It didn’t end up going through. But we know the MRML is functional and since there was intent to field it across the ANG it had to have worked on the F-15C.
Doesn’t really need to be. Golden Eagle just means the airframe is in good physical condition
No “it’s” as in I disagree with you
I’m not pointing at the spelling
I type it like that too but auto correct helps me
Can’t believe I missed that lmao, man I was so paranoid about my own minor spelling mistake I imagined it being pointed out, rather than the obvious take way, lol.
And you guys are right it is one, poor phrasing on my part.
mmmnh
We need SKEET for escalation. Especially the JSOW-B
https://www.acc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2871447/gunfighters-first-shots-with-new-smart-bomb-stormbreaker/#skip-target
“Because of the small size of these new munitions, the F-15E Strike Eagle can carry up to 28 GBU-53/Bs.”
Both of them are already available on the F-15Cs on stations 2 and 8.
Reports have been accepted.
GBU-39 Report
GBU-53 Report
So yes, I am pretty sure that it can carry them and that it would be accurate to add them for both the F-15E and the EX
havent seen many people talking about these reports, hopefully they go through, would love to carry 28 of each if i want to
It’s not a life changing buff but it would be nice to have as an option, won’t be overpowered imo as someone with 28 GBU-53s is not going to get very far with them in a GRB match where they matter most
In game it would be identical aside from the name
The AGM-88G has it too. The AGM-88G and (probably) AGM-88J use the same seeker, which is the one found on the AGM-88E AARGM. And in the case of the AGM-88G, it also shares the same warhead with the AGM-88E.
I wouldn’t be too sure about that. I saw a bug report get denied recently for using “untrustworthy 3rd party sources” when the sources were first party government docs lmao. I don’t remember which bug report it was though
Those F-15s aren’t the EX.
I guess it had some modifications done to it, then. On the F-15Es if you jettisoned the BRU-61 they’d strike the tail apparently. Still yet to find anything that indicates the 15C is any different, not sure why it has them in-game.
As I’ve seen a lot of comments about the ability of the F-15EX to carry 16 AMRAAMs, i would like to put all of the evidence here,
!!! EVEN THOUGH I DO NOT WANT THE F-15EX TO GET 16 AMRAAMs THIS UPDATE AS IT WOULD BE OVERPOWERED!!!
Starting from this picture of an F-15C demonstrator.
Please only pay attention to the racks on station 2 (under the wing), as the double racks on the belly of the aircraft have no evidence of existing or functioning other than a patent.
This proves that it’s physically possible for the AMRAAMs to fit in such arrangement.
These are the MRML pylons, the same pylons used on stations 1 and 9 on the F-15EX, fully capable and wired for launching AAMs.
They already exist in the game on the F-15C GE, giving it a total of 12 AMRAAMs.
Then we move forward to this image of an Advanced Eagle (F-15QA probably) painted in a US scheme and used as a demonstrator for the F-15EX.
Again, the MRMLs are present on stations 2 and 8 equipped with AMRAAMs.
There is no question of the stations not being able to take the weight.
Therefore, by gaijin’s logic of compatibility, the F-15EX, can indeed get 16 AMRAAMs.
10/10 ragebait atp.
I am aware that those are not F-15EXs, they are F-15Es.
Every weapon that’s on the F-15E can be used on the F-15EX.
One of the photo shows the Advanced Eagle loadout, 28 GBU-53s are there.
Idk from where you got that from, but if they are on the loadout chart and on the F-15E, I’m pretty sure that they don’t hit the tail.
An F-15E WSO. BRU-61 is not cleared for the wing stations of the F-15E. It is incredibly common knowledge in the mudhen community. Just because you have seen a munition on an Eglin bird does not mean it is safe for employment.
I’m not disputing the EX can take them on the wing pylons if it states it on the card. I’m stating for the E now.
alright, i guess then. It still is on the wing.
https://www.acc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2871447/gunfighters-first-shots-with-new-smart-bomb-stormbreaker/#skip-target
Also, i don’t think that this would state 28 GBU-53s if they were not cleared for that station
It’s written by an Lt in Public Affairs… They write whatever they want
This stopped being a requirement a long time ago.
Although I wouldn’t mind bringing it back, ground RB with no Kh38MT would be great.
As far as I am concerned, that is an official source, as well as good ol’ mk.1 eyeball, which you can use on those photos. This is not a question of aerodynamics, just of compatibility, as this is a game and gaijin has the compatibility “policy”.
Wouldn’t be game breaking either.
No reason to not add them
Gaijin are just vibing it in these days it seems. Thank god we didn’t get AGM-88s on the F-15E, because there was certainly enough “proof” for it…
It’s just a blog post written by someone in the military whose job it is to write a blog. They almost certainly just counted the number of spaces you can fit a BRU-61 and didn’t think much more about it.
If the F-15E should get BRU-61 on Sta2/8 based on that, then that’s opening one hell of a Pandora’s box for all western aircraft, especially the Gripen.
Hell, actually it’d be even more contentious than adding it to the Gripen - given it failed integration
