No clue, either way something is indeed wrong.
F100-PW-220 engines are stronger at speed than PW-100s.
What discrepancy?
Cause there is none between F-15C and F-15 Baz Improved.
Have they fixed it?
There was never an issue as far as I know.
Then again, I only checked at the time of my first post made here, which may be a different version of the game you were on.
I just download a patch now, but nothing is changed.
They have the same engine but different thrust, and as such, the F-15C MSIP has lower climb rate and lower performance in general
They’re identical in performance.
I’d verify files if I was you.
I don’t know how to datamine that stuff. But there’s definitely a discrepancy in game, even if it’s just stats/wrong engine name for baz. Most likely there’s actually a difference in performance
The F-15C and F-15C Baz Mshupar have identical FMs.
IDK, but mostly like it just underperforming, if compare with F-15A
15C must have better thrust and smaller power pit
Spoiler
I tested that some days ago and indeed the F-15C engines produce less static thrust but a bit higher thrust at above mach with more fuel consumption too, but increase in thrust is like around 400kgf per engine which is not meaningful when you get a far heavier plane with similar thrust below mach.
I don’t know why the Israeli F-15C has more power while having the exact same engines.
I think the best version in-game is the japanese one, stronger engines than the American F-15C and shares the same radar with marginally better missiles too
-100 have better power on all speeds until 1.6 mach
Or smth like that
In game the difference starts above mach, at least at sea level
You have realistic battles selected when viewing f15c and arcade battles when viewing Baz, afterburner thrust differs from 7920 to 8010 on mine too only like that
Why the huge difference in climb rate? Its even higher than the Japanese version which is lighter to begin with
couldnt find anything that could justify that, maybe someone who knows how to look into game files can see whats different. also climb rate varies at different altitudes so im not sure how reliably one can compare planes just by stat card that has very limited info, just like comparing missiles by stat card is pretty much pointless.
Climb rate stats, at least for jets is correct for min fuel and max sea level sustained climb rate (in theory because it’s not really sustained as it decreases with altitude) and without any loadout, for props is often wrong though.
In game it already installed with all losses.
But fun fact that F-15 more straight intakes and must be better