iirc for it to have flares/chaff it would have had to have some of the MSIP upgrades. but idk if 1553A would be included in that
in game its more of a Hodge-podge so gaijin can just make up whether it has it or not
2 Likes
It’s probably, STD-1553B compliant considering we have a Mid 90’s configuration and that -1553A was superseded by -53B in 1978, and that the STD-1760 station(s) use -1553 for the data transfer layer.
2 Likes
That excerpt is from the simulator tests though if I’m not mistaken.
We haven’t been able to find such a comprehensive source for the system on an actual aircraft.
2 Likes
Yeah, but if the simulators had practically identical avionics to a real F-15 (and the helmet prototype was stated to be configured for 1553A) then it should be good enough, since even if simulators assume perfect operating, so does WT
Also this little excerpt from a different thing says it was flown on F-15 test jets but idk if this is mixing it up with the simulator
I think it really was flown on F-15 since the AFB on the simulator document (Wright-Patterson) is different from the one on the HMD history one (Nellis)
LPI for the AN/APG-70??
that could be nice especially in ground depending on how they would model it on RWR
2 Likes
Your bug report is poorly made lets be honest
3 Likes
I agree, but the idea is there
Pretty sure the E can mount the BOL pods too.
1 Like
I mean they 100% can but gaijin is gonna say no without photographic evidence and if you find that they are gonna say its a mockup or experimental f15e so it doesnt count
4 Likes
It it true, that F-15s’ CFTs are like PPSh’s magazines: CFT from one airframe won’t fit at other?
I don’t exactly know but i suppose they are all exactly the same for ease of maintainance and costs
I know that they same in theory. I ask about practice.
Idk man. I play war thunder
Could someone explain me why does the F100-PW-229 mounted on the F-15E has a power loss of around 5000 lbf when the F/A-18’s engines have a loss of 60 lbf and the Su-27SM’s have a loss of 600 lbf???. Channel loss? Maybe. It does seem a bit weird when you look at the intakes of said planes. The Su-27SM has some grates that i suppose contribute to the channel loss. The F/A-18’s intakes take a huge turn inward and up so the blades from the turbine are not even visible. The F-15 has a straight (more or less), visible turbine. Would someone that has more knowledge on the topic help me understand this matter or is this just Gaijin being “Meh. We don’t care” again??
F/A-18 has overperforming engines, thus overperforms in acceleration.
2 Likes
Also thrust with channel losses are shown for V=0 H=0(useless). If you think that thrust is wrong you can compare game with speed and acceleration charts from manual.
1 Like
And the Su-27 losing only 600 lbf when the F-15’s losing 5000?
Ignore him, we have installed thrust charts for the F-18, the thrust is accurate. What is likely the problem is that general electrics stated bench thrust is inaccurate as the engine was intended for export and mounting in numerous airframes.
3 Likes