Back to the future for the F-15C/D

Boeing has published a picture of the first Air National Guard F-15C equipped with FAST packs. The conformal fuel tanks are standard equipment on the F-15E model, but this is a relatively new installation on the F-15C/D. The Air Force flew them in the late 1970s on a few missions that were flown from Alaska and Iceland, but stopped using them relatively quickly. Under the F-15 Persistent Air Dominance Enabler program, the Air National Guard is upgrading their F-15s with the CFTs, as well as multi-rail missile launchers. This will allow them to stop flying carrying external fuel tanks.

The multi-rail launchers will allow the use of both missiles, they can each accommodate up to four missiles, as well as IRST pods, air launched decoys, and other sensors or equipment. The aircraft are also slated to get new cockpits, including large displays similar to the F-35, and updated electronic warfare systems.

"The first flight with the tanks was achieved in just 10 months after the start of the program and marks a major milestone in establishing the operational utility of the conformal fuel tanks. Boeing received a multimillion dollar contract from the NATO Support and Procurement Agency in early 2017 for initial integration, testing and support, and delivered the tanks ahead of schedule. The first test flight on January 31st lasted two hours and took place over the Gulf of Mexico."


The little-known of program is officially called the F-15 Persistent Air Dominance Enabler. Here's an excerpt from the Air National Guard's 2017 priorities document that explains the program and its costs:

www.thedrive.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58

I heard about this system before, from some of the older Eagle Drivers I knew, I never realized that they had done away with them however. Still an awesome system. The avionics upgrade alone would be pretty sweet.

Grim

a reply to: Grimmley

They came as standard on the E, and have been one easy way to tell the Mud Hen apart from the C/Ds. There was talk before of putting them on the earlier Eagles, but it died away pretty quickly. As did all the other configurations of the packs.

New Longerons included?

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Grimmley

They came as standard on the E, and have been one easy way to tell the Mud Hen apart from the C/Ds.

That was going to be my comment. My first base was Lakenheath in England and we had Cs, a few Ds and E models. Looking for the CFTs was a quick, easy way to tell them apart. What's the method now? I'm sure there's other things I just never noticed. Very cool upgrade though.

a reply to: face23785

Color is another easy one. The Mud Hen is a dark green, while the C/Ds are grey.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: face23785

Color is another easy one. The Mud Hen is a dark green, while the C/Ds are grey.

Never even noticed that, despite having refueled them thousands of times lol

a reply to: face23785
sorry to correct you zaph, but I think it might be different in europe - Im pretty sure they are all the 2 tone ghost grey scheme , see link
third image down

sorry using a chromebook so cant insert images directly...
mods feel free to insert image for me

a reply to: urbanfox

I usually call the Mud Hen green, because it looks like it's a green color, but they're always painted dark, while the C/D models are painted light. If you look down that page at 00-3000, 91-304, and 91-308, those are Mud Hens. The grey ones are all C models.

E model:



E model with a C model speed brake:



C model (one with an E model radome):

a reply to: Zaphod58

I always doubt myself when correcting someone with as much knowledge as your good self. I knew the e models looked a bit darker but always put that down to a fresher paint job , however seeing your image of the f15e with a c model air brake really shows the difference up ....not as easy to see when they're on two separate airframes,

As ever Zaph I bow out to your greater knowledge.

much respect
stealth

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: urbanfox

I usually call the Mud Hen green, because it looks like it's a green color, but they're always painted dark, while the C/D models are painted light. If you look down that page at 00-3000, 91-304, and 91-308, those are Mud Hens. The grey ones are all C models.

E model:

E model with a C model speed brake:

C model (one with an E model radome):

That is how I remembered it was the E models were just darker grey. It's been a while. Oh look, a Lakenheath 15. 2003, refueled her many'a time. And 159. Too cool.

a reply to: face23785

The four digit numbers always throw me.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: face23785

The four digit numbers always throw me.

They can really screw up the Fuels Manager database because the quick lookup is based on a 3-digit reference. So if you've got a 2004 and a 004 assigned at the same base, you have to assign one of them the 004 reference (usually the 004) and the 2004 tail gets a different reference, and then everyone just has to remember that that one is an oddball.

a reply to: face23785

I'm guessing that's a USAFE thing. The only place I've ever seen it is on Lakenheath birds.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: face23785

I'm guessing that's a USAFE thing. The only place I've ever seen it is on Lakenheath birds.

That's the only place I can remember it off the top of my head too. Does the MAJCOM designate the tail numbers, or at least how they appear on the aircraft?

It can get confusing when they don't make the year a different size too. If someone didn't know how new the C17 was this might throw them for a loop.

a reply to: face23785

It goes through the Pentagon, because it's based on production. The different commands can make alterations, somewhat, such as going to the shaded codes for squadron and wing birds, or making it a four digit number instead of three.

I always thought that transport aircraft going back to Starlifters,Galaxies etc had their serial number displayed as the last number of the year followed by the last four in a numerical sequence because they used them as a radio callsign? They used to fly over Southern England on the way to Germany in the 1970s calling "MAC XXXXX",I got to see about half of the Atlantic fleet of lifters and Galaxies this way.(Who remembers the legendary MAC 40612?)
On the other hand tactical aircraft such as fighters and bombers that never used their tail numbers as radio callsigns and the base code (LN etc) had them in the more standardised layout,it was only transports that were the exception to this rule?

a reply to: Imagewerx

All tail numbers are the last digit of the year, followed by their production number. ACC aircraft display their tail numbers with the base code above the two digit year, followed by the last three of the production number normally. All other aircraft display them as the last number of the year they were ordered, and the production number.

Callsigns are random. The Andrews aircraft use SAM, for Special Air Missions, most units have callsigns that use something to do with their mission. Some have the tail number as part of the callsign, many don't.

a reply to: Zaphod58

It's a VERY long time since I've listened to military traffic on the civil airband.Do transports such as Globemasters on non-critical or non-tactical flights still use their tail numbers as radio callsigns,or not at all now?

a reply to: Imagewerx

As I said, it all depends. Many of them use tactical callsigns, but some still use their tail number as part of it. I'm looking at many that have RCH and a flight number as their callsign, and others that have words and a flight number, such as SENTRY80, and ANVIL71.