F-15X as an interceptor

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

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3249
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post06 Jun 2019, 17:52

vilters wrote:I do NOT believe my eyes.
We are talking INTERCEPTOR Mission.
An INTERCEPTOR doe NOT care for max RANGE, or miles/gallon.

An Interceptor on alert is close to the runway and will take off in full burner ASAP.
(and stay in burner till mission completed)

The interceptor mission is to get to the enemy as FAST as possible and shoot to kill.

All the rest is bla-bla-bla

If you want "range" buy Airbus or Boeing airliners.


Actually it kind of does. It's true that the goal is getting to the threat as quickly as possible, but you can't do that if you run out of gas. The maximum speed/fuel burn rate will depend on how far away the threat happens to be.
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2266
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post06 Jun 2019, 19:01

It's also kind of nice to have longer range than say, the old Nike interceptors. If you only needed a one-way dash to target than a manned platform isn't necessary.
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1765
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post06 Jun 2019, 21:09

In a later hearing Colonel Vilters was asked to explain how one of his pilots ran out of gas before getting in range to intercept an unknown contact that was heading into restricted airspace.

"We do not consider things such as target range, altitude, heading and aspect to be relevant to an intercept scenario, only that it should be performed at max AB for the entire duration"

The pilot of the unknown aircraft later identified as flight 321, an airliner with transponder technicalities was very helpful in spotting the location of the pilot after a near miss with the parachute.

8)
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1656
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post07 Jun 2019, 01:10

What's the purpose of the mission computer then?
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5381
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post07 Jun 2019, 11:56

madrat wrote:It's also kind of nice to have longer range than say, the old Nike interceptors. If you only needed a one-way dash to target than a manned platform isn't necessary.


This was the thinking behind the XF-108, YF-12, and fighter variants of the B-58. Supersonic endurance and thousand mile radius.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

vilters

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1085
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post08 Jun 2019, 10:17

basher54321 wrote:In a later hearing Colonel Vilters was asked to explain how one of his pilots ran out of gas before getting in range to intercept an unknown contact that was heading into restricted airspace.

"We do not consider things such as target range, altitude, heading and aspect to be relevant to an intercept scenario, only that it should be performed at max AB for the entire duration"

The pilot of the unknown aircraft later identified as flight 321, an airliner with transponder technicalities was very helpful in spotting the location of the pilot after a near miss with the parachute.

8)



Remember the attack on the Irak reactor by Israel.
Getting there was mandatory, the return flight home was optional. (But they pulled it off)
Some have a short memory.

If Israel wants to go for the Iranian reactors? They will. Getting back home will be . . . . .
Pretty sure they are already building / hanging VERY large bags on their F-35.

It is all very simple calculation actually.
Target value versus cost/survivability.

What are 4 machines/pilots versus the survival of a population?
THAT is how Israel thinks/operates.

But none of you easy chair/cold beer computer specialists care, do you?
You tuck in a warm comfortable bed with the wife/mistress, no matter what happens elsewhere.
Offline

basher54321

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1765
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2014, 15:43

Unread post08 Jun 2019, 14:32

vilters wrote:
Remember the attack on the Irak reactor by Israel.
Getting there was mandatory, the return flight home was optional. (But they pulled it off)
Some have a short memory.



Comparing a 500nm+ radius strike mission including a low level outbound leg to a short range point intercept mission - great entertainment Vilters. Wonder how far they would have got with a mandatory full AB requirement. :roll:
Offline

vilters

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1085
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post08 Jun 2019, 22:08

Don't compare apples and oranges, I prefer bananas anyway.

Some where discussing the "range".
For a pure interceptor, against a high value target? Take off and intercept is in FULL AB and guess what ? ? ?
=> "Range" is calculated outbound only.<=

Some simply don't get it.

Most here are Americans, right?
Forgotten the Doolittle raid on Tokyo?
Coming "back" from a high priority target is OPTIONAL...
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5381
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post09 Jun 2019, 01:55

vilters wrote:Don't compare apples and oranges, I prefer bananas anyway.

Some where discussing the "range".
For a pure interceptor, against a high value target? Take off and intercept is in FULL AB and guess what ? ? ?
=> "Range" is calculated outbound only.<=

Some simply don't get it.

Most here are Americans, right?
Forgotten the Doolittle raid on Tokyo?
Coming "back" from a high priority target is OPTIONAL...


99.99% of intercepts are meant to come back from.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2266
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post09 Jun 2019, 04:22

Most definitely, maybe even a few more nines to that decimal.
Offline

vilters

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1085
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post09 Jun 2019, 10:46

When a nuclear missiles armed bomber comes your way, you will change your mind and wanna get him as far from homeland as possible.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5381
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post09 Jun 2019, 14:20

vilters wrote:When a nuclear missiles armed bomber comes your way, you will change your mind and wanna get him as far from homeland as possible.


Of the tens of thousands of intercepts that have happened over the years how many times has that happened?
"There I was. . ."
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3362
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 2

Unread post09 Jun 2019, 14:36

If only American F-15's/16's took this (return trip optional) thing seriously on 9/11 LOL

Funny how within minutes of going off flight plan, Payne Stewart's little learjet in 1999 had an F-15/16 off its wing - clear across the country. But on 9/11, 4 commercial airlier jumbo jets go missing (for hours on end) and we can't get a single aircraft in the air to intercept them?

Isn't that just amazing?

I particularly liked the story of how 2 F-16's were scrambled from Andrews AFB in the opposite direction out over the Atlantic ocean vs. protecting Washington. This, after seeing the World Trade Center towers (and by that time, I think the Pentagon too) hit by commercial airliners.

But wait... we were having a big exercise that day, right? And so it's completely plausible/understandable that the career military men in charge of those exercises..... just left American airspace completely defenseless? Because that's what seasoned career military officers (who know better) do, right?

Boy are we lucky the Russians decided not to attack (or even "probe") American air defenses that day. That day....... 60 years after being caught sleeping at Pearl Harbor. 60 years after vowing never to be caught sleeping again.

America's air defenses slept.

Or so we have been told in (revisionist) history since that day. And as the "official" version of those events is repeated on TV documentaries and in textbooks used by our schoolchildren, it becomes accepted fact..

I will be teaching my son to look at these things a bit more critically..
Offline

juretrn

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 411
  • Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 01:09
  • Location: Slovenia

Unread post09 Jun 2019, 16:21

mixelflick wrote:something something implied 9/11 truther

Seriously, mixel?
Russia stronk
Offline
User avatar

botsing

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 826
  • Joined: 05 Dec 2015, 18:09
  • Location: The Netherlands

Unread post09 Jun 2019, 17:03

juretrn wrote:
mixelflick wrote:something something implied 9/11 truther

Seriously, mixel?

Sigh, indeed.

/me puts mixel on foe(ignore) list
"Those who know don’t talk. Those who talk don’t know"
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 26 guests