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

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3641
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post01 Apr 2019, 14:34

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:The E-CFT has more drag than two wing tanks. It does increase pitch response and of course add many more stores locations.


OK I'm a little confused. One poster basically said that the CFT's don't impose too much of a performance penalty. You're saying here that it does, or at least moreso than 2 wing tanks (from a drag perspective). You mention E-CFT's though.

Are the CFT's carried by the F-15E different than the CFT's on a C? Does that perhaps explain the difference??

Another poster mentioned FAST packs. I was under the impression that was just another name used for CFT's. Am I correct there, or were/are FAST packs something different??

It's getting confusing :roll:
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4672
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post01 Apr 2019, 14:53

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:
FYI, I call them E-CFT to distinguish from the C-CFT (FAST pack) that has a much lower DI due to far fewer pylons.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3429
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post01 Apr 2019, 20:25

Just out of curiosity, where did we get the DI for CFTs being higher than EFTs? Every article about them being added to the C/D Eagles suggests better aerodynamics. Is their a chart, that was being referenced?
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4672
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post01 Apr 2019, 20:31

It comes from the Flight Manuals themselves. The CFTs used on C/D Eagles only has a DI of 5 IIRC. This is indeed less than two wing tanks. The CFTs used on E Eagles have a DI of 21 due to all the additional pylons that stick out of them.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6190
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post02 Apr 2019, 00:07

Do they even make the original "Fast Packs" for the F-15 anymore???
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4672
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post02 Apr 2019, 02:58

No, that's why they have to aquire the E-CFT.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6190
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post02 Apr 2019, 02:59

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:No, that's why they have to aquire the E-CFT.



Well, not like the F-15EX is well suited to the "Air Superiority Mission" in the first place....
Offline
User avatar

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1723
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post02 Apr 2019, 07:18

Spurts, how are Boeing claiming 1000-1100 nm for combat radius ?

Image

Image
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6190
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post02 Apr 2019, 09:53

marsavian wrote:Spurts, how are Boeing claiming 1000-1100 nm for combat radius ?

Image

Image




How are they claiming a speed of Mach 2.5??? :doh:
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2439
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post02 Apr 2019, 12:27

C-CFT
Image

E-CFT
Image
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3641
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post02 Apr 2019, 14:34

So they are different, thanks for pointing that out.

Well, I like them on the C given they bring total fuel load up to what a Flanker carries internally. Given dogfights are unlikely, the added persistence would seem to justify their use. Especially in theater's like the SCS. Maybe we'll see them on existing F-15C's until they wear out, in around 5 years or so. In the meantime, for God's sake let's hope we build more F-35's to replace them, vs. F-15EX's...
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4672
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post02 Apr 2019, 15:12

marsavian wrote:Spurts, how are Boeing claiming 1000-1100 nm for combat radius ?

By not listing a payload that they accomplish that mission with.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline
User avatar

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1723
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post02 Apr 2019, 15:22

Can you get that sort of radius on your model clean or with any missile load ?
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4672
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post02 Apr 2019, 17:21

With a standard 8AAM loadout, two wing tanks, and CFTs I see 876nm right now accounting for climb, descent, and actual reserve requirement.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline
User avatar

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1723
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post02 Apr 2019, 18:00

Cool and with the centerline tank another 50-60 nm ?
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: disconnectedradical, MSN [Bot] and 21 guests