The F 15 C golden eagle should have multiple air to air missile one pylon
15 Likes
Based on?
3 Likes
It came to him in a dream
(He thinks AMBER racks were functional, I’ve still yet to see anyone prove the ones mounted were integrated and usable)
24 Likes
I believe he’s actually talking about the mmlr IIRC I believe in the, “wishful thinking on 15c GE forum post.” There has been images and documents from a few users regarding it and display it, as well as the fact that according to how gaijins displayed certain additions for balance like the su27middle double missile rack not ever being implemented in real life yet added, so it logically stands since theirs images for, as well as actual proof for its addition unlike the su27 it should be added.
It definitely didn’t need a second forum post for it, I have no idea why this user created this one without even posting all the general points as well as the actual evidence/documents.
I do recommend if your interested giving that original post a skim its actually really interesting if you ignore the small amount of players discussing things completely unrelated to needed improvements.
20 Likes
There is no evidence the Kh38mt was ever usable, there is no evidence the Mirage 2000-5f and RMV carried the PGM, there is no evidence the SU-30 carried the Kh38, there is no evidence the Ho-229 can carry weapons, the J6k was never even built, the XFU5 never even took off once, the Kikka has engines that were never built, i could go on all day…
Why do people pretend full irl functionality is somehow the standard for additions in this game?
46 Likes
Half the vehicles you listed were prototypes or unfinished aircraft, to which gaijin has stated multiple times over the years they have different standards for as opposed to production and service aircraft.
As for the Kh-38MT, totally agree that it shouldn’t be in the game unless it reaches production. But gaijin is gaijin there and only did two second of research into and now it’s too late to remove it.
For the Mirages, bug report it then. If it can’t use them, it shouldn’t be too hard to have it removed with proper sourcing.
5 Likes
it should get MRML pylons
25 Likes
There is evidence of Kh-38s [MT is still part of the same family of missiles], PGM was proven on Mirage 2000D, which extends to RMV as it’s a newer platform.
Ho-229 is a prototype.
The entire list in your post is all false-equivalence.
F-15C Golden is a service? aircraft. Without proof that it or older service versions, can carry that amount of missiles, there’s evidence in this topic, and so far not in others I’ve seen.
There’s no identifying marks for that aircraft.
It could be the same JZ test bed that was shown a few times, it could be F-15EX, or any other version of the aircraft with that amount.
Test beds, newer aircraft, etc are not usable for reporting older or different variants of aircraft.
The photograph has to be an F-15C GE aircraft, or older service F-15C that wasn’t a test bed.
2 Likes
it is an f15c as shown in more zoomed out images
we also have confirmation of air national guard wanting to order MRML pylons for their F15Cs as of 2017 and as a part of the program the in game one is supposed to represent
and we know for a fact that they are functional missile pylons because it is the same pylon F15EX use on stations 1 and 9, just located on stations 2 and 8
22 Likes
Then it’s the test bed photographs that have been circulating. which is not applicable to any service F-15.
F-15EX is a newer jet and not applicable to F-15C GE.
Orders are great, but without photos of service aircraft being equipped with them, and without proof that F-15C GE is based on those F-15Cs… it doesn’t matter.
Dude, you know I’ll jump on the first hint of something valid. However, I’ve seen no valid photographs thus far.
I’ve seen photos of F-15s without identification, I’ve seen photos of the F-15C test bed that Boeing showed off in 2018, and I’ve seen F-15EXs thus far.
1 Like
ah yes, so proof that the pylons are functional and that they are compatable with an airframe as why else would they consider ordering them
in addition to having shown an aircraft of that kind with said pylons clearly isnt proof
10 Likes
I’m glad we agree that they’re functional.
We do not have the F-15EX in War Thunder. We do not have the 2018 F-15C test bed in War Thunder.
Neither of those aircraft are in War Thunder.
I’ve been searching for F-15C GE proof as well. Dozens of people are.
I haven’t found any yet, and I haven’t seen photos posted here and elsewhere that is an F-15C GE.
I also haven’t found documents that prove F-15C GE is based on anything other than air force F-15C MSIP II aircraft.
what do you mean test bed
there is no reason to believe that is a modified aircraft, as it still has service markings and was not shown as a test bed, as such there is no reason to believe that it has capabilities other than standard f15cs
7 Likes
also even without any more images it more than meets the standards gaijin seems to enforce for pylons on aircraft
there has yet to be any proof that SU27 or SU30 can use the dual pylons they have in game, in either the form of images or documents
9 Likes
Then I should’ve been able to find them on standard aircraft outside that stage.
I haven’t, and clearly you haven’t otherwise you would’ve posted one.
If these were on standard service MSIP II, I would be arguing that F-15C GE can use them based on that evidence. The same exact standard I use for R-77 dual pylons.
However, no photos have been found or posted.
Also proof of Su-30/35 with dual R-77 pylons have been posted across the forum many times.
If proof exists of standard service MSIP II aircraft with these pylons is out there, I’ll post those too.
1 Like
there are images of them on an aircraft that as far as anyone can tell is standard
there is no need for it to currently be mounted on other F15Cs as for their current peace time operations it is more efficient to not mount them, especially because it prevents the use of drop tanks on the 2 and 8 stations which is a very common configuration
it has not at all
every image that has shown the dual R-77 pylons has shown them mounted on an Su-35 with no evidence of that they can be used on either Su-30 or Su-27 as they are in game
8 Likes
Kh-38MT was never more than a mock up yet it is displayed ingame with fantasy statistics, why such high barrier of proof for one but not the other?
19 Likes
Because
‘Two wrongs don’t make a right’?
Disclaimer: I am not soviet main and I don’t support Kh38MT. Just let us have better brimmy. :'|
the F-15C GE will simply be DOA without the addition of a feature like increased fox 3 count, that’s the issue
4 Likes
Dude… this was literally among the first articles I found looking up AF 80-002 and 80-0002.
80-0002 took part in testing, it was modified to have conformal fuel tanks, and more weapon stations over standard F-15s at the time.
@Papa_Daniel
Is Rafale and Typoon DOA because they lack amraam count?
No. In-fact Typhoon does BVR rather well despite not having an AESA radar.
F-15C GE with BOL pods will be extremely effective.