That doesn’t put armament on the F-15 STOL/MTD. None of that is relevant because THIS PLANE was never intended for combat, it was a testbed for what canards and thrust vectoring COULD do.
F22 with AIM-120Ds and 9X is probably gonna be the only chance for america to have decent plane
F15CGE is mid and im still waiting for my F14D GET ON IT GAIJIN
Yo, my man.
If you were more civil I would’ve taken your words into consideration when we first discussed among each other.
C-5 does seem to have issues that I haven’t dealt with yet.
Active was never meant to go any further than thrust vectoring testing.
Wouldn’t even be surprised if it lacked its radar. [Not a claim.]
Yes it has. EAP isn’t in-game.
That would be 1.0 above Rafale, F-15C GE, etc.
F-14D will not be top BR based on known loadouts.
1 Like
all AMRAAM variants have the issue of poor manoeuvrability compared to their competitors
3 Likes
Explanation now, what in the fuck am i looking at its like a f18, eft and su27 had a horrible baby.
This was one of McDonnell’s proposals for an F-18-based export fighter for japan’s FS-X program. They had two others, the Minimum and Medium Modification models, which don’t look as funny. GD also submitted 3 aircraft initially, with one of them being a copy of the F-16XL.
I thought Su35 would be heavier but looks like that F22 is the fat kid of the two.
The normal loaded weight for the Su-35 is 25,300 kg (tonnes), which is often referred to as the normal takeoff weight. Its maximum takeoff weight is significantly higher, at 34,500 kg (tonnes).
The aircraft’s empty weight is approximately 18,400kg
F22
Empty weight: 43,340 pounds (19,700kg)
Loaded weight: 64,840 pounds (29,410kg)
Maximum takeoff weight: 83,500 pounds (38,000kg)
That 18400 kg for original su-35 of the 90s, su-35s is 19000 kg
flight performance is negligible, the E has better one circle and the C has slightly better 2 circle. the chart comparing the two does fuel load by percent which makes the E like 8000 lbs heavier since it carries more fuel. given equal fuel load in weight my statement above is correct
i dont think this is true the EX uses more composites, titanium and has much smaller lighter electronics compared to the E’s of the early 2000’s
to be fair the raptor has to house weapon bay doors, ejector rails and then enough structural support to sustain 9G’s and it has to have S ducts and the added weight from ram and general stealth shaping
Just check f-15sa manual, you can find it on google. Don’t post it here tho it’s classified. You’ll see it’s heavier
The engines it uses are heavier and airframe reinforced
And you think “nah it uses composites no way it’s heavier”? Bro
It’s not that much heavier, a bit less than a metric ton but even though it’s that little extra weight it still has worse thrust to weight compared to the pw 229 f-15e
look inside manual you can find on google
its still classified
4 Likes
You know, since it’s heavier, how tf does the QA move like a F-15C? Cause i know fbw ain’t doing all that. (Now ofc the QA could weight less but there’s no sources as far as i can tell to back up that claim)
i think you’re first of all underestimating the maneuverability of the old f-15e type air frames, and overestimating the f-15c. Because the f-15c is not at all maneuverable lol, f-15ex/qa with fly by wire being maneuverable isn’t surprising.
Also what do you mean by maneuverable. instantaneous turn? sustained turn? aoa capability?
tbf, F15Cs are limited in how much they can pull because they need to remain aerodynamically stable. while the FBW on QA and EX let it go past that to instability (even just adding the missiles on stations 1 and 9 make the aircraft unstable)
1 Like
Instantaneous turn, since that’s what would matter most for nocthing in war thunder
the SA and QA(EX but for qatar) are completely different btw lol