and 80's that you should be able to find if you look for it where it discusses the dynamic nature of the OWS and how it is dynamically adjusting the over-G limit based on current altitude, mach and aircraft weight, but the end result is that all variants of the F-15 could safely pull 9G's (and more as demonstrated several times) repeatedly over their lifetime.

And again, all of this is the over-G warning going off, nothing in the aircraft limits your actual G pulled.

 

[bies]

4 minutes ago, KlarSnow said:

Just to clear up the confusion on 9G on the F-15A/C in here. All F-15s were and are 9G capable. In the early 1980s the OWS (overload Warning system) was retrofitted to all F-15's that were not built with it (all A's, some C's that were not built with it) This system gave real time monitoring of actual current dynamic G on the aircraft, with warning when approaching over-G. This unlocked the full 9G potential of the aircraft. If the OWS is not functioning properly (or not installed) the aircraft is supposed to be flown under 7.33 G's (both A and C) to ensure a margin from the actual over-G since there is no warning or dynamic display of where the G limit is. This is all laid out in the TCTO's and the ops limits from about 1985 onwards, with no difference between the A and the C once the OWS was installed. The OWS is the beeping you hear as you approach the G limit and the displayed allowed vs current G in the lower left of the HUD.

There is some discussion of this in the Eagle Talk magazine from the late 70's and 80's that you should be able to find if you look for it where it discusses the dynamic nature of the OWS and how it is dynamically adjusting the over-G limit based on current altitude, mach and aircraft weight, but the end result is that all variants of the F-15 could safely pull 9G's (and more as demonstrated several times) repeatedly over their lifetime.

And again, all of this is the over-G warning going off, nothing in the aircraft limits your actual G pulled.

Does it mean F-15A and F-15C had the same wing with the same structural strenght?

[KlarSnow]

The F-15C was heavier, but the wing design was the same. The 7.33 G limit for the A and C was the most restrictive part of the envelope (mach 1.05 at a heavy aircraft weight at a specific altitude IIRC) If however you are lighter than that, slower than that, or at a different altitude, the G limit will be higher that's what the OWS is dynamically monitoring. If you don't have a working OWS the G limit per the Ops limits is just that most restrictive part of the envelope over the entire flight envelope. Again this is all straight out of the -1. Once the OWS is installed there is zero differentiation in G limit between an F-15A and an F-15C, only is the OWS working or not.

When the F-15A and first F-15C's were built there was no OWS, so they were all restricted to that 7.33G most restrictive limit until the OWS was installed.

https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/dd/1c/da/f0c1baa0d059b3/US4302745.pdf

Patent to the OWS if you desire to read how and why it works.

Edited January 20 by KlarSnow