Bol pods for the F-15C MSIP II

Though it worth noting that Britain was operating the Blue Vixen radar was akin to the AN/APG-73 in terms of performance but in a smaller package from the early 1990s and as discussed in the other thread. Sea Harrier was able to “clip” the wings of the F-15A.

Not saying its bad, its not. But dont totally discount European aircraft. They had their moments,


The f15 when laden loses the vast majority of the benefits in an air to air engagement outside of missile payload and radar. This is noted in the manuals. Gaijin has not modeled this.

Europe had no need for an aircraft like this, thus they only built designs directly comparable to it when it became pressing. The first real attempt to compete with it was by France with the Mirage 4000. Which was promising to outclass the F15, however, it was cancelled as France did not need the platform, and few wanted a more expensive option that was better, when the F15 met their needs or they needed a strike platform, in which case the Tornado was chosen. The M4k primarily being pursued to bring in money from sales, thus it was cut away as it was not sold and France did not need it. To the best of my knowledge, I am half asleep writing this.

You are also ignoring the M2k, which did most of what the F15 did, it also outclassed the F15 in almost all but ordnance carried and speed/range. From the information I’m aware of, did have a comparable radar set and better flight performance in all areas but speed/range. It was only a few years after the F15 was introduced that the M2k was flying. I may be wrong on the radar front, I am quite tired.

The long and the short of it, the F15 was a competent design. Not for European needs. It outclassed them in ways that mattered to the US, not to Europe. Until Europe felt a need for these things, at which point they made planes that had what they felt necessary. It is a competent enough design, if you’re projecting air power from a distance away, but otherwise, pretty overrated.

Competent design, but upon nations in Europe actually bothering with planes of a similar design philosophy, it ended up being beaten quite consistently even with modernisation.

As an aside: Anyone who defends the F15’s victory rate claiming it is the best air supremacy platform of the time, it was fighting outdated mirages with substandard training. A sea harrier could have scored equally well.


Technically no Sea Harriers have ever been lost in A2A combat either. And they were fighting against overwhelming odds, outnumbered 10 to 1.

1 Like

Sea harrier best air to air platform then. None ever lost.

It was used so it should get it. Thats what everyone tells me when I ask for no more American jets to be added to other trees

Yep. And if you read Sharkey Wards book, “Sea Harrier over the falklands” you’ll find out the Sea Harrier FRS1 beat the F-15A in 2v2 combat at a ratio of about 3-1

(well a few were lost to ground fire and accidents, but not to an enemy aircraft, and even then one of the Sea Harriers lost to enemy ground fire, got shot down by a radar guided SPAA, but didnt have an RWR installed as it had been replaced with the systems to fire a sea-eagle. They were scrounging together every single available airframe to send south and so raided boscombe down)

1 Like

That post was to do a comparison between the EFT and the F-15C MSIP 2, which although it is much older it isn’t too far off. Then I compared to f22 which is a contemporary US fighter to the EFT. I purposely tried not to talk about other European aircraft as I don’t hate them, many were good, I don’t hate the EFT but I do hate when people needless say dumb stuff like that guy


Can’t really say someone’s saying dumb stuff when you neglect comparable aircraft from your assessment, be it from deliberate malice or ignorance.

The only comparable aircraft you’ve shown is the m4k. And even then, in 1988 when the program was cancelled there were MSIP 2 zipping around with AIM-120. The M2K has worse TTW, and probably bleeds energy due to being a delta wing. The F-15 is more a long range platform but that doesn’t mean it isn’t maneuverable. All the F-15 has to do is fly defensively as the M2K will quickly lose energy and its ability to turn well. It also has a better sustained turn rate and better climb characteristics than a M2K. At high speeds the F-15 could beat an M2K without too much difficulty. There really was no competition until the EFT came along.

1 Like

Less than educated take, but about what I’d expect from a yank.

1 Like

You’re the one who said the M2K was better in every way except for speed and range. That is incorrect. Also the radar is worse, less targets able to be fired on and tracked vs. OG APG 63 and worse range.

Stop think Mirage 2000 are the same IRl than in game!! not really the same acceleration and Delta drag energy in turn but not like in the game like for Gaijin Delta=Airbrake with crap acceleration. Gaijin never consider how they are the French, just see in the game, not a single plane with really good acceleration. Look Alphajet! The plane of “Patrouille de France” for Air meeting ,airshow and aerobatic, who are nervous, light and agile…far from in game!

And the F15 who beat a Rafale…lol Not same standard and asset as training in France. It was Rafale Marine so max Fuel+3 fuel tank+ his missiles while the F15 low Petrole and do the fight close above is base with just a Camera Pod for Photo!! Many vidéo like “AtéChuet” debunk this better than me.

Yikes. You singlehandedly made YOURSELF look uneducated.

All you had to do was disagree.


They have, this is modeled on all aircraft in War Thunder.

Typhoon also loses a lot of its performance when laden with 8 missiles.
Welcome to physics.

Typhoon also costs more than the F-15C MSIP II. XD


“from a yank”

The F-15s thrust to weight can keep it alive in a turn fight if it cans to that. The M4K bleeds a shit ton of energy in turns.

The F-15 would well outdo it in EW performance. The BVR performance would have left the M4K dead before it ever got to range…

So the F-15 had the range, effectiveness, and flight performance. The M4K could do what? Carry a lot of weight?


Can we crowd fund one and give it to Ukraine to end this nonsense once and for all.


But EFT denied because “too strong” (Gaijin needs to make sure US and USSR keep air bias)

Typhoon is superior its a Gen +4
F-15 currently doesnt carry a BVRAAM, Meteor is deadlier than the AIM-120D, AIM-260 isn’t in service yet.

The cost is manipulated through how many you buy internally and how many you export. Thats why an
F-35 is “cheaper” than a Gripen…But that cost per unit never reflects operational costs (maintenanace, software updates/RAM coatings)

As for performance the Typhoon has the Eagle on toast. The F-15EX has restored the balance. The Tranche 4 Typhoon will likely exceed it.

EFT with it’s flight performance, AESA radar and big amount of missiles will destroy ARB

1 Like

No AESA on Tranche 1/2, CAPTOR-M is a conventional mechanically scanned Doppler radar
Carries up to 6 AMRAAM+ 2 AIM-9, for 8 missiles total, same as the F-15s and less than the Su-27s

I agree that a Tranche 4 Typhoon would be broken, of course it would. But that’s the latest Typhoon model. Adding the latest F-15C configuration would be equally broken. Same with the third batch of Su-27SMs with all the most modern Russian missiles.

1 Like