You do make good points. But hopefully they take off artificial nerfs from the f15 such as speed reduction, and maybe if they correctly modeled the aim120D then it would be a lot better and not so much of a budget eurofighter. Plus f15ex speed from Mach 1.5 to Mach 2 beats the eurofighter by a MASSIVE margin iirc. Just a fun fact
No, I have said multiple times that it will be the same situation as Su-30SM/SM2
Lower br plane is strong enough to go up in br, but is prevented due to a superior variant of it sitting right above it
Due to max br, neither can go up
What speed reduction?
Would love to see the data to back this claim up. It would be impossible to beat it by a “massive” margin with marginal increase in thrust over the PW-229 + a heavier airframe.
the day they put he CGE at 14,7 is the same day where they put the su30sm2 and eurofighters at 15.0 or 15.3
3 Likes
Best case scenario
The plane has a drag nerf and it can’t reach its actual irl top speed of Mach 2.5 in game.
Also, a YouTuber did a speed test of every top plane in the game. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwQmp1vWDZE&t=315
The margin is not as big as I remembered but it still notable. But this is also post-nerf. So it’s possible the f15 is actually faster if they correctly fixed the drag on it.
These are two separate issues I’m afraid.
One, the drag nerf was to tone down its broken acceleration and fix the lack of speed bleed (remember those Mach 2+ turns where it just didn’t want to slow down?). The other, I believe, is a reportable issue. It (by ‘it’ I mean pretty much every F-15 affected) should be able to hit Mach 2.3+ at 11,000 m and above like the other jets can, so that’s something that can be reported with the relevant evidence.
Lastly, the video was about the F-15E Strike Eagle. You were claiming that the F-15EX, which is a different and heavier airframe and isn’t even in-game, beats it by a massive margin.
I’m just asking for some actual real-world proof of that. Physics would seem to disagree, especially when we’re comparing a different aircraft to the one actually shown in the video.
Well ever since the nerf, the plane can’t go Mach 2.5 like it could before the nerf. So obviously the one nerf the airframe got resulted in lower top speed as well.
Also the f15ex is slightly heavier, with slightly more thrust. So it’s the same if not better acceleration. So the f15ex and f15E are interchangeable in this conversation.
But as far as real world data, that’s obviously impossible to get. These jets are relatively new and it’s all classified.
But there are aerospace engineers that discuss this, and apparently due to the f15’s variable-geometry intake ramps, it is more efficient at higher speeds because it slows down the air when going into the engines. And the eurofighter has fixed-geometry air intake ramps where it leads it be more inefficient at higher speeds. But keep in mind this is assumed if both aircraft are in clean configurations, if they had standard air to air load-outs it obviously would be different. But this is all conjecture because nobody can get their hands on actual data.
They already answered about this. The Mach 2.5 is for a specific atmospheric condition which isn’t applicable to the game:
F-15E underperforms in max speed // Gaijin.net // Issues
1 Like
F-15E is better acceleration wise, but only by a bit, not exactly ‘interchangable’
They’re not fixed.
Meanwhile my Rafale at 5 000 m trying not to rip itself apart at Mach 1.5:
Everything I search says the f15ex has faster acceleration. So I would like to know where you get that info.
And yea my bad I got that wrong. But for some reason the conjecture around this still states that the f15ex has better performance at higher speeds. This is probably because the eurofighter is reaching its maximum aerodynamic speed, while the f15 is most efficient in this area.
Tbf the Rafale high speed ability in game is very questionable, it beats aircraft made for it like the EFT and F-15 in those flight regimes when it should be topping out at 1.8 high alt from thrust or aerodynamic limitations
F-15 channel loss is comically high.
Iirc someone even posted of it being almost if not over 20%.
1 Like
Are you sure? This is considering that USA players are usually worse than GB and IT players
From Statshark
and which is used more in GRB?
which dramatically reduces a planes stats
1 Like
Typical prejudice, F-15 GE not used in GRB much and US top tier suffered for like 10 months before the GE which made players better
1 Like
ah ok
The video you literally sent.
The F-15E is lighter, with slightly higher T/W than the slightly heavier F-15EX, which, surprise, has slightly lower T/W. I’ll let you do the maths (or in this case, physics).
The EX’s GE-129s aren’t some massive leap in thrust either. They’re rated around 29,500 lbf each static (or ~13,381 kgf for the rest of the world), while the F-15E’s PW-229s are around 29,160 lbf each, also static (~13,227 kgf). So we’re talking about a pretty similar thrust class, not some enormous increase.
(Unless, of course, since Gaijin is taking liberties everywhere, GE-132 becomes a possibility. Then this all becomes moot.)
“Maximum aerodynamic speed” meanwhile the Eurofighter vs the wall at Mach 1.7:
Seriously though, the Eurofighter’s top speed is literally .15 Mach below the F-15’s, their “efficiency” is pretty much the same
iirc the FM is based on another Rafale that tops out at Mach 2.0. If we’re using Gaijin’s formula, shouldn’t that put the expected figure around Mach 1.89?
No, I don’t think they use it for top speed like that. Otherwise F-15 would actually hit 2.5 because of the 1.05x multiplier
1 Like