I’ll have a look into that, thanks.
part of the issue is that he just made up the weights
he says 9 minute of after burning fuel but that is disingenuous at best and an outright attempt to change the results at worst because after burning fuel flow dramatically changes based on speed and altitude
eg.
why was this hidden by flags, it is a fact that fuel consumption depends on speed and altitude
with the recent radar changes (non ESA radar buffs), F-15C GE absolutly should go down, because its one advantage over one of the middle of the pack 13.7s was having a somewhat functional radar, but now every planes radar is much better than it was
and with these changes F-15JM is absolutely a better plane then F-15C GE despite being 2 br steps lower
1 Like
Just got the f15e and its not looking good, but ill reserve my opinion for after I spade it as my current opinion of the ge is of it spaded.
Its the only missile you can notch and it relocks in mili seconds, bending what looks like 90 degrees to hit after successful notch whem no other missile does it.
The shit iv witnessed micas do is a joke
1 Like
If you can’t make the F-15E work when you get two supposedly awesome C-5s stock, plus guaranteed 1.4 mach of base performance without spading, but then you think the F-15GE is good, then I don’t know what to tell you.
Thrust vectoring + narrow seeker FOV go brrr
1 Like
if I can make the GE work then of course I can get the E to work. Im still half spaded but the E is nice as well. The GE seems like a side grade. The E has monstrous engines, but the GE has superb awareness. I feel the same lethality in both.
I previously stated somewhere in this post that the GE should be 14.0, and it seems I was right since it feels like a side grade. They should give it amraam-d since they want it to be 14.3.
it needs more missiles it’s definitely been long enough to see it’s the worse 14.3
No need for AMRAAM D, just fix A/B and C-5
3 Likes
A vehicle being bad for its BR is reason to buff (the GE is). A vehicle being the worst in its BR is not a reason to buff as every BR is going to have a worst vehicle, and does not mean that it is necessarily bad for its BR. I catch your drift, but it could have been worded better.
And I’m not sure that it will get more missiles, since it has even less going for it than the su27sm. They made the argument that since the dual missile rack (AKU-170) was created before the su27sm, then it should be able to carry it. However, MRML pylons and Amber racks were conceptualized and built after the F15C recived its “Golden Eagle” upgrades in 2010.
I only mentioned Amraam-D since the PL-15 was leaked to come in the next major update. Otherwise, I would have said to buff the c-5 or add/and buff c-7.
MRML pylons have been built
they are what the F15EX uses on stations 1 and 9
and they were shown mounted to stations 2 and 8 on an F15C
4 Likes
You are right about the f15ex, I couldn’t find any source that verified the f15C carried them. If you could share yours that would be fantastic.
Incorrect. They are used for missile carriage on stations 1&9 on the F-15EX. They have been built and procured.
Your timeline for what makes a Golden Eagle is incorrect.
1 Like
I corrected my wording as you are right about the EX.
My timeline for what makes a “Golden Eagle” is the upgrade to 63(V3) radar in 2010, according to
https://www.jble.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/258963/ironmen-accomplish-first-active-duty-flight-using-new-radar-system/
and
And those same Golden Eagles are still flying, with the same moniker and more upgrades. And will continue doing so into the 2030s now. It is not a static production standard.
You’re not wrong. I’m not saying I don’t want it to get more missiles, I’m simply stating how Gaijin looks at these issues.
And that doesn’t change them being wrong
Yeah well until they get sent a photo of a f15c with markings and MRML pylons/Amber racks they wont believe it.