Looking for F-15C + 8x AIM-120

Hi folks,

I'm looking for a source or photo/ image, with a F-15C that carries eigth AIM-120. :helpsmilie:

I know, the Eagle can carry the AMRAAM on each pylon, but I never saw a picture with 8 AMRAAMs. Often it carries six AIM-120C and two AIM-9 ... sometimes the AMRAAM on the inner wingpylons, sometimes on the outer wingpylons.

If possible, the source, image, photo comes from combat deployment or an exercise, not a test phase or "what possible is".

And in case, it's impossible ... why is it impossible and why can the F/A-18 carry 10 AIM-120? :huh:

Thanks a lot & kind regards,

Fire

Let see if we can find something. As per the F-18, it could be wiring related or the aircraft software, etc. Not sure

:D Still looking for F-15

Not sure I understand the question. The ability of the F-15 to carry 8 AIM-120's does of course not translate to it operationally doing so. In practical combat there's seldom any reason for this, and the utility of the AIM-9's for specific scenarios outweighs the advantages of 8 BVR missiles instead of 6.

So not a question possibility, but practicality Makes sense

It is possible, but operationally, unless you know all your combat will be BVR or at least, not a turning fight, then there is value in taking a pair of dogfight missiles - especially AIM-9X which will out-perform a 120 in the short-range arena.

Exercises use a limited number of specially equipped captive carry weapons, so you wouldn't even see a full payload there.

In terms of combat deployment, a huge Slammer fussilade is not necessary in current environments, so you won't see it there, either.

It is just a matter of payload utility, that's all.

Anyway, I have a feeling you are trying to prove something and if so - what is it?

Hi folks,

 

I'm looking for a source or photo/ image, with a F-15C that carries eigth AIM-120. :helpsmilie:

 

I know, the Eagle can carry the AMRAAM on each pylon, but I never saw a picture with 8 AMRAAMs. Often it carries six AIM-120C and two AIM-9 ... sometimes the AMRAAM on the inner wingpylons, sometimes on the outer wingpylons.

 

If possible, the source, image, photo comes from combat deployment or an exercise, not a test phase or "what possible is".

 

 

And in case, it's impossible ... why is it impossible and why can the F/A-18 carry 10 AIM-120? :huh:

 

 

Thanks a lot & kind regards,

Fire

For what is Worth, The missiles rails mounted on the F-15 wings are capable of carrying both AIM-9 and 120. But I agree with EtherealN.

Yeah, I know they carry AIM-9, because today it needs still a VID. And with a VID, you're in the range for AIM-9 or in close air combat scenario.

But it would be interesting to see such a picture. :thumbup:

Why I'm looking for? Some mates (sqrd. and HL) carry 8 AIM-120s and I want to know, if that's real.

I try to avoid such "simulation possible payloads" and carry often a 602, 404 or 422.

kind regards,

Fire

I do not think it has ever been done operationally - the F-15 CAN do it, but for the reasons discussed above, this is currently not needed.

I would expect to see such a configuration if you were looking at engaging a wall of numerically superior bandits with your own wall of eagles, then pulling away and leaving the cleanup to the vipers.

I think your set ups are pretty realistic in terms of reality, but what about in terms of the game? Unfortunately there is not a whole lot of advantage to packing a 9 instead of a 120.

If there is no picture then there is no proof! That's the standard that was established for EA missile. :smartass: So, picture please, or else ...

If there is no picture then there is no proof! That's the standard that was established for EA missile. :smartass: So, picture please, or else ...

:megalol::megalol:

I know, I play a game. But I would do it as much as real.

I don't want to carry 8 AMRAAMs to kill 3 or 4 targets per round. I think, that's not real, too. It's ok for me, when I kill 1 or 2 bandits with my payloads. Normally I have my wingman and he can kill 1 or 2 bandits, too. With the superior Eagle in FC 2.0, 4 killed bandits for two F-15 are good and possible ... maybe real, too.

So, no need for 8 AMRAAMs. But I want still like to see a picture. :)

kind regards,

Fire

All the pictures you provided were of training missiles, obviously marked as such. So far, there exists no trace of the EA being used in an operational capacity by anyone, at least not in any public records.

Insofar as 8x 120's go, all you need to know that the FCR will aim 8 AMRAAMs simultaneously, and all rails will accept an AIM-120, as well as there having been 120's mounted on each rail - ie. there are no instances where you can point to some rail being consistently un-occupied by a 120.

I think the difference in evidence is tremendous ;)

If there is no picture then there is no proof! That's the standard that was established for EA missile. :smartass: So, picture please, or else ...

I know, I play a game. But I would do it as much as real.

Then you must consider the threat situation.

I don't want to carry 8 AMRAAMs to kill 3 or 4 targets per round. I think, that's not real, too. It's ok for me, when I kill 1 or 2 bandits with my payloads. Normally I have my wingman and he can kill 1 or 2 bandits, too. With the superior Eagle in FC 2.0, 4 killed bandits for two F-15 are good and possible ... maybe real, too.

 

So, no need for 8 AMRAAMs. But I want still like to see a picture. :)

 

 

kind regards,

Fire

No, I think that is incorrect; a real F-15 pilot would want to bag as many kills per sortie as he could, situation permitting ;)

The trick here again is mission tasking.

All the pictures you provided were of training missiles, obviously marked as such.

Ok, do you have pictures with such training missiles? And what's the difference in weight between training missiles and the normal AIM-120?

kind regards,

Fire

I was responding to Hajduk and his R-27EA quest ... however.

As far as the AIM-120 goes, I don't think there is a difference in weight, but I could be wrong. They remove the rocket motor and perhaps the explosives, but a lot of the electronics remain in order to maintain the real aircraft-missile interface.

This way the aircraft can give you a real built-in-test result, you get real responses from the hardware when activating the simulating the missile launch, etc etc.

Training missiles usually have a blue band as far as AMRAAMs go. Here is an image with training missiles:

Ok, do you have pictures with such training missiles? And what's the difference in weight between training missiles and the normal AIM-120?

 

 

kind regards,

Fire

As far as the AIM-120 goes, I don't think there is a difference in weight, but I could be wrong. They remove the rocket motor and perhaps the explosives, but a lot of the electronics remain in order to maintain the real aircraft-missile interface.

 

This way the aircraft can give you a real built-in-test result, you get real responses from the hardware when activating the simulating the missile launch, etc etc.

 

Training missiles usually ha ve a blue band as far as AMRAAMs go.[/img]

Just to expand on GG's post, training (or inert) weapons (not just AMRAAMs) will be either marked with a blue band or wholly or partially painted blue. In the case of missiles, each section of the weapon (such as rocket motor, warhead) will have the appropriate marking, blue for inert or yellow for live. This can be seen in GG's photo, notice the three blue lines, on separate sections of the missile.

Inert weapons can be nothing more than lumps of metal with the same weight and aerodynamic characteristics as the live weapon, or as GG suggested be a live seeker/guidance section with inert warhead and motor, the latter being most common. In terms of weight inert ordnance is as close as possible to the live ordnance, usually within a few pounds.

It's also not really a case of removing live rocket motors or warheads, inert training ordnance is purchased as exactly that in most cases as it requires less maintenance than live versions of the same weapon, therefore allowing it to be flown almost indefinitely. In comparison live ordnance has a very limited number of available flight hours before it must be disposed of (either by being used, or scrapped), due to the limited life of the explosive warhead and rocket motor. In most cases weapons used for live fire training are weapons close to being life expired.

I would not say it is unreal to have 8 AIM-120's on a F-15. It depends on the mission scenario like some already said above.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/amraam-990493c.jpg

Like F-16's sometimes use 4x AIM-120 without AIM-9's on the plane. And also, I believe 6x (RL) AIM-120 quit enough for any enemy aircraft, to scare him away or even shoot him down. If you have a RL F-15, against some old russian hardware, from some countrys.

I guess if they would know the enemy is useing SU-30's or what ever, I think they would carry 8x AIM-120C's on the F-15's, through the fact that the rule of engagment in this case would mean BVR only on such enemy's, and any merge has to be avoided.

But don't forget in FC2.0, we have MiGs with 6x R-77, flyeing around as well.

Well I'm getting closer

F-16 Block 40 Buzzards rule :D

Up to Six in the correct aircraft now.... maybe... can't tell if the first two on the cheek stations are AIM-120 or AIM-7, :thumbup::joystick::book:

Station 5 and 8 are AIM-7 Sparrows. This was a regular payload, as the AIM-120A entered the service.

422 means 4x AIM-120A, 2x AIM-7, 2x AIM-9 ... 242 was also often carried.

Today regular payload is 602 or 404.

Keep up the search! :thumbup:

kind regards,

Fire

It just dawned on me that my post might be miss understood. I agree with EtherealN and GGTharos, I was just wondering if I can find a photo.

As far as the AIM-120 goes, I don't think there is a difference in weight, but I could be wrong. They remove the rocket motor and perhaps the explosives, but a lot of the electronics remain in order to maintain the real aircraft-missile interface.

AFAIK they weight the same, with same CG with internal ballast for this purpose. When training with them the aircraft is flown with the same trim as with real munitions. :)

I would not say it is unreal to have 8 AIM-120's on a F-15. It depends on the mission scenario like some already said above.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/amraam-990493c.jpg

Like F-16's sometimes use 4x AIM-120 without AIM-9's on the plane. And also, I believe 6x (RL) AIM-120 quit enough for any enemy aircraft, to scare him away or even shoot him down. If you have a RL F-15, against some old russian hardware, from some countrys.

 

I guess if they would know the enemy is useing SU-30's or what ever, I think they would carry 8x AIM-120C's on the F-15's, through the fact that the rule of engagment in this case would mean BVR only on such enemy's, and any merge has to be avoided.

 

But don't forget in FC2.0, we have MiGs with 6x R-77, flyeing around as well.

Pilots talk basicaly goes like this?

"Sidewinder??? why would we want that POS if we have AMRAAM's? Why use the butter knife when you can use the katana to split him in half?" ;)

Long story short, for those who use AIM-9L/M the AMRAAM is the preferred weapon. It is just as good as a short range weapon but much larger warhead. It wouldnt be an absurd to take 8 AMRAAMs on F-15's and F-16 often carry 4 or 6 with no 'winders. It would be dammned expensive though and thats probably the main reason why an 8 active load is not common practice. Another reason is because missile life counts down with the number of flight hours on rails. While you wont see this on peace time IMHO at war it is very possible against a numerous air force.

To bad we can't see this aircraft from the bottom,

maybe I will look at Eglin.af.mil