It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


F-15 next?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 16 2007 @ 08:16 AM
Except that the (now obsolete and retired) Phoenix would most likely be defeated by the Flankers ECM and so it would become (as I am presuming was meant originally due to references to upgrading the airframe) a turning fight.

posted on Apr, 16 2007 @ 08:44 AM
I don't know if it would be so easily defeated by ECM (not to mention there are five more...) though it does lack in ECCM and kinematics in the terminal stage. Still, the Phoenix was a missile designed for a bygone era and it was lacking. The AMRAAM is a much better all round missile, especially the C and D versions, so no the F-14 did not (would not) have better missiles than the F-15.

[edit on 16-4-2007 by WestPoint23]

posted on Apr, 16 2007 @ 09:30 AM
Even if not ECM Westy, there is a strong chance that the Flanker could avoid the Phoenix, is there not? It would almost certainly know it was coming. The AIM 54 was originally designed to hit bomber formations IIRC, breaking up the bomber stream so that they either turn around or are at least too disorganised to press home a meaningful attack and are easier for the short range interceptors to pick off. A similar missile programme in the UK was the Red Dean, but this was axed (like so much else, including its Fairey Delta III carrier aircraft).

An F-14 with Meteor's or AIM120D's might have been an interesting option though, It would carry more than 6 as well

posted on Apr, 16 2007 @ 02:11 PM
Indeed you probably could out maneuver (or out position) one Phoenix missile given you have the proper early warning sensors and the F-Pole is large enough. The Phoenix is a big missile, and it's airframe was designed for range not maneuverability. At best even under optimum conditions the Phoenix is capable of pulling few lateral G's and it's rate of turn would be very low. Now take those two things under consideration when the AIM-54 is used at very extended ranges. At that point the missile is essentially gliding to the target and if it has to maneuver it will bleed energy (fast). So yes it is possible but like everything it depends...

Most modern fighters (and pilots) can pull and sustain more G than the AIM-54 Phoenix. Newer fighters like the F-22 can even accelerate (sustain) while in high AOA or under a lot of G.

posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 01:27 AM
(is that a rectangular exhaust?)

hi, didn't want to make a new thread out of this but its just something that piqued my curiosity so i guess i'll just post my question in here since it deals with the F-15 too.

does anyone know what happened to the F-15 ACTIVE (Advanced Control Technology for Integrated Vehicles)? is it still flying? does it go on airshows and stuff like that?

seems like its awfully hard to find a video of that plane, i wonder how it stacks up against all variations and flavors of the SU-27 & MiG29.

NASA Dryden Fact Sheet
Global Aircraft
F-15 ACTIVE Description

posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 07:21 AM
I thought that the F-15 active was put into service, but as an experimental aircraft.

posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 11:40 AM
hi again everyone, another question regarding the F-15 ACTIVE

does anyone see different exhaust configurations? or is it just me?

so how many of these did they build? are these planes TVC capable?

posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 12:00 PM
It's one aircraft. It's the first F-15B that was built. The first picture was when they tested the canard system, which was from an F-18 tailplane. The last picture is when they had the full system installed including the rectangular exhaust. Yes it was TVC capable.

posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 12:30 PM
The F-15 S/MTD and the F-15 ACTIVE could fly circles around the SU-27 and probably the SU-37. There are a bunch of reasons why the ACTIVE if put into service with a coat of RAM would be one of the best aircraft in the sky.

1. It can take off at 42mph.
2. It uses very little take off roll.
3. It has thrust veins and can direct its thrust forward.
4. It can land on 1700 feet of runway.
5. It is by far the most maneuverable aircraft the USA has ever built.
6. It can perform post stall manuevers very well due to huge engines.
7. It can turn its canards 90 degrees to act as huge airbrakes.
8. Huge canads, tailplanes and 3d thrust vectoring (I cant remember if thats the ACTIVE or the S/MTD) make it supermanueverable.

A coat of RAM and weapons would make this thing a 5th generation fighter.

posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 12:53 PM
Zaph58 & BW23 ..

thanks for the info guys!

found some vids of the ACTIVE, will try merging them into a single file & upload the file to YouTube later on.

posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 01:12 PM
I was mistaken on your first pic. The S/MTD had two dimensional TVC, the ACTIVE switched it to 3D, and that's when they went back to the normal looking exhaust. I forgot that ACTIVE had 3D capability.

The TF-15 they used in S/MTD and ACTIVE was also involved in the Intelligent Flight Control System program in 2002. I BELIEVE it was put into storage shortly thereafter. IFCS was an amazing program that I hope goes farther. It had a learning capable neural network that was installed on the F-15. It would learn how the plane was expected to fly, and if there was a major systems failure it would automatically reroute systems to keep it flying long enough to land somewhere safely.

(Even though this was an F-15B, at the time of production it was a TF-15A)

[edit on 4/20/2007 by Zaphod58]

posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 03:50 PM
Not too much to add to all that good info, just that the camouflaged one in the middle picture is a photo of a standard F-15E in which the canards and 2D tailpipes have been added for illustrative purposes, this picture was published in Flight many years ago, before the F-15ACTIVE had flown.

posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 01:06 PM
A coating of RAM does not make an aircraft into a 5th generation fighter. F-15 has a pretty high RCS, and if it was that easy to just make a plane substantially less visible to radar then there would not have been the F-117 and B-2 programs.

posted on Apr, 23 2007 @ 12:58 PM
sorry guys, been out of town this past weekend and i was unable to log on to the internet where i was at. regarding the F-15 ACTIVE vids, i still haven't found a way to convert .mov (QuickTime) files into a format that can be uploaded on to youtube. will post links here for sure as soon as i've uploaded them.

here are the links to the pages where i found the .mov (QuickTime) videos

Movie 1
Movie 2

[edit on 23-4-2007 by toreishi]

posted on Apr, 25 2007 @ 12:21 AM
hi guys, i just finished posting the vid of the F-15 ACTIVE over at the Aircraft Video Thread.

here's a direct link to the video on youtube

posted on Aug, 22 2008 @ 06:27 AM
The most important point of the F-15ACTIVE was its canards are differential moving, which means one can goes up when other being down.

posted on Oct, 17 2008 @ 08:28 PM
reply to post by waynos

and then theres the fact that the Phoenix was so heavy only the Tomcat could carry it, plus it was virtually useless with standard Navy ROE: Fire only if fired upon, which defeats the main purpose of the AIM-54. By the time they got in range to fire at you, the Phoenix's range advantage was cancelled out. Plus, if you managed to get into an engagement, there was no way you could use it. The Phoenix had to be fired into a large 'basket' radar cone, where it'd activate its own radar and find a target on its own. Fire it into a turning dogfight and you risk splashing your buddies.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in