American F-15E Strike Eagle Engines

Dev Server Firebirds General Discussion - Dev Server
1

Hello everyone! I’d like to know about your opinion on the American F-15E Strike Eagle receiving F100-PW-220 engines, as whilst compared to the Israeli variant, the F15I, they have received the much stronger F100-PW-229 engines.

This is a huge difference, about a significant 25% thrust difference in total. Whilst the Israeli F-15E lacks the AGM-65, do you believe that Gaijin was right in giving the American Eagle the PW-220?

  • I support the introduction of the PW-229 Into the American F-15E.
  • I do not support the introduction of the PW-229 into the American F-15E.
0 voters

What is your opinion on the matter? I personally believe that both the F-15Es should have received the PW-229 engine.

What I mean is: Make them equal. Give them both the engine, the PW-229. Both of them should have it.

61 Likes
2

there is a big difference between the 220 having 7920kgf vs the 229 having 9920kgf which simply makes the f15i significantly better in acceleration, I dont think its fair that the original tech tree of the planes origins receive a lesser version of the plane while historically the strike eagle did use the 229s. If its still an issue for gaijin to make them equal, maybe they could consider an engine modification from 220s to 229s the same way griffon spitfires get 150 octane fuel modifications. I hope gaijin reconsiders

51 Likes
3

The implementation of the F-15I with the superior PW-229 engines is fine on its own. The implementation of the F-15E, the original aircraft that the F-15I, which could ALSO carry the same engines is also fine. What is not fine is adding both aircraft, and deciding to remove the PW-229 engines from the F-15E for “balance” sake. That simply makes no sense, since that means the F-15I is now unbalanced. I implore Gaijin to reconsider their decision, and to implement PW-229 on the F-15E aswell.

45 Likes
4

If the F15I gets it’s historic Pythons missiles im fine with having less thrust/the F15e having as much thrust as the f15i

11 Likes
5

If its done for balance I’m fine with it.

6

no ones saying to reduce the thrust of the f15i, just to increase the f15e to the f15i’s engines so that the americans get their equal jet

30 Likes
7

Gaijin with their signature tackling against the US.

I’m still waiting for a rounded MBT in the US top tier, but this kind of unfounded bs is what leads me to believe that i don’t want the M1A2 SEPV3, as they’ll manage to screw it regardless.

27 Likes
8

Except that the F-15E having -220s while the F-15I has -229s is not balanced in the slightest

22 Likes
10

Besides CAS (highly questionable cause the only inner strength is variety), tell me something the US is widely known for dominating in GRB.

“Victimist mindset” bollocks, it was only until the introduction of ARH missiles the US took some serious dominance in Air.

11 Likes
11

It’s strange that the F-15E is getting this nerf when the Su-34 is… yeah seems odd.
Besides, isn’t the F-15E 3 tons heavier? That’d make a noticeable difference in performance even with the better engines.

29 Likes
13

87-0169 used 220Es.

3 Likes
14

Why both Strike Eagles use ancient Gen 1 Thermal pods…

5 Likes
15

Probably cuz of the thing gaijin calls “balance”

1 Like
16

What other thermal pod would you like?
For a 1988 strike aircraft, is the AAQ-14 not fitting?

18

It simply does not make sense in the continuity of their argument. Let the USA have the 229s.

4 Likes
20

F-14A
F-5E
F-4E
F-16 post FM buff

But yea “only until ARH missiles”, meanwhile for the last however many years either them or the USSR has been the one breaking air

Now ground on the other hand yea they haven’t done well since the release of the first M1/M1IP days

Back to the original comment though, just add 229s to both it makes no sense one gets worse engines because “balance”

5 Likes
21

If it’s the 1988 version, why does it have the 200X HMD and ~2006 glide bomb options?

18 Likes
22

Ask the dev team, if it were up to me it wouldn’t have either.

25

Neither would I. Modelling it on an aircraft that was produced with -229s would have been far better, and the fact that the Ra’am is a secondhand F-15 is enough of an explanation for it to not have AGM-65s.

Not going to say it to everyone I see.

I quite literally said 3 words.

What?

No, 0169 didn’t receive -229s until this decade. It had an AESA before it had uprated engines.

Oh boy, a crew chief… That explains a lot.

2 Likes
26

the resolution is one thing i am more concerned about the bad view angle and zoom levels