F-15EX

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

f-16adf

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 786
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2016, 17:46

Unread post22 Mar 2021, 21:32

Maybe he was doing his slow speed pass in a very stiff head-wind which further reduced his Ground Speed? Nothing against the Strike Eagle but when I saw its demo a little over a decade ago it wasn't particularly impressive. Agile Eagle program which put leading edge slats on E/S Phantoms, I believe, was originally conceived for the F-15. Yet at that time McAir figured that the Eagle was already dominant and it wasn't justifiable. But one must wonder what a variable camber Leading Edge would have done for that jet at lower speeds?

Here is an E model, with no CFT's and pure power from those -229's.
And in the video the jet doesn't even hardly stay in ground effect, yikes......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bp8k3vY3qGU





And moldie oldie C model from 30yrs. ago

https://youtu.be/w3xhrtvrHZ4?t=2046
Offline

Fox1

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 202
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2005, 04:16

Unread post23 Mar 2021, 00:32

It appears the old Eagle design still has lots of life left in her. I am a bit curious to see how much the new fly by wire system improves the low speed handling characteristics. Will the old dog have a few new tricks? I've heard rumors that these latest Eagles can actually pull off controlled tail slides, though I do not know if such rumors are true. I also hear it is capable of some other pretty nice high alpha stuff. And we know it certainly has the power to offset the weight it has gained over the years. I kind of hope they just stick with the GE F110 engines as standard, as that is a helluva nice power plant.
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2925
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post23 Mar 2021, 12:20

If costs are to be controlled then they will likely weigh the P&W integration with the FCS for obvious reasons. I cannot imagine it's a deal breaker as F-16 comes in both options.
Offline

f119doctor

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 113
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2019, 00:07

Unread post23 Mar 2021, 17:23

Both the F100-220/229 and F110-100/129 were designed with a mechanical throttle connection to the airframe, although they both have 1553 Mux Bus interface with the airframe.

If the F15EX/F110-129 has redesigned their engine control system to eliminate the mechanical input and operates completely under 1553 mux commands, the F100-229 integration will not be simple. But if all they have done is install an electric throttle that turns the mechanical input to the engine control, the -229 integration is probably only a paperwork exercise since they are already standard equipment on the F-15E.
P&W FSR (retired) - TF30 / F100 /F119 /F135
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4333
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post24 Mar 2021, 17:21

Fox1 wrote:It appears the old Eagle design still has lots of life left in her. I am a bit curious to see how much the new fly by wire system improves the low speed handling characteristics. Will the old dog have a few new tricks? I've heard rumors that these latest Eagles can actually pull off controlled tail slides, though I do not know if such rumors are true. I also hear it is capable of some other pretty nice high alpha stuff. And we know it certainly has the power to offset the weight it has gained over the years. I kind of hope they just stick with the GE F110 engines as standard, as that is a helluva nice power plant.


If I'm not mistaken, both the GE F-110 and P and W F-100-229 both generate around 29,000lbs of thrust in max reheat. I think the 229 is lighter, but the F-110 has stingier fuel consumption. I'm sure engine guy will know.

Either way, our pilots are getting a terrific engine..
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5069
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Nashua NH USA

Unread post24 Mar 2021, 18:24

mixelflick wrote:If I'm not mistaken, both the GE F-110 and P and W F-100-229 both generate around 29,000lbs of thrust in max reheat.

If you look at the flight envelopes and acceleration charts in the HAF F-16-1 you can see that the brochure ratings don't mean much. The F110 has superior performance to the F100 in many regimes.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4333
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post28 Mar 2021, 13:46

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:
mixelflick wrote:If I'm not mistaken, both the GE F-110 and P and W F-100-229 both generate around 29,000lbs of thrust in max reheat.

If you look at the flight envelopes and acceleration charts in the HAF F-16-1 you can see that the brochure ratings don't mean much. The F110 has superior performance to the F100 in many regimes.


Well, if that's true then I'm sure it really frosts P and W. Not so sure if I was them though that I'd go through the time and expense of building an "F-110 killer"/new F-100. They need to deliver thousands and thousands of F-135's for the F-35, which can't be an easy or inexpensive endevour. The total market for advanced Eagles is what, in the 100's..... maybe?

And most are already flying with GE motors. Saudia Arabia, Quater, ROK, Singapore did a split buy and now USAF. I'm not an engine guy, but it seems to me once those motors are entrenched in a fleet they're difficult to replace. The Israeli's and Japanese? OK, maybe. India? Very unlikely IMO they go with the F-15EX..

If I were Pratt, I'd take a pass on this one and focus on the F-135, F-119 and whatever's next for NGAD/PCA.
Offline

hkultala

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 53
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2018, 08:02

Unread post28 Mar 2021, 16:11

mixelflick wrote:If I'm not mistaken, both the GE F-110 and P and W F-100-229 both generate around 29,000lbs of thrust in max reheat. I think the 229 is lighter, but the F-110 has stingier fuel consumption. I'm sure engine guy will know.

Either way, our pilots are getting a terrific engine..


You are looking at old version of F110, the newest version(F110-GE132) has over a tonne more, 32500lbs
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3724
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post28 Mar 2021, 16:56

hkultala wrote:
mixelflick wrote:If I'm not mistaken, both the GE F-110 and P and W F-100-229 both generate around 29,000lbs of thrust in max reheat. I think the 229 is lighter, but the F-110 has stingier fuel consumption. I'm sure engine guy will know.

Either way, our pilots are getting a terrific engine..


You are looking at old version of F110, the newest version(F110-GE132) has over a tonne more, 32500lbs

Except they're not using that variant. They're using the -129 version.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5069
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Nashua NH USA

Unread post28 Mar 2021, 18:14

and FWIW both Pratt and GE have 32k class motors that actually put out over 35k+ and neither of them have an actual customer (outside the F-16E)
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4333
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post29 Mar 2021, 15:20

wrightwing wrote:
hkultala wrote:
mixelflick wrote:If I'm not mistaken, both the GE F-110 and P and W F-100-229 both generate around 29,000lbs of thrust in max reheat. I think the 229 is lighter, but the F-110 has stingier fuel consumption. I'm sure engine guy will know.

Either way, our pilots are getting a terrific engine..


You are looking at old version of F110, the newest version(F110-GE132) has over a tonne more, 32500lbs

Except they're not using that variant. They're using the -129 version.


Right. I'm sure they have their reasons be it $, having plenty of thrust already, durability/engine life, TBO, fuel efficiency... something. It's probably fair to say it won't be lacking in the "umph" category and besides, thrust is just part of the equation. The other big factor is drag, and given what it's capable of carrying they'll be plenty of that LOL.

Clean though, or nearly so? Should be absolutely frightening, given what we already have seen from the other "advanced" F-15's flown by SA, Quatar etc...
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5638
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post30 Mar 2021, 13:00

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:and FWIW both Pratt and GE have 32k class motors that actually put out over 35k+ and neither of them have an actual customer (outside the F-16E)


And they've had them for decades. A damn shame that more didn't buy them. :cry: Imagine an F-15C or Tomcat with 72,000lbs of thrust.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5069
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Nashua NH USA

Unread post30 Mar 2021, 13:54

sferrin wrote:
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:and FWIW both Pratt and GE have 32k class motors that actually put out over 35k+ and neither of them have an actual customer (outside the F-16E)


And they've had them for decades. A damn shame that more didn't buy them. :cry: Imagine an F-15C or Tomcat with 72,000lbs of thrust.


From conversations I had with the guys at Edwards, the F-15 ACTIVE has them. As for the Kitty, a TF30 is bigger than an F119, so why half a$$ it with a stronger F110? The F119 has Mil power comparable to the TF30 in burner over much of the flight envelope.

But I digress and talk of F-15C or Tomcat is off topic. The truth is that 129s give plenty of AB power for even a heavy F-15EX. I really think the F-15 is wing loading limited now.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
-PFD Systems Engineer
-PATRIOT Systems Engineer
Offline

basher54321

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2233
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post30 Mar 2021, 17:48


March 29, 2021

An unlikely competition to supply the engines for the U.S. Air Force’s future lots of Boeing F-15EX fighters will soon come to an end. Bids are due April 7 from the familiar F-15 engine rivals—the GE Aviation F110 and Pratt & Whitney F100—for the largest single fighter propulsion system contract.

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/ ... =114923889

When Obi Wan logged onto Twitter: "You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious"
Offline

basher54321

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2233
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post07 Apr 2021, 18:54

Pratt & Whitney Submits Proposal to Power the F-15EX with the F100

Pratt & Whitney is proud to have submitted our proposal to power the USAF F-15EX with the trusted F100-PW-229 engine for Lots 2-9 of the procurement schedule. The F100 engine has powered every operational F-15 in the USAF fleet since its first flight in 1972, and we look forward to powering this legendary fighter for decades to come. The F100-PW-229’s power, performance, and reliability will enable the F-15EX to conduct the Air Force’s most critical missions here and abroad. With more than 28 million hours flown by 23 nations, the F100 has proven itself an invaluable asset for our customers around the world, and our extensive sustainment network at USAF F-15 bases worldwide will ensure the engine is mission ready and delivers excellent value and superior capability to the U.S. Air Force as it conducts global operations.

https://newsroom.prattwhitney.com/Pratt ... h-the-F100




April 7, 2021 | By Brian W. Everstine

The Air Force’s newest fighter jet has a name: F-15EX Eagle II. The service unveiled the name of the jet during an April 7 ceremony at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla.

The Air National Guard will be the first to receive the new jet operationally. ANG Director Lt. Gen. Michael A. Loh said during the ceremony the F-15EX’s improvements will be key to its mission of homeland defense.

https://www.airforcemag.com/f-15ex-named-the-eagle-ii/
When Obi Wan logged onto Twitter: "You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious"
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests