Option to remove CFTs

[Despayre]

29 minutes ago, Spurts said:

That's wrong though.  The CFTs on the E, with all the pylons, have more drag than two wing tanks.  It was true on the F-15C CFTs which only had AAM launchers and not 12 pylons.

A. It still doesn't matter, they're not coming off.

B. Where's your proof for that claim? (About the CFT's on the E, not about the F-15C's)

[Nahen]

I am starting to treat this topic as an element of local folklore

[henshao]

flight performance data for clean -220 and -229 F-15E can be found in, amazingly, flight manual

 

fighter CFTs have drag index of ~4, -4 CFTs have drag index of ~20, -5 CFTs ~21. 3.3 each wing pylon which are I guess are technically optional
2 wing tanks drag index ~5.5 each on otherwise clean airplane but 3.3 for each obviously mandatory pylon

[Spurts]

6 hours ago, Despayre said:

A. It still doesn't matter, they're not coming off.

B. Where's your proof for that claim? (About the CFT's on the E, not about the F-15C's)

A: that is what I have been saying this whole thread. 

B. What @henshao posted above. 

[Kula66]

Perhaps Razbam intend to release a 15C later ... If you could take the CFTs off, that would hit sales of the futureA2A bird

Either way, day 1 purchase for me

Edited October 19, 2022 by Kula66

[henshao]

On 10/19/2022 at 4:19 AM, Kula66 said:

Perhaps Razbam intend to release a 15C later ... If you could take the CFTs off, that would hit sales of the futureA2A bird

Either way, day 1 purchase for me

 

Think they'll let you install CFTs on the light grey eagle?

[Kula66]

Who mentioned putting CFTs on 15Cs? Not sure where you're getting that from.

[henshao]

5 hours ago, Kula66 said:

Who mentioned putting CFTs on 15Cs? Not sure where you're getting that from.

Uh, I got that from the F-15?

[Rebel352]

[Deano87]

29 minutes ago, Rebel352 said:

That's not an F-15E.

Can we please stop this thread, its tiresome.

[strikeeagle]

So what is the confusion w/regard to CFT's?  The only time we flew Strikes w/out CFT's was if it was going to Warner Robins.  There was once a demo for sales that flew w/out, but only for that demo. The only squadron of C's that ended up flying with FAST packs was the 57th FIS out of Iceland...that's it.

[draconus]

2 hours ago, strikeeagle said:

So what is the confusion w/regard to CFT's?

This is only discussion about simulating aircraft capabilities vs its history. Ex. it's like not implementing the gun if it was never fired in combat. My vote always goes for capabilities.

But devs already made decision because of lack of data, rarity of the case and work needed vs potential benefits.

[Nahen]

11 hours ago, strikeeagle said:

So what is the confusion w/regard to CFT's?  The only time we flew Strikes w/out CFT's was if it was going to Warner Robins.  There was once a demo for sales that flew w/out, but only for that demo. The only squadron of C's that ended up flying with FAST packs was the 57th FIS out of Iceland...that's it.

Everything changed when the F-15C from Lakenheath was withdrawn... Since then, often and more F-15Es from 492nd and 494th Squadrons fly without CFT. It seems to me that often mainly planes from the 492nd fly without CFT in "air to air" configuration lately. So if razbam will ever release an "upgrade" to the more modern F-15E, maybe removing the CFT will make sense But now for me today it still doesn't make sense

[strikeeagle]

8 hours ago, Nahen said:

Everything changed when the F-15C from Lakenheath was withdrawn... Since then, often and more F-15Es from 492nd and 494th Squadrons fly without CFT. It seems to me that often mainly planes from the 492nd fly without CFT in "air to air" configuration lately.

Interesting.  Do you have any pics?  I'd be interested in seeing the config.  Flying regular sorties w/out CFT's is a big deal.  CFT mounts have to be removed (I broke a 1" drive trying to remove a nut), LAU-106's and vortex generators have to be installed.  Some what of a PITA for maintenance.

Edited December 31, 2022 by strikeeagle

[Cab]

9 hours ago, Nahen said:

Everything changed when the F-15C from Lakenheath was withdrawn... Since then, often and more F-15Es from 492nd and 494th Squadrons fly without CFT. It seems to me that often mainly planes from the 492nd fly without CFT in "air to air" configuration lately. So if razbam will ever release an "upgrade" to the more modern F-15E, maybe removing the CFT will make sense But now for me today it still doesn't make sense

This thread has been a long, winding road for those of us who have stuck with it. 
 

I quote myself from June of this year:

On 6/13/2022 at 8:35 AM, Cab said:

The only reason no one uses the E this way is because it has always been more valuable as a striker. If, on the other hand, a scenario presented itself where a significant number of highly maneuverable fighters were required, they would strip CFTs off and send them up.

[Nahen]

9 hours ago, Cab said:

This thread has been a long, winding road for those of us who have stuck with it. 
 

I quote myself from June of this year:

ITS TRUE, TRUE

10 hours ago, strikeeagle said:

Interesting.  Do you have any pics?  I'd be interested in seeing the config.  Flying regular sorties w/out CFT's is a big deal.  CFT mounts have to be removed (I broke a 1" drive trying to remove a nut), LAU-106's and vortex generators have to be installed.  Some what of a PITA for maintenance.

 

Search here, besides what I sometimes see with my own eyes on this channel there are a lot of videos from recent months from Lakenheath

https://www.youtube.com/@AviationInAction

June this year:
https://youtu.be/2iqXzRQPNNw?t=3879

Edited December 31, 2022 by Nahen

[strikeeagle]

44 minutes ago, Nahen said:

ITS TRUE, TRUE

Search here, besides what I sometimes see with my own eyes on this channel there are a lot of videos from recent months from Lakenheath

https://www.youtube.com/@AviationInAction

June this year:
https://youtu.be/2iqXzRQPNNw?t=3879

 

NOW THAT’S DIFFERENT!!  Thanks for sharing ans cluing me in.  I have never seen that as a config for a sortie.

[Nahen]

27 minutes ago, strikeeagle said:

NOW THAT’S DIFFERENT!!  Thanks for sharing ans cluing me in.  I have never seen that as a config for a sortie.

I think that when the "C" began to be withdrawn, someone noticed the fact that it was the basis to dominate the aviation of Russia during a possible conflict. F-22s alone may not be enough, especially since there is no point in sending F-22s against Su-27/30/35 or MiG-29/35, it is better to use them against AWACS or MiG-31s which are not dangerous in themselves but their missiles can be a bit of a problematic.
In my opinion, in the event of a potential conflict, an aircraft such as the F-15 in the A-A configuration will be very much needed over Europe.

[Deano87]

Ok @Nahen... that's genuinely interesting.

I'm SHOCKED... SHOCKED I TELL YA! Good find!

@strikeeagle Where were the Vortex Generators installed on the E when you took the CFTs off? My inner aerodynamicist would like to know.
 

[strikeeagle]

2 hours ago, Deano87 said:

Ok @Nahen... that's genuinely interesting.

I'm SHOCKED... SHOCKED I TELL YA! Good find!

@strikeeagle Where were the Vortex Generators installed on the E when you took the CFTs off? My inner aerodynamicist would like to know.
 

If installed, it would be above the aft 106’s. Pretty much always installed on light greys.  And yes, if the jet was to fly w/CFT’s off, the generators were installed.  It’s job was to keep the aft missiles from being suck back up into the jet when launched. 

 

 

Edited December 31, 2022 by strikeeagle

[Ramstein]

the single seater had all electronics from the front seat back. back then there wasn't many micro electronics in the computers, at least in the earlier models.

Edited December 31, 2022 by Ramstein

[Deano87]

2 hours ago, strikeeagle said:

If installed, it would be above the aft 106’s. Pretty much always installed on light greys.  And yes, if the jet was to fly w/CFT’s off, the generators were installed.  It’s job was to keep the aft missiles from being suck back up into the jet when launched. 

Aha is this it?

 

[agamemnon_b5]

18 hours ago, Cab said:

This thread has been a long, winding road for those of us who have stuck with it. 
 

I quote myself from June of this year:

It's incorrect to say "no one" uses the E in that way.  F-15E squadrons deployed for Operation Northern Watch and Southern Watch (no fly zones over Iraq after the First Gulf War) were employed in an Air-to-Air roll and were armed as such (with some ground ordinance at times to take out SAM sites that fired on them.

[Cab]

32 minutes ago, agamemnon_b5 said:

It's incorrect to say "no one" uses the E in that way.  F-15E squadrons deployed for Operation Northern Watch and Southern Watch (no fly zones over Iraq after the First Gulf War) were employed in an Air-to-Air roll and were armed as such (with some ground ordinance at times to take out SAM sites that fired on them.

Did they remove the CFT’s? That was the intended reference.

[strikeeagle]

3 hours ago, Deano87 said:

Aha is this it?

 

Yep