It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New F-15 upgrade programme to take it upto 2025

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by jetsetter
Guys.......Most fighter aircraft today are just missile launching platforms. The F-15 has done well as a missile launching platform. It has shot down many aircraft without one loss. Dogfights don't happen that much in modern combat. One of the aircraft is usually shot down long before a dogfight can start.


Yes I know that, but it doesn't mean they still can't happen. Do I think dogfights will happen much anymore, no I don't, but that doesn't mean they won't happen ever again.




posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Stealth says:


Hmm..interesting stuff...but will the upgrading of the F-15's translate to compromises to F-22 upgradations or is it independant of the latter's induction numbers.


Probably so. If you're familiar with some of the activities behind the most recent and upcoming QDR, you'd note that the Air Force wants the latest 'n' greatest airplane, because that's the way the Air Force works -- nothing wrong with that, of course.

But the debate for years has been whether we actually need a new air superiority fighter, given the realities of the world today. It's not like we have to worry about al-Qaeda aircraft, you know. and the money being spent on the F-22 can be better spent (in the opinion of some people) on other procurements.

Moreover, most of the powers-that-be in Congress (who are the ones who decide what the defense budget is, not the military) see dogfighting capability as relatively unimportant. With C^4I^2 capabilities enabling the USAF control of the skies within a day or so in a theater after hostilities begin (which is a big assumption, of course) whether or not the XYZ fighter can outshoot an F-15 or F-22 in the air becomes irrelevant, because the XYZ aircraft won't exist except as a small crater and a black patch on the ground somewhere.

Now whether or not this is realistic is open to debate (although I tend to agree with the assessment); but dogfighting capabilities are simply not that important.

And finally, understand that I have little personal stake in this argument one way or the other; my employer builds the F-15s, true; but we're also a major sub on the F-22.


[edit on 5-8-2005 by Off_The_Street]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hockeyguy567
You are correct that the F-15's were not allowed to use AWAC support, however the Indians were in most engagments, the other main handicap the F-15's had was that they had to use the semi-active AIM-7 Sparrow with a range of about 30 miles, which seriously handicapped them.


Greetings,

The IAF didn't have any AWACs support during these exercise's. It was a means to try and prevent any unfair advantage that any one side would have during the exercises.

I don't see your point with the AIM-7, as you have already mentioned, this is a combat proven weapon system. I don't see how this is in any way a handicap, this system works, it has been used in combat and in no means a substandard system. It may not be as advanced as the AIM-120 but it works. Its not the equipment that makes it effective, its the man, if the man can not complete the mission without the latest in missile technology, I have to question their abilities.

- Phil



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hockeyguy567
What i'm saying is that Russian aircraft have been very poor against Western aircraft in the past 25 years, it's been a turkey shoot, 108-0, mainly in the Bekaa Valley, Gulf War 1, and in Yugoslavia. While Russian weapons data is very limited, the information I do know is that they have performed very poorly in actual combat.


Chew upon this :


Lt. Col. David "Logger" Rose, a Persian Gulf War F-15 pilot, 41, recalled the time "12 years ago to the day in Desert Storm" when an Iraqi MiG-29 chased away his F-15 on the first day of the war.


Source : www.reviewjournal.com...

Besides, when have those russian aircraft's been given a fair shot.

Either they were outnumbered, or they had rookie pilots from countries that could barely sustain themselves.

Some Dutch F-16's downed a Mig-29 from Serbia with pilots who colud barely fly. Is that a fair fight ??

When did well trained Mig or Sukhoi pilots ever take on F-16's or F-15's.
I guess you'll have to wait till the next India-Pakistan war to find out about some F-16's getting swatted out.

Besides, what happened to your F-15's in the air exercises(not simulations) . True they were outnumbered, and were not the best F-15's around, but they went down to Mig-21's and Jaguar's in Alaska.

It also kinda shown that the USAF cannot win in disadvantaged situations.

Similarly F-16's of the Singapore AF, got swatted by Mig-29's in air exercises, with no handicap to either side.

And do you have any idea of the 2nd round of air exercises in alaska when Jagars of the IAF beat the USAF again ...and this time with no constraint on either side ??



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hockeyguy567
the R-77 which has never been fired in combat.


Is that even an excuse to question its abilities???? Do you think its not tested against simulated and real targets ???

Do you even know of the the R-77 PD or the ramjet propelled hypersonic R-172 super BVRAAM missile that will come out in 2007 with the PAK-FA ??


And that's another advantage of the F-15, it has low-wing loading, compared to the Flanker's high wing loading which effects its g-load in combat. The F-15C fully loaded can still sustain about 8.6 g's in combat, while the Flanker drops down to about 7.5 fully loaded.


LOL....isi'nt it common knodwledge that the flanker is by far more manuverable than the F-15 ??


So do the math Stealth Spy, are you going to take a platform with proven capabilites, or take an aircraft with unknown and/or abysmal performance?

I've done my math...i suggest you use a bit of common sense .... and give me a few links to back your delusional declarations.

PLEASE READ THIS and learn a little about the latest flankers...and dont skip the part about the engines, the virtual 3D thrust vectoring, the 5th gen scanned phased array radar, manuverability, range, payload, and most importantly the latest Israeli and French aveonics and electronic warfare suites and systems that go with it..... here is the link Su-30 MKI

Pray, you read the link properly



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Hockeyguy, you said it yourself. The IAF had a 'simulated AWACS'. That was what I was describing, an An-24 transport simulated the flight pattern of an AWACS and the fighters had to defend it. There were no actual AWACS types used by either side during cope india.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:03 PM
link   
I hope this quote from a very credible website called FAS or Federation of American scientists.


The US Air Force claims the F-15C is in several respects inferior to, or at best equal to, the MiG-29, Su-27, Rafale, and EF-2000, which are variously superior in acceleration, maneuverability, engine thrust, rate of climb, avionics, firepower, radar signature, or range.

Although the F-15C and Su-27P series are similar in many categories, the Su-27 can outperform the F-15C at both long and short ranges. In long-range encounters, with its superiorr radar the Su-27 can launch a missile before the F-15C does, so from a purely kinematic standpoint, the Russian fighters outperform the F-15C in the beyond-visual-range fight.

Additionally, the Su-35 propulsion system increases the aircraft’s maneuverability with thrust vectoring nozzles.


www.fas.org...

And note that the Su-35 is one of the older variants of the Sukhoi. It came out in 1994.

And the next variant was the Su-37 which came out in 1998.

And the latest one which came out in 2001, is the Su-30 MKI (dont be decieved by 37>30) and combines the best of the latest Russian, Israeli, French, and Indian technologies.

Although i fully agree that the F-22 is by far the best, i have to disagree with your declaration about the F-15


And i hope that the link from FAS on what the USAF says will put things to rest.

And you alredy heard what the USAF said on the air-exercises as well here (from an american mag again)

Which is more credible- the USAF's statements or hockeyguy's unilateral declarations ??? ... decide for yourselves guys.

[edit on 5-8-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:17 PM
link   


I don't see your point with the AIM-7, as you have already mentioned, this is a combat proven weapon system. I don't see how this is in any way a handicap, this system works, it has been used in combat and in no means a substandard system. It may not be as advanced as the AIM-120 but it works. Its not the equipment that makes it effective, its the man, if the man can not complete the mission without the latest in missile technology, I have to question their abilities.



I don't know if it was an AIM-7 exactly, but I do know that it was some sort of semi-active missile with its range much less than that of a typical AMRAAM.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Stealth Spy, i'm through tring to educate you, you want to live your own little bubble, that's fine with me. You want to ignore facts and ignore real engagments, fine with me. You wanna keep droning on about your Cope India "victory", that's fine with me.

And quit beating a dead horse with that stupid link.

Oh yea, do you think anybody really takes you seriously? I know a few people that don't.

[edit on 5-8-2005 by Hockeyguy567]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Sun 19 Jun 2005

Eurofighter a shooting star in clash with US jets

MURDO MACLEOD
POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT


IT might be over budget and years late but the Eurofighter Typhoon has shown that it can shake off America's best fighter plane and shoot it down.

A chance encounter over the Lake District between a Eurofighter trainer and two F-15 aircraft turned into a mock dogfight, with the British plane coming off best - much to the surprise of some in the RAF. The episode was hushed up for fear of causing US blushes.

For a project 10 years late and $8bn over budget, it is a welcome piece of good news.

The 'clash' took place last year over Windermere when the two-seater RAF Eurofighter was 'bounced' from behind by the two F-15E fighters.

The US pilots intended to pursue the supposedly hapless 'Limey' for several miles and lock their radars on to it for long enough so that if it had been a real dogfight the British jet would have been shot down.

But much to the Americans' surprise, the Eurofighter shook them off, outmanoeuvred them and moved into shooting positions on their tails.

The British pilots themselves were almost as surprised at winning an encounter with an aircraft widely regarded as the best fighter in the world.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:42 PM
link   
A fair bit of press spin in the wording there, unsurprisingly. Also I would bloody well hope the Typhoon CAN outfight the F-15E, which is first and foremost a mud plugger.

I feel some on this forum may well highlight the faults in that report as a case for it being untrue, whereas it is simply a case of a reporter misreporting something he knows little about.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hockeyguy567
i'm through tring to educate you, you want to live your own little bubble, that's fine with me.


More like the other way around .... a lot of us are here are trying to educate you...and its you who refuses the credible links that we post .... as a wise man once said "if some is ignorant, he can be educated; but if he wants to be ignorant - there is little one can do with him" .... and i am not referring to anybody here with that.



You wanna keep droning on about your Cope India "victory", that's fine with me.

I must remind you, it was you who brought up the cope india issue, and i never said anything about "victory"....too bad if you think it was an Indian victory....air exercises are not wars...they are done on a freindly level to check the pilot and equipment standards and improve on the same.

Air exercises are symblos of mutual freindship, not about who won as you claim, and not about making lame excuses to defend ones own country.


And quit beating a dead horse with that stupid link.

All the links i gave were of articles written in reputed and credible american mags.....and you failed to give me a single link to back your declarations about the F-15 being able to beat any Eurofighter and any flanker....and now you say these links on credible AMERICAN mags are "dead horses" ..... well that speaks for itself....i wont say more to it.



Oh yea, do you think anybody really takes you seriously? I know a few people that don't.


And you think anybody here takes your unilateral declarations about the F-15 being able to beat any variant of the Eurofighter and any flanker ???

[edit on 5-8-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
Eurofighter a shooting star in clash with US jets


Good article


here's the link to it (maybe you forgot) >> scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com...



A chance encounter over the Lake District between a Eurofighter trainer and two F-15 aircraft turned into a mock dogfight, with the British plane coming off best.


I hope hockey read that.

[edit on 5-8-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
A fair bit of press spin in the wording there, unsurprisingly. Also I would bloody well hope the Typhoon CAN outfight the F-15E, which is first and foremost a mud plugger.

I feel some on this forum may well highlight the faults in that report as a case for it being untrue, whereas it is simply a case of a reporter misreporting something he knows little about.


Yes the F-15E IS a mud mover - but , running empty its also a very maneuverable fighter - which can also carry more weapons than the F-15C -
www.globalsecurity.org...

up to 8 AMRAAM AND 4 AIM-9`s AND the engines on the `E` are more powerfull - a hair under 30,000lb thrust (5,000 more than the C).

So , its a better fighter - AND 2 were `killed` by a trainer aircraft!!



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 01:27 PM
link   


More like the other way around .... a lot of us are here are trying to educate you...and its you who refuses the credible links that we post .... as a wise man once said "if some is ignorant, he can be educated; but if he wants to be ignorant - there is little one can do with him" .... and i am not referring to anybody here with that.


Bzzzzzzzz wrong guess again. Look stealthspy, do you know I am like one of the few people that disputes you because nobody wants to deal with your childish antics?



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 01:30 PM
link   


up to 8 AMRAAM AND 4 AIM-9`s AND the engines on the `E` are more powerfull - a hair under 30,000lb thrust (5,000 more than the C).


About the engines, I talked to a USAF F-15C pilot who was stationed in Alabama and he told me that the F-15C uses the same P&W F100 229 engines with 29,000lbs thrust each.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 01:35 PM
link   
Dispute
... i have'nt seen a single piece of evidence coming from you that backs your claim about the F-15 being able to beat any eurofighter and flanker.

And its your antics, that the rest of us are debunking....Lol...go check the previous pages on who started this by 1) saying the F-15 can beat any variant of the flanker 2) needlessly fabricated stuff about air exercises and posted it

Nice try to deflect attention


[edit on 5-8-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hockeyguy567
I talked to a USAF F-15C pilot who was stationed in Alabama and he told me that the F-15C uses the same P&W F100 229 engines with 29,000lbs thrust each.


Did he also tell you that the F-15 can beat any variant of the Eurofighter and flanker as well ?? ... or did you make up that part by yourself ??

And quit sending me flaming, derogatory personal attack ridden u2u's... why dont you keep this civil and confine this to the thread ??...also why are you forwarding the contents of u2u messages between you and other members and mods to me ???

[edit on 5-8-2005 by Stealth Spy]



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy
Dispute
... i have'nt seen a single piece of evidence coming from you that backs your claim about the F-15 being able to beat any eurofighter and flanker.

And its your antics, that the rest of us are debunking....Lol...go check the previous pages on who started this by 1) saying the F-15 can beat any variant of the flanker 2) needlessly fabricated stuff about air exercises and posted it

Nice try to deflect attention


[edit on 5-8-2005 by Stealth Spy]


There you go again Stealth Spy, ignoring intellignece, you just don't quit do you?

This is very amusing.



posted on Aug, 5 2005 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

Originally posted by Hockeyguy567
I talked to a USAF F-15C pilot who was stationed in Alabama and he told me that the F-15C uses the same P&W F100 229 engines with 29,000lbs thrust each.


Did he also tell you that the F-15 can beat any variant of the Eurofighter and flanker as well ?? ... or did you make up that part by yourself ??


It's called a primary source.

But you being so dense, I'll provide a link anyways.

en.wikipedia.org...-15_Eagle.29


[edit on 5-8-2005 by Hockeyguy567]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join