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.

 

F-15N Sea Eagle

page: 5
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 07:24 PM
link   
Just been reading dis
www.aviationexplorer.com...

Seriously, F-15s should be navalised, The A/B models $27M C/D $29M when the JSF is $39m and the super hornet around $50m.

Being like the tomcat but more advanced, faster, more manouverable, and has been exported worldwide.

Dont care how old it is, This things a damn killer!


Its obviously led to the F-22, Not only by the airframe but VT nozzles were first tested on it. Could make a decent bargain ATF for countries who want somthing like the F-22.




posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 07:29 PM
link   
I agree the F-15 is a great plane but my question is the airframes say Canada was interested in a programe like that(though they probably wouldn't be). what condition are the airframes in because another nation or the US as well doesn't want to pour money into something that is gone in 20 years. think about how screwed the CF was for buying the Voodoo.



posted on Oct, 10 2006 @ 08:03 PM
link   


Just been reading dis
www.aviationexplorer.com...

Seriously, F-15s should be navalised, The A/B models $27M C/D $29M when the JSF is $39m and the super hornet around $50m.

Being like the tomcat but more advanced, faster, more manouverable, and has been exported worldwide.

Modern Eagles go for around $70m out of the factory. A navalized version would be much, much more expensive as the whole frame would have be redesigned and strengthened not to mention redesigning the landing gear and electronics.

The added weight from the frame strengthening would make the aircraft slower, less manueverable, and heavier. The Tomcat was much more suited to the carrier life than the Eagle.



Its obviously led to the F-22, Not only by the airframe but VT nozzles were first tested on it. Could make a decent bargain ATF for countries who want somthing like the F-22.

Again the cost and limited upgradability would turn potential buyers around. If a country wanted to look for a new air-superiority fighter they'd be looking at a cheaper Flanker model or a Typhoon that has more capabilities and future potential.



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 02:36 PM
link   
A 'What If' Image of the F-15N Sea Eagle




posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 06:05 PM
link   
espesially with the F-14 in the background.



posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Look carefully, I know how the F-15N can landing on carrier, but I don't know how does it taking-off, especially, from US carrier.



posted on Nov, 3 2006 @ 01:55 PM
link   
The F14 is clearly designed for a special carrier role which the F15 would never match unless it became a F15 - 0.5.

The F15N would have a much worse performance with phoenix's than the F14 even if it was changed to work with it. The F14 is a fighter designed to be fast even with heavy missles. The F15 cant go as fast or is as manuverable as the F14 when carrying a 6 phoenix + 2 sidewinder loadout.

Infact the only advantages the F15 has over the F14 is it higher top speed, higher accelleration and faster rate of role. The F14 has the edge in all the other areas. Yes it can out turn a F15. Infact once it starts turning it turns just as fast as a F16 20 degrees a sec.

The F18 super hornet may be designed for multi role capabillity but the F14 is infact doing quite well at that even though it was never designed for that. A Bombcat outperformed normal hornets in bombing missions and the only change was lantirn pods.




top topics



 
0
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join