I mean, look at it. I is so much more streamlined that the E
It’s literally the same plane
Cmon, man, it is simple, just look at it.
Hell, I’ll help you visualize it:
See how much more drag the E has compared to the I?
14 Likes
The exhaust nozzle covers are present on the Israeli model, making it slightly more aerodynamic.
5 Likes
Understood
Yes. The point is it’s not supposed to. It’s a gaijin fabrication, not accurate to the real aircraft.
It is before or after thrust and drag correction?
F-22 can make post-stall maneuvers, F-15 can’t
I can’t say, because I’m watching YouTube.
Except LANTIRN does block the port side.
Here’s one where you can clearly see all port-side bays are empty:
Spoiler
Link that won’t embed in spoilers:
https://media.defense.gov/2022/Jul/07/2003031055/-1/-1/0/220706-F-PB262-1159.JPG
Maybe there’s a new mounting spot with newer targeting pods, but LANTIRN physically blocks the port-side countermeasure bays.
Which to be fair, if you’re bringing this into ground RB, you don’t need flares/chaff for anything other than an enemy jet which are less common than air RB, so 120 becomes a lot.
And clearly the manufacturer, maintenance teams, and pilots all universally agreed that firing flares on a targeting pod is not a good idea which is why the bays are all empty in every single photograph that has the targeting pod equipped.
Now, you and I may disagree with them, but the manufacturer is what dictates things that will later be used for the game; not us.
Same reason why A-10C can’t use the targeting pod with 3x AGM-65s equipped next to it.
It can do that, but it’s forbidden by the manual.
Also it’s not my opinion about the countermeasure thing for air RB, it’s the opinion of countless pilots.
And to translate the amount of countermeasures they prefer for air RB to that of ground RB that sees less aircraft is rather simple.
I personally prefer 240+ for air RB, more than the comfort level of other pilots.
I’ve used none in ground RB partially because the one time I could use them [AMRAAMs being added] was after I retired the Tornado ASSTA from ground RB to use my spawn points for more tanks instead.
That appears to be Defyn’s video, so there is no way he could have filmed his video after the corrections.
So it’s pre nerf
Now you got me interested
What does it say actually?
In the bottom comment. Guy who posted it didn’t actually understand what he read and thinks it applies to chaff and flares and not just flares*
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/S3wT4cgKnOeA
Gonna take a guess and say theyre modelling this:
Either that or either the dataminer or the devs making the change made a typo
Did they not put them on USAF ones?
I think f15e can carry JSOW, as when Singapore ordered their F-15 they asked for JSOW, which heavily implies that strike eagles can not only carry but are compatible with JSOW
Here’s my test flight of the F-15I. I’m losing speed and altitude at 57,000 feet.
Here’s the F-111F’s performance chart (it doesn’t even come close to this in game)
The F-15E/I in game is underperforming compared to a plane with 18 kN less thrust per engine and a bypass ratio of .878 vs the PW-229’s .35.
In fact all planes are underperforming at alt in game because:
That and their drag model. Something something AIM-7F longer burning more powerful motor to get its time to target right because the drag in WT is way too high.
2 Likes