not planned A2A Fastpacks

[Woogey]

ED, can we please get the extended range air to air conformal fuel tank as an option for the new Charlie?  Please see attached photos. 

[falcon_120]

Seems to me like a very niche requests that requires so much dev time... This is not like requesting a livery

Let's see, if they implement this they would need to:

• Make a second flight model to account to new drag profile and weight
• Make additional 3d work to make it realistic (missile hard points, possibility of adding bombs in the rack...)

We had the same discussion in the F15e forum requesting to remove the CFT... you could just use already the F15e in air to air mode (aka no bombs).

If it was really a thing operationally in some units i'm ok but only if its low in the priority list and after EA. In the end, not only DCS maps are not very big, but we also have already options now (F15e, refuelling, taking 2 drop tanks...)

[draconus]

34 minutes ago, falcon_120 said:

taking 2 drop tanks

Make it 3.

[Bremspropeller]

...somebody had to ask it...

[Default774]

1 minute ago, Bremspropeller said:

...somebody had to ask it...

The F-15C has no CFTs, there is nothing to remove

[Bremspropeller]

Just now, Default774 said:

The F-15C has no CFTs, there is nothing to remove

Disagree

[NytHawk]

1 minute ago, Bremspropeller said:

Disagree

To my knowledge, only a handful of F15Cs based in Iceland ever got CFTs

[MAXsenna]

...somebody had to ask it...

Already been asked, while the question does need its own thread!
I wonder how many pages we can push it.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Bremspropeller]

Just now, NytHawk said:

To my knowledge, only a handful of F15Cs based in Iceland ever got CFTs

Israeli jets also got CFTs. Being CFT-compatble is one of the features of the Charlie. Ask the nerds for specifics.

null

[NytHawk]

1 minute ago, Bremspropeller said:

Israeli jets also got CFTs. Being CFT-compatble is one of the features of the Charlie. Ask the nerds for specifics.

I personally don't see us getting an Israeli F15

[MAXsenna]

To my knowledge, only a handful of F15Cs based in Iceland ever got CFTs

Let's get Iceland then!

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Bremspropeller]

Kadena jet with fancy toys.

[Vampyre]

12 hours ago, NytHawk said:

To my knowledge, only a handful of F15Cs based in Iceland ever got CFTs

1st TFW Langley AFB VA

18th TFW Kadena AB Okinawa

21st TFW Elmandorf AFB AK

These are in addition to the 57th FIS birds at Keflavik. All of the C/D units, possibly with the exception of Bitburg, flew with CFT's for the long range interception of Soviet Bombers. The Israeli and Saudi C/D's also used this capability.

[Woogey]

The reason I made this post, is with the announcement of a "NEW" F-15C, there is more of a chance that ED will actually consider it.  There are more than a few units that flew with them.  No they are not the same as the F-15E, No they are not Bomb racks.  I am not asking for some weird configuration that there is no info on.  Its simply part of the standard US F-15C configuration options.  It would not change the weapons station count.  The Loadout Manager could stay the same,  on the user side, it could be as simple as adding a check box item in the fuel portion (See Example Photo) On the coding side, Checking the box would call up a different drag index, and add fuel (and Weight) to the internal tank QTY.  

-Woog

[Sierra99]

There are a lot of assumptions being made here based on photos...

The USAF 57th Fighter-Interceptor Squadron based at NAS Keflavik, Iceland, was the only C-model squadron to use CFTs on a regular basis due to its extended operations over the North Atlantic. While other photos show F-15s equipped with CFTs they lack specific information regarding the circumstances.

The first thing that comes to mind is; Where did Keflavik's F-15s go after the 57th closed? If they went to Langley, Kadena and Elmendorf they might have kept the CFTs until their next depot check. (Easier to remove them at depot)

No matter what photos seem to show...It was not standard practice...it was not a standard configuration option.

 

Edited January 18 by Sierra99

[Bremspropeller]

Please define "regular" and "standard". Our mileages may vary here.

The lengths some people are going to rationalize not adding optional features never ceases to amaze me. There's literally nothing the addition of FAST Packs will take away from you.

For the time being, assume people want to fly those exact jets out of Keflavik. Or Kadena. Or Elmendorf. Or Langley.

[Vampyre]

36 minutes ago, Sierra99 said:

There are a lot of assumptions being made here based on photos...

The USAF 57th Fighter-Interceptor Squadron based at NAS Keflavik, Iceland, was the only C-model squadron to use CFTs on a regular basis due to its extended operations over the North Atlantic. While other photos show F-15s equipped with CFTs they lack specific information regarding the circumstances.

The first thing that comes to mind is; Where did Keflavik's F-15s go after the 57th closed? If they went to Langley, Kadena and Elmendorf they might have kept the CFTs until their next depot check. (Easier to remove them at depot)

No matter what photos seem to show...It was not standard practice...it was not a standard configuration option.

 

Oddly enough, the 21st TFW was replaced by the 3rd TFW in Dec 1991 while the 57th FIS was disbanded in March 1995. The photo with the MiG-29's was taken in Aug 1989. An argument for the above statement would be the jets were transferred out of the 57th early but then it is still true that the CFT's were used regularly by other units even if just until their next depot visit. The CFT's were used by the 57th roughly between 1985-1992 from what I can tell from photo evidence.

This photo from William Tell 88 shows a row of 57th jets with the CFT's removed. That indicates that a depot visit was not required for removal and installation of the CFT's. This indicates a high probability that the presented information is bunk. The better questions would be what is your source, and why do you consider it accurate?

 It still remains that most, if not all C/D's, were capable of mounting the CFT's even if they fell out of favor in the 90's. These tanks, along with its latent ground attack capabilities, were usable features of the C/D Eagles and should be included in a realistic representation of the jet.

[Sierra99]

3 hours ago, Vampyre said:

This indicates a high probability that the presented information is bunk. The better questions would be what is your source, and why do you consider it accurate?

My source is the fact I spent 22 Years, 4 Months and 0 Days as an Inflight Refueling Operator in the USAF from 1986 to 2009.

In those 22 years I can tell you for fact I never saw a single F-15C model fitted with Conformal tanks.

Not once during the Cold War...
Not once during Desert Shield...
Not once during Desert Storm...
Not once during Southern Watch...
Not once during Northern Watch...
Not once flying out of Alaska supporting NORAD F-15s...
Not once during F-15C fighter drags to and from the Middle East...
Not once during a training mission...
Not once in 22 years.

You are welcome to call that source bunk if you wish. However, my other source is one on one conversations with F-15E maintainers during a fighter drag who stated they generally didn't like removing the CFTs unless they had to or the Jet was going to Boeing for Depot since Boeing didn't want to deal with them.

I said before there are reasonable explanations for why photos exist of Kadena, Langley and Elmendorf jets configured with CFTs. I'm inclined to believe they are former 57th birds transferred to other units who didn't bother to take them off until they had to...Or perhaps they were some sort of Test program that was never adopted...you are welcome to believe what you wish. But until you can provide context for the photos in question (Where, When, Why etc) I will maintain that all you have are photos of one off examples of a seldom used fuel tank. Unicorns.

Now having said that...I really don't care one way or the other...I'm quite sure the programmers are more capable of making it an option if they want to. In my mind the fact Israel and Saudi Arabia used them really is more than enough justification to include them. But everyone maintaining a few pictures means they were used widely on USAF C models is simply incorrect.

 

Edited January 19 by Sierra99

[G.J.S]

31 minutes ago, Sierra99 said:

My source is the fact I spent 22 Years, 4 Months and 0 Days as an Inflight Refueling Operator in the USAF from 1986 to 2009.

In those 22 years I can tell you for fact I never saw a single F-15C model fitted with Conformal tanks.

Not once during the Cold War...
Not once during Desert Shield...
Not once during Desert Storm...
Not once during Southern Watch...
Not once during Northern Watch...
Not once flying out of Alaska supporting NORAD F-15s...
Not once during F-15C fighter drags to and from the Middle East...
Not once during a training mission...
Not once in 22 years.

You are welcome to call that source bunk if you wish. However, my other source is one on one conversations with F-15E maintainers during a fighter drag who stated they generally didn't like removing the CFTs unless they had to or the Jet was going to Boeing for Depot since Boeing didn't want to deal with them.

I said before there are reasonable explanations for why photos exist of Kadena, Langley and Elmendorf jets configured with CFTs. I'm inclined to believe they are former 57th birds transferred to other units who didn't bother to take them off until they had to...Or perhaps they were some sort of Test program that was never adopted...you are welcome to believe what you wish. But until you can provide context for the photos in question (Where, When, Why etc) I will maintain that all you have are photos of one off examples of a seldom used fuel tank. Unicorns.

Now having said that...I really don't care one way or the other...I'm quite sure the programmers are more capable of making it an option if they want to. In my mind the fact Israel and Saudi Arabia used them really is more than enough justification to include them. But everyone maintaining a few pictures means they were used widely on USAF C models is simply incorrect.

 

No photographic proof, but I do know that Saudi Charlie’s used them routinely (GW1/ODS). May not have been stars’n’bars - but the C model can certainly use them, and did on combat ops. They can be uploaded/downloaded in under 20 minutes on the line.

Used to know a couple Bolars years ago, who were quizzed about the reasons behind CFT removal when crossing the pond for PDM - they said it was to enable higher transit flights, with lower fuel burn values.

Edited January 19 by G.J.S

[Woogey]

6 hours ago, Sierra99 said:

There are a lot of assumptions being made here based on photos...

The USAF 57th Fighter-Interceptor Squadron based at NAS Keflavik, Iceland, was the only C-model squadron to use CFTs on a regular basis due to its extended operations over the North Atlantic. While other photos show F-15s equipped with CFTs they lack specific information regarding the circumstances.

The first thing that comes to mind is; Where did Keflavik's F-15s go after the 57th closed? If they went to Langley, Kadena and Elmendorf they might have kept the CFTs until their next depot check. (Easier to remove them at depot)

No matter what photos seem to show...It was not standard practice...it was not a standard configuration option.

 

The Alaska birds had them concurrently with the Iceland birds.  The Alaska patrols area is much larger than the GUIK Gap.  The point is lost on you, why are you resistant to the possibility of more capability?  If you don’t like them, that’s ok, don’t fly with them.  IT’s a fairly simple ask for ED.  In all honesty, 2 people could probably get it done in a single day = 16 man hours.  
 

-Woog

[Bremspropeller]

7 hours ago, Sierra99 said:

I said before there are reasonable explanations for why photos exist of Kadena, Langley and Elmendorf jets configured with CFTs. I'm inclined to believe they are former 57th birds transferred to other units who didn't bother to take them off until they had to...Or perhaps they were some sort of Test program that was never adopted.

That would be a somewhat reasonable explanation, but it doesn't add up comparing the tailnumbers.

All of the KEF jets I've consciously seen have 80-0XX numbers on them which indicates they're pretty much a nose to tail batch of airframes right out of St Louis. The Langley jet is an 82 fiscal year (82-018) aircraft. One of the Elmendorf jets might be a 79-xxx (picture isn't clear enough) jet. It's hard to tell on the Kadena bird unless there's a higher resolution version of that photo around.

[Sierra99]

Quote

The Alaska birds had them concurrently with the Iceland birds.

Do you have anything other than photos to support this statement? Perhaps a copy of an Operating instruction or Regulation directing their use? Again a photo is a single moment in time. It does not indicate a standard practice or event. Show me an article from the base paper announcing their use (yes something like that is possibly out there). Show me more than one picture to prove it was common place.

Quote

The point is lost on you, why are you resistant to the possibility of more capability?

The point is far from lost on me. I have already said the fact Saudi Arabia and Israel both used them along with the 57th so in my mind there is more than enough justification for including them. What people decide to do with them if they are included is up to them. This is exactly the same as the F-16 3 Mavericks under each wing question.
 

The Air Force decided after testing that 3 Mavs on a TER was a bad idea because firing them in this manner caused damage to the aircraft. Experts in DCS pointed a a few pictures of F-16s configured with 6 mavs and decided this was "proof" it was regularly done.

The only USAF unit documented to have REGULARLY used CFTs is the 57th. Until you can fill in the blanks for the other photos they are still unicorns.

it wouldn't surprise me if ED adds CFTs. This is a game. But in real life the practice was far from simply a configuration option.

 

[Sierra99]

" USAF Eagles only took limited advantage of FAST packs, with some jets deployed to Iceland or stationed in Alaska using them sporadically for the long-range air sovereignty role. "

https://jalopnik.com/the-amazing-saga-of-how-israel-turned-its-f-15s-into-mu-1701606283

[Sierra99]

Quote

 

Conformal fuel tanks on the F-15C add nearly 12,000lbs of gas to the jets 13,850lbs of internal fuel with only slight performance penalties and are much more aerodynamically efficient than the 600 gallon drop tanks normally carried under the F-15C’s wings and fuselage. This begs the question: why did the USAF stop using CFTs in the first place? 

That is a complicated question, but by some accounts the time it took to pull the CFTs of for maintenance was one issue. The fact that the USAF had a surplus of virtually everything, including tankers and F-15s, following the end of the Cold War meant that squeezing every bit of performance out of every tactical aircraft simply wasn’t a high priority. The fighter-pilot dominated culture of the USAF may have also played a part in the decision. 600 gallons tanks can be dropped in an instant to give back the F-15’s maximum maneuverability and kinematic potential during combat. CFTs on the other hand can’t be jettisoned, and the small performance penalty they dock from the jet is there as long as they are attached. 

 

https://www.twz.com/18259/its-back-to-the-future-for-u-s-f-15c-eagles-and-conformal-fuel-tanks

Edited January 19 by Sierra99

[Bremspropeller]

What are we trying to prove here?

First, the request for CFTs/ FAST Packs is brought forward. Then somebody claims it wasn't an option for the light grey Eagles and the person is proven wrong.

Then there's the argument that just "a hand full" of KEF based jets used it. That argument is proven wrong two-fold: It was the entire squadron over a significant timeframe and there's pictural evidence of more jets on the ground (FF and ZZ) and jets in the air. Two AK jets being airbore, the FF jet standing on the line and the ZZ jet in a configuration that suggests a ground-display showing the jet's overall capability. Note, there's also a Mk80 on the wing pylon.

Then there's the argument it was a weird test config or taylor-made for the IS jets, which is wrong as well as evidenced by the other jets and the IDF jets flying the config.

How about acknowledging it's a standard and normal configuration dictated by mission-requirements which are seldomly on the table. As such, it should be in the scope for the F-15C in the game. Just like the general AG capability.