You know they could make it land on carriers if they wanted the navy were never gonna get the F15 their is reason why the F14 and F15 existed which is the air force and navy argue
I don’t see any data supporting the claim of overperformance of the F-14 or F-15, they’re both some of our better ‘new’ FM’s.
I don’t have a stance. Gaijin extrapolated data… which you merely speculate is wrong. Just your unfounded opinion.1
I was mainly referring to the visual model of the F-15 in the game.
Without moving air inlets the F-15 would not be as efficient, it’s not just the engines, it’s also the trim drag. They also have an effect on AoA, with the angled air inlets keeping the airflow over the fuselage. Still, I think the FM in the WT is probably fine. But I don’t know, I don’t have an F-15. I wonder if it can have a stable 36-38 AoA.
1 Like
Don’t worry about that! DEV will say soviet manual states it can fire the AIM-7E therefore the APG-63 can provide a separate CW signal for guidance despite not being able to do in real life.
F/M sparrows have lower Rmin than the E, missile/FCS calculates and sets everything.
4 Likes
You can literally just look at the EM diagram and then over-perform it by 20% with wing sweep. That is fine for gameplay purposes but lets not pretend that it’s realistic. Just like we don’t have to pretend that the 45 degree AoA F-16 is realistic either.
I have a question, I haven’t found the AIM-7E being used on the F-15A. It is not listed in the manuals. I would trace the AIM-7F guidance methods, but not the materials for the AIM-7E on the F-15, where are you drawing from ?
I know we have had our disagreements, but I do think he listens to you a lot more than it appears.
Can you rephrase the question? “Materials for 7E”?.
The apg 63, 65, and 68 use HPRF waveform to guide the sparrow( the same signal the radar uses to track). The F14 is the only teen series that can do both CW and PD. 7F and up can do both and 7E/below require CW.
I think the E-4 was also capable of being guided with PD
1 Like
[quote=“MaMoran20, post:1418, topic:919, full:true”]
Can you rephrase the question? “Materials for 7E”?.
My bad, sorry.
I didn’t find that the AIM-7E was used on the F-15. I wonder where you’re getting your information about use on the F-15.
The EM diagram is with full forward sweep? As I said, if you have primary information showing the performance is not accurate we can easily submit a report and it will be fixed (often within ~2 weeks of the report). I fully encourage you do so.
“We” is a stretch here as people defended that for eons.
Yes the -7E-4 was, but it was only ever used by the F-14’s as training aids, all it is, is an AIM-7F seeker & autopilot mounted to the -7E’s propulsion section. Technically it probably could have been used by the F-15, but was USN only in practice.
I never said it can, could or did. Just that that the soviet manual wrongly states it can. Gotta reread the post
1 Like
Please, go ahead and try to use a plane with a vastly higher approach speed and required landing length and put it onto a carrier. No the F-15 was not put on a carrier because the design was untenable for carriers, in the same vein as the purposed carrier capable F-16.
Neither airframe would be able to even remotely operate off a carrier efficiently without massive design overhauls.
1 Like
Yeah if the the navy wanted the F15 they would of made it work but thry refused to use any stuff that the airforce had and vise versa
They had the F14 as they pulled out of the F111 navy and airforce rarely agree untill the F35
Where do these charts come from? Please send the name or link.
Examination of wing rock f15
1 Like
I’ve had it for about 4 years now but haven’t had time to look at it yet and the tables are at the end. Great, I’ve only looked properly now, thank you.
Regarding a Navy F-15, there was the F-15N and F-15N-PHX that were suggested but never were built. The N died because it couldnt carry the AIM-54 at all, the N-PHX likely died because the idea of trying to outmatch a purpose built plane like the F-14 in a role by retrofitting/modifying an existing airframe is kinda dumb and likely wouldve killed any performance advantage the F-15 had over the F-14 anyways. It was estimated the F-15N-PHX would increase the weight of the aircraft by a minimum of 9000lbs.
F-15N:
F-15N-PHX:
1 Like
@k_stepanovich how does the RWR F-15 see the Pacntcir S1 and Tunguska if 1 U symbol should be displayed
1 Like