Nahen

I still flying in F-15C

I honestly never thought of any kind of forcefeedback on the stick. I fly on a standard Warthog, in the near future I am replacing the grip itself with a copy of the F-15 stick and modifying the throttle with the elevation knob of the radar antenna that is in the F-15. Somehow I don't feel the need for the stick to shake or resist me. Maybe if I was building a specific rotating cockpit working in three axes, I would think about it

I didn't use physics... Okay, then explain to me how an object with a smaller frontal cross-section, posing less aerodynamic resistance and having a similar mass and subjected to a similar driving force can accelerate slower in a medium that resists air? Apart from the fact that the F-15 has less force to weight,

March is getting closer...

The F-15E is an "aerodynamically stable" design - like all F-15 family aircraft. I don't need FbW. Yes, it has systems supporting the "leading" of the aircraft to facilitate it, But it is not and will never be, even in the latest EX, a typical FbW, which is primarily to keep the aerodynamically unstable airframe "level", with the often shifted center of gravity, which without constant control and adjustments to all control surfaces would not have been able to maintain a stable position in the air. Unless we consider it in the category of "traditional" cables, cables connected to control surface actuators or servomotors - without FbW, or a rod connected only by wiring with electrical and hydraulic converters - with FbW. Anyway, the F-15E and newer have pilot assist systems, which makes them different from earlier versions. There isn't much of a difference on the stick.

https://www.tickcounter.com/countdown/3816402/f-15e-pre-order

Acceleration in this case is determined by the thrust-to-weight ratio and nothing else. And as if you didn't curve by reality: on "empty" For F-15E---0.93 For F-16---1.09 With an average take-off weight and 50% fuel: F-15E --- 1.1 F-16C --- 1.24 Both are powered by the same motors: F-15E: 2 × F100-PW-229, thrust: 17,800 lb dry (79 kN); 29,160 lb (129.7 kN) with afterburner each; F-16C Block 52: 1 × Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-229 for Block 52 aircraft, 17,800 lbf (79 kN) thrust dry and 29,160 lbf (129.7 kN) with afterburner.) It's just that the F-15E weighs 14,379 kg empty, and the F-16C 8,573 kg. So you can do whatever you want but you can't cheat physics. And finally - yes the F-15E is faster. What I wrote about is: able to achieve much higher speeds, with the increase in ceiling the advantage in speed increases. But still the F-16 will accelerate faster until it reaches its top speed and then eventually the F-15E will catch up and overtake it due to the higher top speed. Therefore, the F-16 in maneuvering combat should, assuming that both machines have equally good pilots, win every skirmish. It recovers energy much faster, has much less inertia, and has a much higher so-called "roll rate" - which is not without significance in maneuver combat.

The F-16 has much more excess power than the F-15 of all versions. That's why it accelerates so much faster.

Well, in the subject of F-15E vs F / A-18 there was a question about the F-16 Well, the F-16 accelerates much faster than the F-15 in principle in all conditions. But beyond the lowest altitude range, the higher it gets, the more it lags behind the speed it reaches. In fact, from 10,000 feet and above, the F-15E achieves higher speeds up to the maximum altitude, where it is faster by almost 500 km/h. Of course, everything again depends on the configuration, the amount of armament and everything that affects aerodynamic drag and reduces the thrust to weight ratio.

Faster is F-15, but better accelerate on lower altitude mby have F/A-18. Thrust to Weight ratio for F/A-18 is 0.96 for F-15E is 0.93 - very similar.

I assume that the "start" of the Sparrow from the F-15E is specially programmed so as not to damage the visors from LITENING In addition, different versions of rockets can also come into play.

I confirm that a large part of the pilots who did not fly from Keflavik at that time think so - hence my categorical claim that the F-15Cs were not operationally used with CFT. Single photos could not be a confirmation, because they could always be taken on some occasion of training, research or other occasional situations. It turns out that 57 FIS and the period 1985-93/4 in Keflavik is something like "dark zone" or "area 51" in the history of the F-15C.

Base: 1 - After the start, throttle at 95% on the clocks on the right panel, the first two clocks under the RWR (the round display on the right) There you control the operation of the engines - after firing the engines on "idle" - iddle - work around 65-67%. The maximum value on these clocks is 96%. In fact, the afterburner ignites around 96%, so before you learn to "hear" and "feel" it after the start and whenever you do not need the afterburner - engines at a maximum of 95%. 2 - Velocity vector and Aircraft datum - these two markers need to be controlled. The F-15 is heavy and at higher altitudes and too low speed, it noses up above AoA 18-20 degrees and slows down. Very often, beginners fly on boost to avoid "uncontrolled" deceleration. Then the only way to "return" to level flight is to accelerate - i.e. use the afterburner and use fuel. You have to get into the habit of controlling these two markers and react faster enough to increase the engine speed enough to maintain the speed, but not to abuse or not to use the afterburner at all. 3 - altitude/ceiling - the higher you are, the less fuel you use. The F-15 is a plane that likes high altitudes. You want to fool around, fly low, etc - you will use a lot of fuel. You want to fly longer, shoot something down, typically in BvR you fly high and relatively fast. High means over 35,000 feet. 40-50 is the perfect range for the F-15C. At 40-45 thousand, if you accelerate to Mach 1 with the afterburner removed and the engines at 95%, you should maintain a speed of about Mach 0.9 without any problems. If you master the fast climb and acceleration, then in such conditions with two tanks under the wings (don't fly if you don't have to with three) you will be able to fly for two hours. Each use of afterburner consumes fuel drastically - although at high altitudes it is possible to fly on afterburner "relatively" economically - relatively - with full internal tanks, about 30-40 minutes non-stop on afterburners.

Good,I'm after talking on the phone "hot" 57 FIS from Keflavik could fly with CFT. A friend was there around 1994/95 and then transferred to Lakenheath for the 493rd of the 48th Wing. Earlier, I talked to him about various things and asked about CFT and he replied as I wrote. Now we just talked only about it. According to him, when he moved to the UK, the 57th FIS was disbanded / transferred. Hence, it could be as he said - not all machines had CFT at that time - it could be related to moving the planes to another place. I have now started looking at information about the 57th FIS from 1980-1995 and in fact in 1994-5 the 57th FIS was "disbanded" and its functions were rotation taken over by F-15Cs from Lakenheath in UK and from NG. And in fact, there is information that this is the ONLY squadron that operationally used the F-15C with CFT.

It is puzzling that talking quite recently with one of the pilots who flew the F-15C in the late 1980s and early 1990s and was stationed in Keflavik at the time, when I asked him if they flew with CFT, he said no. That yes, he saw several CFTs mounted on several F-15s in the base, but he does not remember that the entire squadron flew with them. So I do not know. I am still not convinced that they are used except in some exceptional situations. The next time I meet him, I'll have to press the subject harder.It is puzzling that talking quite recently with one of the pilots who flew the F-15C in the late 1980s and early 1990s and was stationed in Keflavik at the time, when I asked him if they flew with CFT, he said no. That yes, he saw several CFTs mounted on several F-15s in the base, but he does not remember that the entire squadron flew with them. So I do not know. I am still not convinced that they are used except in some exceptional situations. The next time I meet him, I'll have to press the subject harder.

I've been broke since Valentine's Day when I met my wife

And now it's starting to look different. F-15A with CFT, intercepting T-95 speaks to me about CFT - fact. I have not seen these photos. As for the F-15C, I still maintain that they did not fly operationally with CFT. All the photos I saw were from tests related to the F-15E program. The photo with the practice bombs on the F-15C, if I associate this, concrete F-15C with "photo tags", is one of those that were used for tests in the F-15E program. It is not an operationally flying F-15C, but a test one - owned by McDonnell at the time, as far as I remember. So I don't really know what this is supposed to bring? Tests, tests, tests... And that the F-15C and A could carry stupid bombs everyone know, and so?

Please some proof, document, authorized pilot's account of those "operations". And for all the rest... Did you know that the USAF has dropped the CFT for the F-15EX for today? And what does it bring? Again, because I see you have a comprehension problem - No F-15Es have NEVER flown OPERATIONALLY without CFT until 2022. Here's a picture from 1989 when the first squadron (Seymour Johnson Air Force Base in North Carolina, 4th Tactical Fighter Wing, 336th Tactical Fighter Squadron) reached operational readiness with the F-15E... https://www.alamy.com/five-members-of-the-336th-tactical-fighter-squadron-4th-tactical-fighter-wing-4th-tfw-salute-during-the-playing-of-the-national-anthem-at-a-ceremony-marking-the-squadrons-conversion-to-f-15e-eagle-aircraft-one-of-which-is-behind-them-the-4th-tfw-is-to-be-the-air-forces-first-operational-f-15e-wing-the-squadron-members-are-from-left-sgt-richard-t-donahue-sgt-glenn-r-strow-staff-sgt-thurmand-bodenheimer-lt-col-robert-t-newell-and-maj-rodney-fitzpatrick-base-seymour-johnson-air-force-base-state-north-carolina-nc-country-united-states-of-america-usa-image504267250.html Now show me those first non-CFT F-15Es flying operationally... Proof Please? For now, I can write that I have a UFO in the garage ... more or less that's what you have evidence ...

But you know that these photos have nothing to do with the normal use of these planes? These are photos - one during service work - 605 from Lakenheath in 2013 was in a dilapidated condition as you can see in the photos and in 2015 it came back from the service repainted and renovated. Why do you think she had her CFT taken off? It has been written about a million times - F-15E until 2022 did not fly operationally without CFT only for service inspections, shows and similar "events". How many more times can write the same thing over and over again? Likewise, the USAF F-15A/Cs have not flown with CFT except for exceptional testing, training, etc. programs. 90% of F-15C photos with CFT and bombs come from units that participated in research and testing for the development of the F-15E in the 1980s. None of them had ever flown operationally in this configuration. There were such plans, which was written here more than once, but it never worked out beyond some "local" training. And in two days the next one will come and he will post the same things and tell the same stories.

NO At KadenaAFB, laser-guided bombs were reportedly dropped several times, but the targets has been illuminated from the ground.

What does it mean, it's like a fleeting moment, dew on the grass on a July morning, a girl's smile that you remember for the rest of your life and lasted a few seconds, it's fleeting like politicians' election promises, these two weeks are nothing with all this waiting time... I can handle... I guess..

Explain to me why and how the F-15C responds to targets with different RCS? Eg Su-27 and Su-33 Detects from a greater - much greater distance than the MiG-29S or Su-30? On what basis and how does it detect the F-15C from completely different distances, the F-16C and the F/A-18 from a different distance? Why do these distances change depending on the angle to his radar? And finally, tell me how much hours have you flown the F-15C and how well do you know it? Because I'm afraid that you are writing some "heard" from someone, fairy tales that have nothing to do with the current state of this module. And the truth is that 90% of people flying "serious" modules have no idea how the F-15C module behaves in the air and how its radar and dependent elements of the weapon system work. And believe me, what is in the "manual" is not even 40% of how it works in practice.

Of course

I must reset timer https://www.tickcounter.com/countdown/3816402/f-15e-pre-order

The day of spending the money in the pre-order for the F-15E is like ordering something online, pure joy and then just waiting for the courier Someday it will come