IAF Su-30MKI defeaded UK F3 Tornados. Next the EF2000...

[Dudikoff]

Defensively the F-15 would need an overhaul as well although again, it would probably be a low-cost, quick process using existing equipment. Boeing could easily rip flight computers, ECM/towed decoys/chaff and some cheap-as$ RAM stuff from the F/A-18E/F (or even the F-16C+'s).

 

I don't think there is such a quick and low-cost process. All these new systems require time for integration and pretty extensive testings which is all expensive but at the same time doesn't bring a lot of money to the aircraft industry.

 

And in the end, it would still have its large RCS.

[D-Scythe]

The Typhoon is a new generation aircraft. And watching it at the airshows you can understand what that means. I've seen footage of F-15 airshows and you see it's powerful, that climbs and turns extremely well. But the Typhoon (I've seen it live) can do other things, that probably the F-15 is unable to do. That means maneuvres similar to Kobras, where, instead of _turning_ the aircraft actually points the nose... I saw a vertical loop that was closed in really few hundred feets. At top of the loop the Typhoon actually reversed like paper-planes, in a snap... just incredible!

 

If you ever have to get that slow in a dogfight, you've done something seriously wrong. Furballs are the great equalizer in combat; a MiG-21 with Python 4/R-73 is just as lethal a threat as a F-22.

 

Anyway, if you put new Pratt and Whitney engines in the F-15, chances are it'll do stuff no other aircraft can do too.

 

I don't think there is such a quick and low-cost process. All these new systems require time for integration and pretty extensive testings which is all expensive but at the same time doesn't bring a lot of money to the aircraft industry.

 

And in the end, it would still have its large RCS.

 

Well, quick and low-cost are relative terms - such upgrades would be quick/low-cost in comparison to developing a new fighter (a lot cheaper than Eurofighter), but obviously it's gonna be a pretty substantial upgrade. You're basically taking out the old stuff and putting in new computers, engines, radar and TEWS into the jet.

 

It might be better to describe it as "low risk" - everything required is already in service. And yes, the F-15's RCS will still be large in comparison to it's (newer) competitors, but if the F/A-18E's ECM/towed decoys are as good as they say...

[ViperEagle]

There are plainly alot of things that can be done to F-15's to enhance them. Replacing the Cockpits with the MFD type found in the Super Hornet or Raptor for one.

[GGTharos]

Strap on some 229's and add the ACTIVE's TVC getup ... ;)

[TucksonSonny]

There are plainly alot of things that can be done to F-15's to enhance them. Replacing the Cockpits with the MFD type found in the Super Hornet or Raptor for one.

 

The Rafale, eurofighter, Su-37 and F-22 have an airframe surface made up of more than 70% Carbon firbe composites. Even the engines are made smaller and stronger because of the use of Carbon firbe composites.

Advantages: - 20% lighter / 50% stronger / smaller RCS / "radar absorbing material (RAM)" improves stealth cap.

Desadvantage: More expensive

This is not the case with the F-15 / F-16 ;)

[Frostie]

Ive heard of going down with the sinking ship but this F15 loving is going way ott.:wacko:

You guys conveiniently forgot that 6 F15s got owned by one superRaptor Xwing, or do u pull that chestnut out when its non american planes on the line against the ohh precious one, fact is you claim F22 owns all because of its smaller RCS then why not EF,Rafale,Grippen etc against super inferior stealthless planes ,maybe cos there foreign:D

[Guest IguanaKing]

IOT&E and DACT have different rules/goals. How's that for a quick answer? :D

[ViperEagle]

The Su-37 doesnt exist anymore.

 

Just a little FYI

[D-Scythe]

Ive heard of going down with the sinking ship but this F15 loving is going way ott.:wacko:

You guys conveiniently forgot that 6 F15s got owned by one superRaptor Xwing, or do u pull that chestnut out when its non american planes on the line against the ohh precious one, fact is you claim F22 owns all because of its smaller RCS then why not EF,Rafale,Grippen etc against super inferior stealthless planes ,maybe cos there foreign:D

 

Never said anything about F-15s owning Raptors - it never will. The other new fighters, like Eurofighter, Rafale, etc. are NOT stealth - they have a smaller RCS for sure, but that just means the F-15's AESA radar will pick them out at 120 miles rather than 140.

 

Detection 101 - doppler signature is usually a much more important factor in detection than RCS *except* from max radar range. You could have the RCS of a B-52 but if you have no doppler, you're invisible. Likewise, you can have the RCS of an F-117, but provided that the radar is within maximum detection range for your RCS, you're gonna be picked up.

 

And some of you need to think more BVR. Sure, dogfights happen, and will always happen, but it never happens by choice. The victor of the engagement has long been decided BVR by the time the first SRAAM is fired. You win BVR, you win WVR, pure and simple. And unless it's stealthed or a MiG-31, nothing can consistenly out-BVR a good pilot in an Eagle, especially an updated one with -229A engines.

[Starlight]

And some of you need to think more BVR. Sure, dogfights happen, and will always happen, but it never happens by choice. The victor of the engagement has long been decided BVR by the time the first SRAAM is fired. You win BVR, you win WVR, pure and simple. And unless it's stealthed or a MiG-31, nothing can consistenly out-BVR a good pilot in an Eagle, especially an updated one with -229A engines.

 

Dogfights or fights WVR can still happen. That is because often visual ID is still required by RoE. That obviously puts superior forces to disadvantage, because WVR is much more dangerous and unpredictable. While this not being the rule, it may still be the case, even in present days.

 

If you remember, many kills done by USAF recently were made WVR... maybe with AMRAAMS, but still within a few miles.. you could clearly see bandits and fireballs in the HUD footage.

[ViperEagle]

If a bogey is ID'ed as a bandit by AWACS, and the F-15's IFF system ID's it as such, then the F-15 would fire BVR.

 

In an actual war, if a bandit gets WVR, you've screwed up.

[Guest IguanaKing]

There haven't been any actual wars involving the US in over 60 years. VID, even with AWACS, IFF, and NCTR in full operation, becomes a political consideration in limited-scale conflicts.

[Frostie]

Never said anything about F-15s owning Raptors - it never will.

?? you've lost me there ,who said what

The other new fighters, like Eurofighter, Rafale, etc. are NOT stealth - they have a smaller RCS for sure, but that just means the F-15's AESA radar will pick them out at 120 miles rather than 140.

I think you are seriously underestimating the RCS size on 4th Gen aircraft.

And unless it's stealthed or a MiG-31, nothing can consistenly out-BVR a good pilot in an Eagle, especially an updated one with -229A engines.

On what basis ,the humiliation of meek Mig29A's.

[Guest IguanaKing]

 

Detection 101 - doppler signature is usually a much more important factor in detection than RCS *except* from max radar range. You could have the RCS of a B-52 but if you have no doppler, you're invisible. Likewise, you can have the RCS of an F-117, but provided that the radar is within maximum detection range for your RCS, you're gonna be picked up.

 

 

This would only be true in a look-down situation, and then, how are you going to stop moving? In a helicopter maybe, but I think its already been proven that the rotor blades can give you away. Besides, the doppler effect is related to the energy coming back to the receiver of the radar that transmitted the signal. That energy has to be of sufficient magnitude for the radar receiver to think of it as anything but noise. So, RCS and doppler are inescapably linked to each other. :smilewink:

[GGTharos]

I think you are seriously underestimating the RCS size on 4th Gen aircraft.

 

No, actually, because of the nature of the relationship of detection range to RCS, he's not. The thing here is that those LO aicraft will deny the F-15 a long-range detection advantage, so the F-15 doesn't get to set up before the others do. That and in of itself is a big thing though.

 

On what basis ,the humiliation of meek Mig29A's.

 

Superior hardware and training :)

[Frostie]

Not only that but the lockon range is significantly reduced.:idea:

[Frostie]

Superior hardware and training :)

HAHA nice try but definately the wrong answer.

[Guest IguanaKing]

The LO technology being incorporated by the newer fighters, including the Eurofighter and Rafale definitely reduce the effectiveness of some of the Eagle's best traits. I wouldn't want to place any bets on a gloves-off fight between just two aircraft with equally-trained and skilled pilots in this contest. But, on the other hand, I'm not going to accept claimed "victory" in DACT as proof of anything either, because that isn't what DACT is for.

 

Oh...just a side-note on the stability of Russian electronics. I have seen nothing in the Eastern aircraft I work on to indicate that its a problem. Sadly, the only reason I end up working on them is when the domestic stuff in them breaks. I can't deny it, Russian avionics don't have as many bells and whistles, but reliability is definitely NOT their weak point, they're solid as a rock.

[GGTharos]

HAHA nice try but definately the wrong answer.

 

Exactly right if fighting Russian hardware and/or most European air forces ;)

[SUBS17]

HAHA nice try but definately the wrong answer.

 

Read the interview with a Mig29A pilot from Germany, BVR the mig is toast but WVR is another story.

[Pilotasso]

WHere you guys getting the reports from russian electronics being unstable?

 

They are not top rated granted that but I never heard of such a thing. Every Aircraft in service measures their onboard reliability by malfunctions/hour. Imagine that! :)

 

As a matter Of curiosity the attack on Libya in 1986 at the city of tripoli, involved 24 F-111's, 12 of wich were no go at the time of crossing the mediterranean, and only 8 managed to attack due to glitches that come from operating equipment for long hours in long range missions. Source: Discovery Wings, General Dynamis F-111. :)

[D-Scythe]

Not only that but the lockon range is significantly reduced.:idea:

 

Nope. For Western radars, because of their design, lock on range is the same as detection range (LOMAC has got this wrong). Swingkid would be able to explain this in more detail if you wanna dig deeper into it.

 

This would only be true in a look-down situation, and then, how are you going to stop moving? In a helicopter maybe, but I think its already been proven that the rotor blades can give you away. Besides, the doppler effect is related to the energy coming back to the receiver of the radar that transmitted the signal. That energy has to be of sufficient magnitude for the radar receiver to think of it as anything but noise. So, RCS and doppler are inescapably linked to each other.

 

No, it would be true in a look up or look down situation. Look down is only different because naturally the radar has to deal with more clutter.

[Guest IguanaKing]

No, it would be true in a look up or look down situation. Look down is only different because naturally the radar has to deal with more clutter.

 

No. As I said, doppler only becomes important in look-down situations. In look-up, you have no other clutter, hence doppler filtering is not necessary for detection. As Rhen once said, in a look-up situation there is no notch.

 

Pilotasso, 18 F-111Fs (3 flights of 6 aircraft) of the 48th ended up attacking Tripoli, not 8. 6 of the original 24, along with one Raven, returned to RAF Lakenheath after the first re-fueling (no information about why they returned has been released, to my knowledge). The rest pressed on in that 6400 nm mission and put their bombs on target. 1 F-111F was lost after the mission, including the air crew. The last known cause was engine failure, IIRC.

[Prophet]

Correct me if I am wrong, but doppler pulse radar detect based on doppler shift.

 

Because the ground is stationary, and the radar is moving with the plane, you get a doppler shift, thus creating a backround 'noise'.

 

Therefor there is always a 'notch'.

[Guest IguanaKing]

The radar is interfaced with other systems in the aircraft, the air data system for one, that tells the radar how fast the aircraft is moving and which way the plate is pointed. Stationary objects give a doppler shift which matches the speed of the transmitting aircraft, therefore they are filtered out by the receiver's processor. If the object is moving at a significant positive or negative closure speed in relation to the ground clutter, then it creates a doppler shift different from the speed of the transmitting aircraft, thus its detected. When the plate is pointed above the horizon (look-up), the radar then knows that doppler filtering of the incoming signal is no longer necessary, so the notch disappears.