Option to remove CFTs

[Coole28]

3 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

The F-15E doesn't have CFTs

 

Dear God somebody lock this thread already.

[draconus]

They forgot to rename the fuel indicator switch position which says "CONF TANK"

[Spurts]

and the manuals which all call out CFT.  FAST Pack was the original program but it was largely abandoned.  There were versions with internal ECM, internal IR, extra motors, and internal weapons, and many other things.

[henshao]

If you wanted to call this a FAST pack I ain't gonna stop you

 

[SkateZilla]

1 hour ago, Spurts said:

and the manuals which all call out CFT.  FAST Pack was the original program but it was largely abandoned.  There were versions with internal ECM, internal IR, extra motors, and internal weapons, and many other things.

Considering the "CFT"s have been expanded during the last 30 years to include more hardpoints, and more computers,

I'd say the program was very much alive, they just didnt want all the niche packs (Augmented thrust, buddy tanker, gun pod, crop duster etc)

 

[Rainmaker]

8 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

Considering the "CFT"s have been expanded during the last 30 years to include more hardpoints, and more computers,

I'd say the program was very much alive, they just didnt want all the niche packs (Augmented thrust, buddy tanker, gun pod, crop duster etc)

 

Fast Packs and CFTs are two different things.  They were never the same thing. 

[SkateZilla]

the CFTs are part of the Fast Packs.

[Rainmaker]

2 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

the CFTs are part of the Fast Packs.

that’s a big ol negative. Internals arent the same and never have been. 
 

fast packs were always considered CFTs.  The FAST portion is just a dressy name. The E CFTs, however, are quite a bit different internally. 

Edited August 15, 2022 by Rainmaker

[SkateZilla]

Funny, cause the part numbers are all under the Fast Pack program designation,

The current CFTs might not be part of the original 10 Designs, but pretty sure the program continued on,

the F-15E CFTs are more than just Conformal Fueltanks, they house electronics as well as interfaces for A2A and A2G Weapons, and have changed configurations multiple times.

The Same CFTs are also compatible with F-15C and Ds.

FAST Packs, are Fuel And Sensor, Tactical, The ONLY thing they dropped was Sensors from the -E Packs (AS they've Adopted a pretty decent combo of Litening and Sniper Pods,

If anything, they are called FAT Packs now, bahaha,

Regardless, the interface being used is the same interface developed for the FAST Packs.
The ANG is procuring new CFT's under FAST Pack Part Numbers for their F-15Cs

[Spurts]

I see where you are coming from @SkateZilla.  I can just agree to disagree as far as what to refer to them as.

[Nahen]

On 8/14/2022 at 6:07 AM, SkateZilla said:

The entire thread is a wash,

The F-15E doesn't have CFTs, it has Fast Packs. (Well now they call them CFT's just because).

And the only time they ever really flew with them off is for testing purposes.

as for Weapons stations under fastpacks, Umm, those are the fastpack interfaces for the stations on the fastpacks and/or Fastpacks w/ Electronics...


 

 

 

Explain to me what is in the 15-16 line...

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-15-specs.htm

 

[XCNuse]

40 minutes ago, Nahen said:

Explain to me what is in the 15-16 line...

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f-15-specs.htm

You're missing what Skate was stating.

 

Everyone that wants to be able to remove the "CFT's" are failing to realize that at the loss of those, is also the loss of near all underbelly mountings.

Some of the sensors and nearly all weapons the E model carries are through load bearing mounts on said CFTs.

If you remove them, the F15E can then only carry 4 missiles and the 3 drop tanks (one per wing and centerline).

 

Now call me stupid, but who in this thread wants a "slick" F-15E that can only carry 4 missiles?

Because that's what you'd get if those fastpacks are removed.

[henshao]

4 minutes ago, XCNuse said:

You're missing what Skate was stating.

 

Everyone that wants to be able to remove the "CFT's" are failing to realize that at the loss of those, is also the loss of near all underbelly mountings.

Some of the sensors and nearly all weapons the E model carries are through load bearing mounts on said CFTs.

If you remove them, the F15E can then only carry 4 missiles and the 3 drop tanks (one per wing and centerline).

 

Now call me stupid, but who in this thread wants a "slick" F-15E that can only carry 4 missiles?

Because that's what you'd get if those fastpacks are removed.

"failing to realize" literally exactly what is being requested...a slick F-15E (with 8* missiles)

 

also I'm curious what "computers" and "sensors" you guys keep saying are in these conformal fuel tanks

[Coole28]

3 hours ago, XCNuse said:

Now call me stupid, but who in this thread wants a "slick" F-15E that can only carry 4 missiles?

Some people want a full-fidelity F-15C module.  Since the likely hood of that happening anywhere in the near future (or ever) is slim to none, an E model w/o CFTs is the closest they are going to get.  That idea is somewhat understandable.

Other people are hardcore A/A fanatics and couldn’t give a crap about fidelity or what plane they fly, they just want the raw performance a powerful low-drag plane like a neutered E model would have to give them an edge in PvP.  Those people are lame and deserve to be smitten by every SA-10 out there.

[Rainmaker]

16 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

Funny, cause the part numbers are all under the Fast Pack program designation,

The current CFTs might not be part of the original 10 Designs, but pretty sure the program continued on,

the F-15E CFTs are more than just Conformal Fueltanks, they house electronics as well as interfaces for A2A and A2G Weapons, and have changed configurations multiple times.

The Same CFTs are also compatible with F-15C and Ds.

FAST Packs, are Fuel And Sensor, Tactical, The ONLY thing they dropped was Sensors from the -E Packs (AS they've Adopted a pretty decent combo of Litening and Sniper Pods,

If anything, they are called FAT Packs now, bahaha,

Regardless, the interface being used is the same interface developed for the FAST Packs.
The ANG is procuring new CFT's under FAST Pack Part Numbers for their F-15Cs

I am glad you are trying to school me on CFTs, only spent 17 years working the bird. The interfaces are NOT part of the CFT either, they are on the aircraft side.  And some of THAT isnt there anymore.  I’m fully aware of what a CFT is and isnt. I’m fully aware of what components are on the CFTs and what isnt. I’m fully aware that the part numbers of CFTs have changed 3 times in the last two decades. 

[XCNuse]

4 hours ago, Rainmaker said:

I am glad you are trying to school me on CFTs, only spent 17 years working the bird. The interfaces are NOT part of the CFT either, they are on the aircraft side.  And some of THAT isnt there anymore.  I’m fully aware of what a CFT is and isnt. I’m fully aware of what components are on the CFTs and what isnt. I’m fully aware that the part numbers of CFTs have changed 3 times in the last two decades. 

Guess you'll have to convince Razbam with all available public data about this to convince them that they came off all the time and aren't a major function of the specific model E they're developing then.

 

In the meantime, a photo to at least prove that the hardpoints are on the aircraft and not the removable portions themselves would be outstanding; because even that I'm failing to see.

[Rainmaker]

36 minutes ago, XCNuse said:

Guess you'll have to convince Razbam with all available public data about this to convince them that they came off all the time and aren't a major function of the specific model E they're developing then.

 

In the meantime, a photo to at least prove that the hardpoints are on the aircraft and not the removable portions themselves would be outstanding; because even that I'm failing to see.

Firstly, I didnt comment in any way on the removal of them for flight. Not sure how you are even reaching that kind of conclusion.  My previous comments on the subject are the exact opposite of whatever conclusion you somehow drew from that  

Secondly, hard points are not what I am referring to. 

[Nahen]

14 hours ago, XCNuse said:

You're missing what Skate was stating.

 

Everyone that wants to be able to remove the "CFT's" are failing to realize that at the loss of those, is also the loss of near all underbelly mountings.

Some of the sensors and nearly all weapons the E model carries are through load bearing mounts on said CFTs.

If you remove them, the F15E can then only carry 4 missiles and the 3 drop tanks (one per wing and centerline).

 

Now call me stupid, but who in this thread wants a "slick" F-15E that can only carry 4 missiles?

Because that's what you'd get if those fastpacks are removed.

Anyone who wants to take CFT off has extra sensors somewhere that they won't be able to put on. Do you know why? Because all those who want removable CFTs want the clickable F-15C. They just don't understand that the CFT photo won't make an "E" version like this "C".

[bies]

On 8/9/2022 at 1:56 PM, henshao said:

I know the AFCS on the E has some expanded capability compared to C for high alpha regime.

Opinion of reali life pilots is all 2-seat canopy F-15 are way worse at high AoA than 1-seater due to disturbed air behind 2-seat canopy.

[henshao]

14 minutes ago, bies said:

Opinion of reali life pilots is all 2-seat canopy F-15 are way worse at high AoA than 1-seater due to disturbed air behind 2-seat canopy.

I think you quoted the wrong person

[bies]

2 minutes ago, henshao said:

I think you quoted the wrong person

Why is this wrong person? I'm quoting sentences - not people. I try to never be personal discussing on fora.

[henshao]

i'll just put the whole thing together

On 8/3/2022 at 10:38 PM, henshao said:

I hate to break it to you but the F-15E is somewhat hamstrung compared to the F-15C in air to air. It has lost a lot of the F-15C's underrated low speed high alpha capacity.

 

On 8/9/2022 at 4:36 AM, Allesmor Obranna said:

The F-15E has actually a better low speed/high alpha capability, than the C/D models. It has a re-defined flight control system and an improved handling characteristic. But this advantage on the C model is only available without the CFTs -> which is not the normal operational setup for the E. Loop is closed. 

By the way, the more heavier EX model is even more capable, even with CFTs, due to the digital fly by wire system. 

 

On 8/9/2022 at 7:56 AM, henshao said:

I know the AFCS* on the E has some expanded capability compared to C for high alpha regime. And also I am aware EX has full fly by wire. .... All this being said I would gladly select a C eagle to go against a CFT eagle in a one circle despite the improvements

 

50 minutes ago, bies said:

Opinion of reali life pilots is all 2-seat canopy F-15 are way worse at high AoA than 1-seater due to disturbed air behind 2-seat canopy.

 

*the Automatic Flight Control System may be better without the jet necessarily being better

[Allesmor Obranna]

On 8/16/2022 at 4:11 PM, bies said:

Opinion of reali life pilots is all 2-seat canopy F-15 are way worse at high AoA than 1-seater due to disturbed air behind 2-seat canopy.

Yes, but actually no.

There is no significant AoA losses. (On this video, there is no CFT at all by the way  )

 

 

[bies]

14 minutes ago, Allesmor Obranna said:

There is no significant AoA losses. (On this video, there is no CFT at all by the way  )

I'm citing real life F-15 pilot opinion who flown both types extensively, not an amateur from the internet trying to interpret by himself some video without any telemetry - no offence, nothing personal. Nobody said 2-seat F-15 can't turn at all, it's just significantly worse at low speed/high AoA than 1-seater canopy. That's all.

Nice airshow BTW, thx.

[henshao]

3 hours ago, Allesmor Obranna said:

Yes, but actually no.

There is no significant AoA losses. (On this video, there is no CFT at all by the way  )

 

 

you seem really impressed by this. We do see a period of sustained 25 degrees AoA which isn't bad I guess. But look at the sustained AoA from the F-15 spin tests

 

that plane (F-15A) is at close to 40 degrees angle of attack IMO when "there's right rudder, there's left stick" is input (and it still takes a while to spin)

if you read here they often had to put massive fuel asymmetry into this F-15A just to get it to spin at all, outside of speed-brake development
https://www.docdroid.com/zmrZTQT/f-15-spin-test-program-notes-pdf