F-15C PFM

[Bufo]

Is the F-15s really has PFM?

 

I don't know how it is supposed to fly, but it feels like the MIG-29 and Su-33 which only have the standard flight model. For example if you have asymmetrical load on wings, it doesn't bank on its side like the Su-27, and the nose is not that sensitive relative to thrust.

[GGTharos]

It will bank with asymmetric loading. Try loading a fuel tank on one wing only.

 

As for speed changes, the f15 auto trims to 1G. The CAS does a lot more than that.

[Sryan]

Yes it does.

 

While I'm not as well versed on the details like others may be, it has a mechanical/hydraulic system that sort of resembles a fly-by-wire system, but isn't exactly like it.

 

The Pitch Trim Compensator (PTC) keeps the stabilators in a certain position while keeping regards to the stick position and the g-force the aircraft is enduring. This is why the nose of the F-15 is steady regardless of acceleration. The system tries to keep it on 1g.

 

A way to visualise the system at work is by sitting on the runway, going to external view and moving the stick left or right, and then up and down. You can see the ARI (Aileron Rudder Interconnect) and RRC (Roll Ratio Changer) commanding the rudder and stabilators (elevators) to help create the motion for the aircraft you seem to desire by stick inputs.

 

I still feel you need to trim with assymetric load.

 

TL;DR it's technology that gives the F-15 it's on-rail feelings.

 

Someone else may be able to tell you more about it or correct any mistake I may have made in my explanation.

[pepin1234]

Is the F-15s really has PFM?

 

I don't know how it is supposed to fly, but it feels like the MIG-29 and Su-33 which only have the standard flight model. For example if you have asymmetrical load on wings, it doesn't bank on its side like the Su-27, and the nose is not that sensitive relative to thrust.

 

Thanks for open this thread. I have been shoot down by F-15 doing dogfight just after take off with fuel tank full of fuel. Also they have the ability to pull high rate of G's forces without damage wings or airframe while you can see how the Su-27 can be broken apart when he pull high G's with G's force limit command (S), or even when he is overloaded with fuel, see here https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=164429 I also have catch out lot of F-15 pilots getting 12000m-14000m loaded with 3 fuel tanks just after they take off.

 

See here my thread open and after some discussion was closed. The same you are talking was the same I comment in this thread. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=155452

 

Edited September 11, 2016 by pepin1234

[Sweep]

Thanks for open this thread. I have been shoot down by F-15 doing dogfight just after take off with fuel tank full of fuel. Also they have the ability to pull high rate of G's forces without damage wings or airframe while you can see how the Su-27 can be broken apart when he pull high G's with G's force limit command (S), or even when he is overloaded with fuel, see here https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=164429 I also have catch out lot of F-15 pilots getting 12000m-14000m loaded with 3 fuel tanks just after they take off.

 

See here my thread open and after some discussion was closed. The same you are talking was the same I comment in this thread. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=155452

 

(picture)

 

You weren't able to prove anything in your thread(s), FWIW.

 

You think it is wrong, but you cannot prove that it is, even if many on the forum agree with you.

 

Try loading a fuel tank on one wing only.

 

1 wing bag is the best bag loading ever, IMO. :megalol:

[JazonXD]

Actually when you have an asymmetric load, (just fired one amraam for example) there's actually banking of the AC with that. However, because of the PTC system that automatically trims the aircraft to almost 1G constantly, you'd have to put the plane into level flight and then let off the stick for a while and you'll see the plane pull very slowly and slightly to that one side.

[Ktulu2]

Pepin, as said in many threads, the F-15 was designed with an OPERATIONAL limit of 9G (so much more for longevity&accidents) unlike the -27 that was meant to pull 9G only in clean configs. Just go look at combat logs for F-15s and you'll see it is normal...

 

As for 3-Bags climbout, it's not because the pilot has a highly unefficient loadout and not cost effective one that he shouldn't be able to reach only 50 000', which is 10 000 feets BELOW the SERVICE ceilign. On top, he is about to stall so he just went from mach 1 to near-vertical from take off.

If 2-bags F-15 can fly stable at 60 000' (up to 100K' clean peak), I don't see why 3-baggers couldn't reach similar altitudes as two bags, especially for like 30 seconds before stalling...^...

 

Now back on topic hehe

 

The PFM of the eagle becomes VERY apparent at high AoA (20+) below 150 knots, or anywhere near stalls in general, where you really ''feel'' the stall.

If you wanna test the pfm, go CAS and YAW controls off and enjoy the flanker feeling, these are the systems that give the eagle its semi-FBW.

[Bufo]

I didn't know this plane was this "smart" :)

 

Thank you for the info!

[will-]

Left shift +1

Left shift +2

Left shift +3

 

While toggle the switches controlling the ptc.

[mytai01]

As beautiful as the Su-27 is, it's no F-15! The F-15 is simply a much better aircraft. The Russians try, but they have never quite been able to match the same level of excellence as the US aircraft industry. This is why everyone was so shocked when the Su-27 and MiG-29 were first revealed.

[DarkFire]

If you wanna test the pfm, go CAS and YAW controls off and enjoy the flanker feeling...

 

He he that actually made me :lol:

 

As beautiful as the Su-27 is, it's no F-15! The F-15 is simply a much better aircraft. The Russians try, but they have never quite been able to match the same level of excellence as the US aircraft industry. This is why everyone was so shocked when the Su-27 and MiG-29 were first revealed.

 

Horses for courses. Different aircraft built to differing philosophies and in some respects for differing purposes. If we compare a post-Gulf War 1 F-15C with a mid-1980's Su-27S then yes the Eagle is superior at some, even most things. Compare it with an Su-30MKI and the difference is far less clear.

 

In terms of the aircraft we have in-game, the F-15C enjoys a clear advantage in terms of situational awareness, BVR capability, climb rate and acceleration The Su-27 enjoys a significant advantage in WVR combat and, surprisingly, a small top speed advantage.

 

To answer the OP's post: the CAS in the F-15 trims for 1G, so as an F-15 driver you enjoy care-free handling and within certain limits the aircraft will keep the flight path marker wherever you put it. For the period during which it was designed the F-15 had an incredibly sophisticated control system, far ahead of anything else at the time. If you asymmetrically load the aircraft you'll have to manually trim for roll though.

[GGTharos]

Compare it with an Su-30MKI and the difference is far less clear.

 

After that golden eagle upgrade it's still pretty clear ;)

 

In terms of the aircraft we have in-game, the F-15C enjoys a clear advantage in terms of situational awareness, BVR capability, climb rate and acceleration The Su-27 enjoys a significant advantage in WVR combat and, surprisingly, a small top speed advantage.

 

The F-15 has been flown to M2.7 by NASA, but the thing to keep in mind is that our flight sim doesn't deal with the engine/materials stress that occurs at those speeds due to the combustion chamber temps rising, which are the major limiting factor for speed.

 

However, they don't mean that the engine will burn or explode etc - the 'book' limitations of 1 minute flight time in those regimes is very, very conservative AFAIK.

[DarkFire]

After that golden eagle upgrade it's still pretty clear ;)

 

Ah yes, I remember reading about that. Very interesting as it sounds like the USAF upgrade will bring the current F-15C up to the "2040C" specification if I've read it correctly. I guess the only things that will be at or near parity will be fully implemented EF-2000's and maybe the PAK-FA.

 

Up to 16 missiles, AESA radar, active & passive DEWS... That F-15 Golden Eagle is going to be one tasty warbird. I see the descriptions mentions that it'll be getting link-16 as part of the upgrade. I thought that some Eagles had JTIDS terminals installed for Gulf War 1. Maybe I'm confusing it with something else...

[Frostie]

As beautiful as the Su-27 is, it's no F-15! The F-15 is simply a much better aircraft. The Russians try, but they have never quite been able to match the same level of excellence as the US aircraft industry. This is why everyone was so shocked when the Su-27 and MiG-29 were first revealed.

Would you like some cream with that propoganda pie, just the mention of MiG-31 should stop this Rus bashing. Surely we're old enough to not care for my cock is bigger than your rooster discussions.

If anyone needs a sick bag just PM me i've got a large supply after reading so much of this kind of nauseating nonsense over the years. :D

Edited September 15, 2016 by Frostie

[lunaticfringe]

After that golden eagle upgrade it's still pretty clear ;)

 

 

 

The F-15 has been flown to M2.7 by NASA, but the thing to keep in mind is that our flight sim doesn't deal with the engine/materials stress that occurs at those speeds due to the combustion chamber temps rising, which are the major limiting factor for speed.

 

However, they don't mean that the engine will burn or explode etc - the 'book' limitations of 1 minute flight time in those regimes is very, very conservative AFAIK.

 

On the F-15, the limitation isn't the engine; it's the windscreen.

[wilky510]

If anyone needs a sick bag just PM me i've got a large supply after reading so much of this kind of nauseating nonsense over the years. :D

That's usually a two-way street. I've seen my fair share over the years being a big lurker on these forums for the longest time :megalol:.

[Sierra99]

Would you like some cream with that propoganda pie, just the mention of MiG-31 should stop this Rus bashing. Surely we're old enough to not care for my cock is bigger than your rooster discussions.

If anyone needs a sick bag just PM me i've got a large supply after reading so much of this kind of nauseating nonsense over the years. :D

 

Ya know Frostie you're right...lets just compare verifiable numbers...

How many Air to Air Combat Kills do the F-15s have against Soviet built Aircraft...

How many Air to Air Combat Kills do Soviet Built Aircraft have against F-15s?

 

We'll wait while ya look it up. :music_whistling:

 

Sierra

[Frostie]

Ya know Frostie you're right...lets just compare verifiable numbers...

How many Air to Air Combat Kills do the F-15s have against Soviet built Aircraft...

How many Air to Air Combat Kills do Soviet Built Aircraft have against F-15s?

 

We'll wait while ya look it up. :music_whistling:

 

Sierra

Don't disagree with that, do me a favour and try and comprehend something before responding to it.

 

Proof that the Sea Harrier is far superior to anything Russian also.

Edited September 16, 2016 by Frostie

[Sweep]

Would you like some cream with that propoganda pie, just the mention of MiG-31 should stop this Rus bashing. Surely we're old enough to not care for my cock is bigger than your rooster discussions.

If anyone needs a sick bag just PM me i've got a large supply after reading so much of this kind of nauseating nonsense over the years. :D

 

Don't disagree with that, do me a favour and try and comprehend something before responding to it.

 

[Weta43]

Ya know Frostie you're right...lets just compare verifiable numbers...

How many Air to Air Combat Kills do the F-15s have against Soviet built Aircraft...

How many Air to Air Combat Kills do Soviet Built Aircraft have against F-15s?

 

We'll wait while ya look it up. :music_whistling:

 

Sierra

 

By the same reasoning, the Sea Harrier is a better fighter than anything the Israelis or the French make (Eurofighter?), as the Sea Harriers destroyed 18 (or 20, depending on where you look) Mirage / Nesher aircraft for no losses during the Falklands war

 

Or maybe it's that the Harriers were well trained pilots flying well maintained versions of the most advanced version available, new radar, AIM-120, flying close to home, and with effective GCI, while the Argentinians were (relatively) poorly trained pilots flying badly maintained (no spare parts) instances of considerably older aircraft, at the very limit of their operational range, and without ground control support.

 

 

The F-15 has kills against Russian built aircraft, but in almost every case, it's been against poorly trained pilots flying poorly maintained versions (often held together with string and rubber bands after years of weapons embargoes on parts) of what were downgraded export versions of the aircraft even when new, and that were often a generation older than the F-15's they were up against.

 

 

EDIT:

A Super Tucano armed with AIM-9L would undoubtedly take down a P-51.

Do the Brazilians really make better fighters than the US ?

Edited September 16, 2016 by Weta43

[*Rage*]

By the same reasoning, the Sea Harrier is a better fighter than anything the Israelis or the French make (Eurofighter?), as the Sea Harriers destroyed 18 (or 20, depending on where you look) Mirage / Nesher aircraft for no losses during the Falklands war

 

Or maybe it's that the Harriers were well trained pilots flying well maintained versions of the most advanced version available, new radar, AIM-120, flying close to home, and with effective GCI, while the Argentinians were (relatively) poorly trained pilots flying badly maintained (no spare parts) instances of considerably older aircraft, at the very limit of their operational range, and without ground control support.

 

The F-15 has kills against Russian built aircraft, but in almost every case, it's been against poorly trained pilots flying poorly maintained versions (often held together with string and rubber bands after years of weapons embargoes on parts) of what were downgraded export versions of the aircraft even when new, and that were often a generation older than the F-15's they were up against.

 

+1 (Except replace 120 with Aim9L)

 

And yes British pilots are obviously the best;)

[Frostie]

Sweeps you're a young lad, its Friday night, have a wash, put on that spray you got last Xmas and get out there and find a girl.

 

Protip: smile, always pay cheeky compliments, don't be creepy, if they don't appear interested they're not interested, above all else enjoy yourself then the party will come to you. You can't fail. X

[Sweep]

Sweeps you're a young lad, its Friday night, have a wash, put on that spray you got last Xmas and get out there and find a girl.

 

Protip: smile, always pay cheeky compliments, don't be creepy, if they don't appear interested they're not interested, above all else enjoy yourself then the party will come to you. You can't fail. X

 

:megalol: :thumbup:

[*Rage*]

Ill tell you whos's partying too hard, the engineers at Raytheon. The real world pK has dropped dramatically going from 9L to 9M to 9X. Infact its a big fat zero for the X! Not a single 3rd gen Mig/Mirage kill! Somebody over there needs to get fired...

[Sweep]

Eh, lots of F-4s have ate 'em.

 

Maneuvering ones, too, with CMs...

 

Obviously we should go back to R-3S and AIM-9B/D, though.