F-15X: USAF Seems Interested

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

disconnectedradical

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 880
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2010, 00:44
  • Location: San Antonio, TX

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 04:36

wrightwing wrote:It's the same amount of thrust as E models with -229 motors. To get a boost, they'd need to go with the -132/-232s.


GE-129 static thrust is about same as PW-229 but dynamic thrust is better, based on HAF F-16 manual.
Offline
User avatar

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1723
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 04:56

Corsair1963 wrote:
marsavian wrote:F-15E(X) come with CFTs as standard so it will have around 23klb of fuel before any optional EFT are added.


Honestly, doesn't help that much. As you have to subtract all of that weight from the gross. Which, doesn't even touch on the considerable penalty in drag!


Drag is relative, on a nice cold day a F-15E with CFTs and AAMs can hit Mach 2 which will do nicely for QRA and air patrol.

Image
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6571
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 06:19

marsavian wrote:
Drag is relative, on a nice cold day a F-15E with CFTs and AAMs can hit Mach 2 which will do nicely for QRA and air patrol.



Honestly, how many times do you have to be told. That 4th Generation Fighters like the F-15 "never" hit Mach 2 under "Real World" conditions. Especially, under a combat load and that wouldn't even include CFT's!

:doh:
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2182
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 07:07

Has there ever been a USAF eagle pilot who has claimed their unit has not yet done a mach 2 QRA intercept...?
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6571
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 08:20

weasel1962 wrote:Has there ever been a USAF eagle pilot who has claimed their unit has not yet done a mach 2 QRA intercept...?



If, you have a source of a F-15C (or any other Eagle model) that has performed a Mach 2 intercept during a QRA. Which, was combat loaded....Please, don't be shy post it!
Offline
User avatar

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1723
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 08:46

Corsair1963 wrote:
marsavian wrote:
Drag is relative, on a nice cold day a F-15E with CFTs and AAMs can hit Mach 2 which will do nicely for QRA and air patrol.


Honestly, how many times do you have to be told. That 4th Generation Fighters like the F-15 "never" hit Mach 2 under "Real World" conditions. Especially, under a combat load and that wouldn't even include CFT's!


You can tell me until Hell freezes over and I will still give it the lack of attention it deserves, it's technically possible which is good enough for me. Iranian Tomcats in a real war hit their Mach 2+ placard speed limits with missiles. If you are not worried about fuel because you have a tanker nearby as Iranians did then you will step on the gas.
Last edited by marsavian on 12 Feb 2020, 08:50, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6571
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 08:49

marsavian wrote:
You can tell me until Hell freezes over, it's technically possible which is good enough for me. Iranian Tomcats in a real war hit their Mach 2 placard speed limits with missiles.


It's technically possible to make an F-15 fly at Mach 2.5 Yet, it never does......... :doh:


Our only concern is how a type performs under combat condition and with a combat load! Everything else is static..... :roll:
Offline
User avatar

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1723
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 08:52

It's technically possible to make an F-15 fly at Mach 2.5 Yet, it never does......... :doh:


Only because there's no tactical need for it. If the mission was to intercept supersonic Foxhounds then it might be a different story like it was with Iranian Tomcats intercepting supersonic Foxbats.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6571
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 09:06

marsavian wrote:
It's technically possible to make an F-15 fly at Mach 2.5 Yet, it never does......... :doh:


Only because there's no tactical need for it. If the mission was to intercept supersonic Foxhounds then it might be a different story like it was with Iranian Tomcats intercepting supersonic Foxbats.



:roll: :roll: :roll:
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2182
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 10:27

Its not about what is technically possible.

In the "real world", which USAF eagle unit has never performed a mach 2 interception for QRA? Simple question.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6571
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 10:57

weasel1962 wrote:Its not about what is technically possible.

In the "real world", which USAF eagle unit has never performed a mach 2 interception for QRA? Simple question.




QUOTE:

steve2267

Post22 Dec 2019 17:20

The point I was trying to make, and apparently not very well, is that ALL operational Eagles are limited to a maximum speed of 1.5 Mach.

Any F-35A (or F-35I) in combat configuration with four (by the time the F-15EX is available, probably six) internal AIM-120s, and 18,500lb of gas can go 1.6Mach.

IMO, the practical kinematic differences between a combat ready F-15EX, in an operational configuration, and an F-35 is nil, but I strongly suspect the F-35 has the edge.

QUOTE:

Post22 Dec 2019 18:29

F-15E:
• 1.4 Mach -- maximum with external wing tanks
• 1.5 Mach -- maximum with single centerline tank

When the USA was under attack, F-15C's scrambled out of Otis AFB punched it up to 1.4 Mach (on the pilot's own volition). They did *not* punch their tanks, even though they did not know what the situation was. They were over Long Island Sound, so punching tanks would have had little risk of hitting anything at ground level.

I'm still waiting for someone to provide an example of an air force that flies CFT-equipped F-15's operationally with NO additional external tanks.


QUOTE:



mixelflick

Post23 Dec 2019 02:30


marsavian wrote:

Mach 2 with CFT's? Never once have I heard of it achieving such, even in early test birds.


You obviously don't look at manufacturers flight test graphs

You're right, I don't. Wanna know why? Because of a simple word on said "graphs" that you overlooked. The word "estimated"...


No F-15 in the real world has achieved these performance levels. In fact no F-15 has ever even come close. The Iranians took the gloves off during several F-14 intercepts of Iraqi Mig-25's, and it never exceeded speeds of mach 1.6. That, despite Grumman "estimates" of a mach 2.34 dash speed. How about the F-4 Phantom? McDonnell Douglas estimated a mach 2.5 dash speed there too. Never pushed past mach 1.6 in combat.

I could go on and on, but it should be obvious from those 3 examples that manufacturer "estimates" and real world ability are two different things. In fact, in all 3 examples they aren't even close.

QUOTE:



mixelflick

Post23 Dec 2019 03:01

marsavian wrote:Look more closely, Estimated refers to stores not to the flight performance. Also you yourself posted of an Iranian F-14 going to Mach 2+ in pursuit of a Foxbat. Sorry but in an all out war all bets are off and all top end performance is available however briefly due to fuel considerations.



So where is this F-15 that achieved these speeds with said "estimated" weapons load? If the weapons load is estimated, then de-facto rest of the flight performance has to be.

Yes you're correct, I think I found one instance of an F-14 achieving mach 2 in combat. One. Still, that's not the F-15 and there is no instance of any Eagle achieving more than mach 1.4 in combat. Either mach 1.4 or mach 1.6, I can't recall. Regardless. both are way, WAY slower than mach 2.3 sustained or 2.5 for ONE minute (absolutely clean).

Now, you do have a valid point the F-35 isn't the best solution to all missions. But allow me to ask you, what aircraft is? Better question: What aircraft comes closest? You'd have a difficult time arguing the F-35 isn't the closest IMO. As to Israel and her F-15's, I do think they'll order new F-15EX's at some point. Why? Because the aircraft lends itself well to a number of roles, and they keep finding new ones for it.

I do NOT think it would be the weapon of choice to strike Iran. Reason? Way, way too big of a radar signature. Even with Iran's meager interceptor fleet of F-14's and S-300 batteries, it would be suicide on Israel's part. The F-35 is clearly the better option for that job, and they'll find a way to get there given the F-35's current range on internal fuel.

I LOVE the F-15, really do. It's big, fast, powerful and carries a big weapons load. But you are citing estimate figures at the very edge of its performance envelope, which I think is unrealistic. That I think, is everyone's point. Israel will continue to use the F-15 and continue to dominate. Just not at mach 2.5 and 70,000 feet...

If the Israeli's do use the F-15 instead of the F-35 to bomb Iranian nuke reactors, I'll be the first to buy you a beer. If they do so exceeding mach 2 at any point I'll buy you another. Deal? :)


QUOTE:



Offline


wrightwing

Post23 Dec 2019 07:57



marsavian wrote:

Fuel tanks can get you to Mach 1.5, drop them and Mach 2+ then beckons on your full internal (+ CFT) fuel. Just because the tanks are not normally dropped does not mean they won't be in real combat conditions which require a lot of high speed like say chasing a Foxhound or Blackjack or intercepting supersonic missiles. The ultimate capability is there if needed.


You're still missing the point. The F-15 is capable of flying much faster in non-tactically relevant situations/configurations, than it ever could in operational scenarios. It's not a M2+ fighter, in any operational situation, if persistence/getting home with your aircraft is a consideration. You'd use more than just your external fuel, to get to M1.5. By the time you got to M2+, you'd be looking for a tanker. THAT is why ~M1.4 is about as fast as you'll see F-15s EVER fly operationally.


Please, feel free to read from page 36 on.....

viewtopic.php?f=58&t=29374&start=525
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2182
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 11:09

All supersonic flight in US airspace is flight limited as an SOP but is granted on a case by case basis especially for QRA.

Flight manual is the flight manual. The ones we see don't even have AIM-120 in some cases so they're not carried? Since we're not talking about "theory", in the real world, which USAF eagle unit has never performed a mach 2 QRA? simple question.
Last edited by weasel1962 on 12 Feb 2020, 11:12, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

milosh

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1020
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 11:11

Good reason to get F-15 is radar. You can put big aesa radar and use it without LPI mode (getting max from it) so you can have fighter which can deal with new russian stealthy cruise missiles and in future with Chinese ones (China still don't have bomber which can fly to coastal USA).

Also with networking you get mini AEW with such F-15, and this AEW is lot harder to down then E-3.

So F-15X could be American MiG-31BM. Russians use MiG-31BM for similar role, or to be more precise they used even old MiG-31 for that (AEW) because of radar and networking.

So there is reason to get F-15 after all. I don't know what USAF plan to do with it though. If they are plan to use it for strike missions that is BS.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6571
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 11:22

weasel1962 wrote:All supersonic flight in US airspace is flight limited as an SOP but is granted on a case by case basis especially for QRA.

Flight manual is the flight manual. The ones we see don't even have AIM-120 in some cases so they're not carried? Since we're not talking about "theory", in the real world, which USAF eagle unit has never performed a mach 2 QRA? simple question.



I answered your question and so did several other members.....
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2182
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post12 Feb 2020, 12:09

What answer? Which unit?

in the real world, which USAF eagle unit has never performed a mach 2 QRA? simple question.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: hythelday and 24 guests