The F-15 and MP gameplay

[RIPTIDE]

A quick look at wikipedia (yes, I know there are flaws in this):

 

Numbers built:

F-15 A/B/C/D/J/DJ: 1198

F-15E/I/SG : 334+

 

Total: 1532+ (nb. the USAF has nearly all of these)

 

 

Su-27 : 680

Su-30 : ~300

Su-33 : ~24

 

Total: ~1000 (nb. CIS has the biggest share of these, but Indian and China has sizeable fractions)

 

So, strictly speaking the ratio of built aircraft is 1.5. The ratio of flying aircraft will be higher in the F-15s favour (they last longer). Then there is a 'bias' effect where the USAF has a greater share of total F-15 compared to Russia's share of total Su-27. This makes it more likely that the US F-15 will outnumber Russian Su-27 in battles today (and was even more so in the 1980s and 1990s era).

 

If anyone else has more accurate figures then it'd be good to publish them please.

I had a look at the airforce almanac 2009.

 

http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Magazine%20Documents/2009/May%202009/0509facts_fig.pdf

 

Page 19. I calculate National Guard + Active Duty = 630. All versions C-E.

 

Maybe I'm missing something? :(

Edited August 25, 2010 by RIPTIDE

[Moa]

@Riptide. Nice find. Now, how many Su-27 still operating and combat worthy?

 

@Teknetinium: There was the same breathless reporting of the MiG-25 in the past if you are old enough to remember. Turned out in reality wasn't so great. I saw the same fear of the Su-27 back in the day. The USAF has had Su-27 and has flown, tested, maintained and eveulated them to death. They even put the ones they had up for auction recently (got a spare $2 mil?). Just because some turkey wrote an article and got some retired admiral to check the basic facts doesn't mean squat. Clearly the US Air Force and Navy prefer their own gear, for technical and strategic reasons.

Edited August 25, 2010 by Moa

[RIPTIDE]

Yes, how many Su-27 still operating?

IN the world? Dunno.

[RIPTIDE]

The USAF has had Su-27 and has flown, tested, maintained and eveulated them to death..

With radars?

[RIPTIDE]

 

@Teknetinium: There was the same breathless reporting of the MiG-25 in the past if you are old enough to remember. Turned out in reality wasn't so great. I saw the same fear of the Su-27 back in the day. The USAF has had Su-27 and has flown, tested, maintained and eveulated them to death. They even put the ones they had up for auction recently (got a spare $2 mil?). Just because some turkey wrote an article and got some retired admiral to check the basic facts doesn't mean squat. Clearly the US Air Force and Navy prefer their own gear, for technical and strategic reasons.

Breathless reporting is made by idiots. :) As for the Mig-25 it does its job reasonable well for those who operate it as a Recon platform. INdeed they were used over Israel positions with impunity in the early 70's.

[Moa]

With radars?

 

I'm not sure. They were originally Ukrainian, so wouldn't be the latest and greatest (but it is not like the CIS air forces have brand new kit either, and even when they have new stuff it is in the quantities that only somewhere like New Zealand would be proud of, eg. the handful of Ka-50).

 

If I was a betting man (I'm not) I'd put money on the US having a very good idea of the characteristics of the Flanker radar - they do seem to make the effort (and spend the money) to acquire such information (when such reports leak out).

[RIPTIDE]

I'm not sure. They were originally Ukrainian, so wouldn't be the latest and greatest (but it is not like the CIS air forces have brand new kit either, and even when they have new stuff it is in the quantities that only somewhere like New Zealand would be proud of, eg. the handful of Ka-50).

 

If I was a betting man (I'm not) I'd put money on the US having a very good idea of the characteristics of the Flanker radar - they do seem to make the effort (and spend the money) to acquire such information (when such reports leak out).

Generally they were demilitarized. But yes, they would have been equivalent to the USSR general issue in Ukr. hands. Just passed down by case of location of squadron after the USSR.

 

Finding out radar characteristics works both ways by untoward means. My biggest worry was always the Pakistani F-16A export types. They always been too close to China.

[Moa]

Breathless reporting is made by idiots. :) As for the Mig-25 it does its job reasonable well for those who operate it as a Recon platform. INdeed they were used over Israel positions with impunity in the early 70's.

 

Nothing special, in the 70's the the Canberra was doing the same thing (despite its first flight 1949).

[RIPTIDE]

Nothing special, in the 70's the the Canberra was doing the same thing (despite its first flight 1949).

A Canberra is a target drone by comparison.

[Moa]

A Canberra is a target drone by comparison.

Yes, even venerable aircraft could do what the MiG-25 did, yet the press was in a lather about the Foxbat (which also suited the Pentagon's agenda to get more stuff) and it wasn't until Viktor Belenko defected that the reality was made clear. Same deal with the Flanker ...

[RIPTIDE]

Yes, even venerable aircraft could do what the MiG-25 did, yet the press was in a lather about the Foxbat (which also suited the Pentagon's agenda to get more stuff) and it wasn't until Viktor Belenko defected that the reality was made clear. Same deal with the Flanker ...

What reality?

[Frostie]

@Riptide. Nice find. Now, how many Su-27 still operating and combat worthy?

 

I think your probably looking at half that amount for the Flanker, but to what conclusion is this bringing?

Are you trying to compare the strength of 2 airforces that have absolutely no intention of going into a large scale war anytime soon. Surely if the intention was there then a drive towards mass war machine manufacture would be in progress which could then lead you to some worthwhile number crunching.

 

As it is, with the scope of things Lockon where a 20th century Flanker is pitted against a 21st century F-15, any relation to the real world goes right out the window.

[GGTharos]

It is pitted against a 20th century flanker with an F-15 skin and AMRAAMs.

The current FC2 F-15C lacks features even F-15A MSIPs had in '79.

 

Any attempt to make a relation to a timeframe goes out the window - and incidentally, 21st century flankers vs. 21st century F-15's ... not exactly changing the 90's trend a lot at this point.

 

Russia seems to be modernizing to the point of just being adequate for local things (which brings us back to your statement about said two air forces not intending to go at each other), and putting most of their money into PAK-FA instead - at least that's what it looks like to me currently.

 

As it is, with the scope of things Lockon where a 20th century Flanker is pitted against a 21st century F-15, any relation to the real world goes right out the window.

[EtherealN]

21'st century F-15?

 

Okey, so AIM-120C entered operational use in 1996, and most of the upgrades over the B model are not included in FC2. No one-way datalink for initial guidance, no INS, etcetera. It is basically the same missile as the R-77 with the exception of a few tweaks caused by differences in propellant and aerodynamic layout. For all intents and purposes, the AIM-120C in FC2 is a SARH until pitbull. The "real thing" from it's first variants in the 90's was not.

 

At the same time, the F-15 does not even have the full features of the APG-63 (operational in 1973). In pure coding, the F-15 and Su-27 has pretty much exactly the same radar. Displays are coded to work slightly differently to be a closer match to reality, but the underlying code for behaviour is pretty much the same AFAIK.

 

...and then we are not even remembering that there has been significant upgrades to the APG-63, that are likewise not there in the simulator. As far as missiles go, the AIM-120C in FC is an AIM-120A with C-model ballistics, and the radar is barely better than a 70's version.

 

So drop that bull about "21st century F-15". If you think the Eagle in FC2 is somehow "modern", you should ask someone who flies/flew the F-15A in the ANG. They just might inform you of the fact that the FC2 Eagle is even less capable than their second-hand equipment... :P

[Boberro]

In potentially DCS f-15C vs. Su-27 Flanker pilots will be crying their hearts out :D

[Steel Jaw]

If you think the Eagle in FC2 is somehow "modern", you should ask someone who flies/flew the F-15A in the ANG. They just might inform you of the fact that the FC2 Eagle is even less capable than their second-hand equipment... :P

 

Crap.

 

You just ensured I wont fly the FC2 Eagle anymore.

 

Fool that I am I did not realize it was THAT FAR OFF.

 

:doh:

 

Now then back to awaiting the DCS A10 and flying the BMS F15C for now.

[Frostie]

So drop that bull about "21st century F-15". If you think the Eagle in FC2 is somehow "modern", you should ask someone who flies/flew the F-15A in the ANG. They just might inform you of the fact that the FC2 Eagle is even less capable than their second-hand equipment... :P

21st century within reason, its a game/sim not an actual representation.

 

Im sure if you went back in time and asked Su-27S pilots what they thought about FC2's Flanker they would also say it was an extremely poor version of what they fly. :doh:

[GGTharos]

Yep, I know what you're saying, I just dislike that people focus on something very broad when the real problem is simply, and I mean simply 'we can't handle TWS with effective AIM-120'. I'm sure you've handled it, and we sure tested it to make sure WE could dodge it ... and yes, it is hard. The philosophy was 'any missiles that is launched at you you must turn awa from to evade' (within kinematic reason, of course).

 

Ouch, huge aside here - but anyway.

 

You're also correct about the flanker. Some things would work a lot better with a more realistic representation, some things would make you cry, and there is definitely a lot (both good and bad) missing.

Same for the F-15, but there is a whole lot more good than bad missing ... mind you, there's already some things the radar does wrong in a bad way (ie. AESA like TWS lock) that would be a 'degradation' when modeled realistically, and some things that would be an 'upgrade' like, TWS not dropping the track just because you went into the notch (I refer to F-15 because my memory on the flanker radar specifics is foggier at this point. I studied it, then I forgot a lot about it).

 

Again, an aside, but just an example displaying light v. hard core sim.

 

Mind you EVEN though FC2 is a 'light' sim, it really does let you experience the GIST of BVR and WVR. You don't need a myriad avionics for this in general, and it lets you focus purely on tactics instead.

 

21st century within reason, its a game/sim not an actual representation.

 

Im sure if you went back in time and asked Su-27S pilots what they thought about FC2's Flanker they would also say it was an extremely poor version of what they fly. :doh:

[RIPTIDE]

and putting most of their money into PAK-FA instead - at least that's what it looks like to me currently.

Most goes into naval projects. Things like Borei and Baluva.

[Frostie]

@GG.

I agree totally.

Don't get me wrong I am in no doubt what the F-15 lacks but in relation to the statement of 21st v 20th century, an F-15 is a weapon, if its fitted with a 21st century radar its called a 21st century weapon. Likewise if its fitted with a 21st century AMRAAM it is also called a 21st century weapon. It really is that simple.

 

If im not clear on this the TWS and AMRAAM combo for me, is how it should be at least.

Edited August 25, 2010 by Frostie

[MoGas]

21st century F-15's, nothing surprises me anymore.

 

:music_whistling:

[Frostie]

Mind you EVEN though FC2 is a 'light' sim, it really does let you experience the GIST of BVR and WVR. You don't need a myriad avionics for this in general, and it lets you focus purely on tactics instead.

Most definately, as a tactical learning sim its fantastic and extremely enjoyable too.

 

Edited August 25, 2010 by Frostie

[Pilotasso]

The AMRAAM is not a 21st century weapon nor the radar is. The modeled radar is vanilla APG-63 while the C AMRAAM first apeared still in the 90's. The Su-27P/S is to this date the maintay of russian airforce.

Edited August 25, 2010 by Pilotasso

[Teknetinium]

Moa u think Russian specialist have not tested the F-14 ,F15 or F-16 to the death :)

 

Mig-31 based on mig-25 would give u nightmares in ur dreams. Even F-15E would not be able to handle it.

Mig-31 SARH TWS lunches guided by datalink in ur face from 140 km. I will not talk about the new missiles developed in 90s that will hit from even grater ranges. If you would try to have a war you would regret it. Lets be frinds insted so Russians can Buy American radars and British engines and Americans can by Russian aerodynamic and we get best of two worlds. Missiles thou that is not for sale :)

Edited August 25, 2010 by Teknetinium

[GGTharos]

MiG-31 is very different from MiG-25...even its mission parameters are diffent.

 

And while it is a potent aircraft, intercepting fighters isn't exactly its thing; and don't worry about the F-15's, they'll pick that monster up on radar pretty easily ;)

The MiG-31 on the other hand will definitely have the kinematic advantage, so it is not an easy opponent to shoot down for anyone.

 

Moa, MIG-31 based on Mig-25 is something that even F15E is not capable of whit AESA radar. It will shot down F-15s before they get it on radar :)