F-15 vs. F-18 from the perspective of an Eagle driver
Overall, the F-18 has a advantage of under 350 knots due to its excellent maneuverability. But the F-18’s weak spot shows up here as well. It’s high drag and less power… in the Eagle I never had a problem slowing down with the Hornet… I could fly around 100 knots and be able to match the Hornet, the advantage I enjoyed was power… even at low speeds I could outrun the Hornet. Accelerating at these low speeds I could get to 100 knots in about 3 seconds, the Hornet around 60 knots in same time. Eventually I was gaining speed and power for a vertical or out rate advantage against the Hornet. But if an Eagle pilot is not good in low speed duels, he will lose to a good Hornet pilot … very fast.
The APG-65 was also better than the early APG-63 too no?
The APG-63 offered better range, and the Eagle’s avionics package gave it better BVR capabilities than both the F-16 and F-18.
3 Likes
No,
(medium target = 2m² target)
Apg 63 is vastly better in the A2A role
2 Likes
Is that confirmed somewhere? I would have expected it to be 5 m2.
If we know that the APG 66 detects a 1.3m² target( T-38) at ~20 Nautical miles
and on the chart the apg 66 has a “medium” target at 22NM and the apg 63 is 3.5x the apg 66s range. You can just work the math out
2 Likes
There’s a reason dcs changed the values like a year and half ago, after like 5 years on the forums of discussions.
This is for a 5.5 m² target. Where the range is of the apg63 is 65NM. Which is ~105km for a 3m² target. Which we know where that value came from(soviet booklet). The fixed it to 85NM, which is 67NM for a 2m² target. On the next pic you’ll see the F15E when it got added. Basically the same range figure at 50%. You can also see the Su27 radar range figure, which is the same as the old F15C radar.
This is how the F15E looks as of now.
That 92NM at 50% throws out 71.5 NM for a 2m^2 target.
Its like they had a dev like our current one and like here, 5 years of proof fell to deaf ears. Dunno if they changed the radar dev on dcs bc the f16, f18s, f15s radar were suddenly changed to more realistic values. Heatblur’s F15E also had work input from SE WSOs which is a factor aswell.
4 Likes
In DCS I tried comparing the game to reality at higher angles of attack and I was surprised that they are quite nicely simulated.
Are there more sources on F-15 radar ranges that can be review?
1 Like
I put everything within the realms of publicly available here
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/eBYSZDAzruGG
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/W8lWB7cpXJX5
The indication that a weapons delivery manual(81’ and aswell 89’) state that the half power beamwidth is 2.5° and not 3° like it is incorrectly stated in that canadian document gives a clue the document is wrong aswell
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/vNe2slf263FF
2.5° is aswell supported by F14s antenna which is similar, 42 slots and diameter, and mathematically through optical wave theory. With a loss in directivity using amplitude tapering for sidelobes control and/or antenna efficiency parameters
5 Likes
Lmao at those “not a bug” labels.
2 Likes
I’d love to see the F-15E soon tbh.
From my understanding FM-wise, it’d be inferior to the F-15A we currently have. Could have the same weapons (but a much better radar) and would have much more ground attack ordinance. So performance-wise, it should be possible to be added to the game now/in the near future tbh.
Radar, electronic warfare, etc. They could (and likely will) add multiple variants down the road.
1 Like
AIM-9’s, AIM-7’s, and AIM-120’s
Yours is by Jack Abercrombie, aerodynamicist for McAir’s FX program, but it’s not real. It’s a graph from the late 1970s, from a report to AGARD which was not showing the truth on purpose because it was the Cold War.
1 Like
