Would we be able to fly with 'clean' CFT?

[foxmagnet]

CFT is a huge feature of F-15E and  it is what enables our 'beagle' carry a bunch of munitions. However in A2A configuration, protruding bomb rack are nothing but drags.

So I am wondering if we are not flying with any weapons mounted on CFT, can we fly with clean, rackless CFT?

Edited November 4, 2022 by foxmagnet

[Deano87]

I think the racks are integral to the CFTs and don’t get removed regularly, so I’d say no.

[Spurts]

Deano87 is correct. The racks are integral. It's what separates the CFT model on the E from the one for the C.

[TheGhostOfDefi]

There are literally 11 pages already about that. Tl;dr NO

[Nahen]

https://s3.amazonaws.com/the-drive-staging/message-editor%2F1517874182405-1280px-mcdonnell_douglas_f-15c_with_the_conformal_fast_pack_fuel_tanks_060905-f-1234s-017.jpg?auto=webp&optimize=high&quality=70&width=1440

 

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/18259/its-back-to-the-future-for-u-s-f-15c-eagles-and-conformal-fuel-tanks

 

Edited November 4, 2022 by Nahen

[=DROOPY=]

No.   

On 11/4/2022 at 12:14 PM, Nahen said:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/the-drive-staging/message-editor%2F1517874182405-1280px-mcdonnell_douglas_f-15c_with_the_conformal_fast_pack_fuel_tanks_060905-f-1234s-017.jpg?auto=webp&optimize=high&quality=70&width=1440

 

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/18259/its-back-to-the-future-for-u-s-f-15c-eagles-and-conformal-fuel-tanks

 

 

And so what exactly are you saying here?  Here is what I would like..  I would like to see one... One. Single. Photo....  of an F-15E in a combat theater, crewed up, and loaded with live weapons...but no CFT's.  That is all.  

[1stBEAST]

On 11/4/2022 at 5:25 PM, TheGhostOfDefi said:

There are literally 11 pages already about that. Tl;dr NO

actually not he is asking for CFT´s but without the Pylons

but it was answered already^^

null

[Nahen]

13 hours ago, =DROOPY= said:

No.   

And so what exactly are you saying here?  Here is what I would like..  I would like to see one... One. Single. Photo....  of an F-15E in a combat theater, crewed up, and loaded with live weapons...but no CFT's.  That is all.  

You can want it, you can't bend reality anyway...
CFTs have INTEGRAL pylons for armament. They cannot be removed from the tanks. Is it hard to understand? F-15E sometimes fly without CFT - so far never in combat - but CFT without suspension points?? Some heresy... unless in F-16...

[F-2]

We should just do a community mod to fly without the CFT so we can enjoy the experience and then enjoy the module with the question in the back of our heads extinguished.

[Mig Fulcrum]

Yeah +1

It's funny that most question of the Muhden are about removing CFTs than about actual F-15E capabilities.

[Scott-S6]

13 hours ago, Mig Fulcrum said:

Yeah +1

It's funny that most question of the Muhden are about removing CFTs than about actual F-15E capabilities.

There is a very small but vocal part of the community that flies PvP without concern for scenario/operational accuracy. (Which seems a little perverse to me since that gives you a "competitive" game with no attempt whatever at balance). They see an F15E without CFT as providing a competitive advantage to them and they don't care about capabilities since all they do is dogfight.

[Talon Karde]

And the topic starts again......

[Hiob]

Do I need popcorn?

The only important question regarding the E-Eagle is: When will it finally arrive?

[Cab]

3 hours ago, Talon Karde said:

And the topic starts again......

“All this has happened before, and all of it will happen again.”

[Nahen]

9 hours ago, Scott-S6 said:

There is a very small but vocal part of the community that flies PvP without concern for scenario/operational accuracy. (Which seems a little perverse to me since that gives you a "competitive" game with no attempt whatever at balance). They see an F15E without CFT as providing a competitive advantage to them and they don't care about capabilities since all they do is dogfight.

I feel "offended"
I ONLY fly the F-15C and will not accept the F-15E module with removable CFT or "bare CFT" fantasy. I will only agree to this when I find out about the first OPERATIONAL use of the F-15E without CFT.
Instead of removable CFTs in the Strike version, I 100 x more prefer to believe that one day we will get the F-15C FullFidelity.

Forgive me, but I had to I can't imagine a topic about "taking CFT off" or flying with "naked CFT" without my participation

A question by the way - why fly with "naked CFTs" if they do not exist in real life? All pylons on CFT are integral with them.

[Mig Fulcrum]

10 ore fa, Scott-S6 ha scritto:

There is a very small but vocal part of the community that flies PvP without concern for scenario/operational accuracy. (Which seems a little perverse to me since that gives you a "competitive" game with no attempt whatever at balance). They see an F15E without CFT as providing a competitive advantage to them and they don't care about capabilities since all they do is dogfight.

Then use the F-15C, it's the aircraft created for that role, single seat so you don't have to share anything, no (so hated) CFTs, much better thrust to weight ratio, same amount of missiles, no wierd AG corks for non sweaty players and even a better radar, why in heaven would you choose a fast bomb truck for PvP air to air?

Edited November 28, 2022 by Mig Fulcrum

[Cab]

10 hours ago, Scott-S6 said:

There is a very small but vocal part of the community that flies PvP without concern for scenario/operational accuracy. (Which seems a little perverse to me since that gives you a "competitive" game with no attempt whatever at balance). They see an F15E without CFT as providing a competitive advantage to them and they don't care about capabilities since all they do is dogfight.

If that's the case, and I think it is for some, they may want to be careful what they wish for. If Razbam does a good job with the flight model at the edges of the flight envelope, the Eagle dogfighters might find their more "colorful" maneuvers are no longer possible. 

[Nahen]

3 hours ago, Mig Fulcrum said:

Then use the F-15C, it's the aircraft created for that role, single seat so you don't have to share anything, no (so hated) CFTs, much better thrust to weight ratio, same amount of missiles, no wierd AG corks for non sweaty players and even a better radar, why in heaven would you choose a fast bomb truck for PvP air to air?

 

I would be careful with this better power-to-weight ratio ... Because while you are right with the F100-PW-220 engines, the versions with the F100-PW-229 engines have a better power-to-weight ratio than the F-15C:
kg of thrust / one kilogram of weight
F-15C: 1.69 (F100-PW-220)
F-15E: 1.49 (F100-PW-220)

F-15E: 1.84 (F100-PW-229)

[Spurts]

1 hour ago, Nahen said:

I would be careful with this better power-to-weight ratio ... Because while you are right with the F100-PW-220 engines, the versions with the F100-PW-229 engines have a better power-to-weight ratio than the F-15C:
kg of thrust / one kilogram of weight
F-15C: 1.69 (F100-PW-220)
F-15E: 1.49 (F100-PW-220)

F-15E: 1.84 (F100-PW-229)

Sure, if you use the weight of the F-15C in place of the F-15E.  Quick lesson in F-15 weight, F-15A/C has grown in weight (metric) from ~12.7t to ~14.1t and an F-15E with no CFTs weighs ~15.5t and ~16.8t with them (empty).  If you have access to -1s you can verify this yourself.  In the end, the F-15E-229 T/W(empty) is roughly the same as F-15C-220.  Planes don't fly without fuel though, and the heavier F-15E needs more divert fuel so it has higher minimum reserves.  Weighing more also means it will not go as far on a given volume of fuel for the mission so to match range you need more fuel.  All of a sudden, the T/W isn't comparable anymore even if they both have the same AA loadout.

[Nahen]

40 minutes ago, Spurts said:

Sure, if you use the weight of the F-15C in place of the F-15E.  Quick lesson in F-15 weight, F-15A/C has grown in weight (metric) from ~12.7t to ~14.1t and an F-15E with no CFTs weighs ~15.5t and ~16.8t with them (empty).  If you have access to -1s you can verify this yourself.  In the end, the F-15E-229 T/W(empty) is roughly the same as F-15C-220.  Planes don't fly without fuel though, and the heavier F-15E needs more divert fuel so it has higher minimum reserves.  Weighing more also means it will not go as far on a given volume of fuel for the mission so to match range you need more fuel.  All of a sudden, the T/W isn't comparable anymore even if they both have the same AA loadout.

Maybe instead of inventing, count?
The factors I gave are calculated for the weight of the F-15E more than 2 tons higher than the F-15C. Support structure - the structure of the F-15E airframe is more than two tons heavier than the F-15C. What I gave is just calculated for this mass. For the mass of the airframe itself, without CFT.

 

Edited November 28, 2022 by Nahen

[Spurts]

1 hour ago, Nahen said:

Maybe instead of inventing, count?

 

 

Okay, I didn't mean for this to get snarky, but if you want to insult my math, fine.  F-15E-229 without CFT or anything else is 34,600.  No fuel to power the engines, no crew, no CFT.  You claim (invent) 1.84 T/W, that would be 63,664lb or 31,832lb per engine.  Well guess what?  That more than the rating for the F100-PW-229.  I at least gave you the benefit of the doubt that you had an incorrect data source for F-15 mass, as most people do.  Taking the rated values of the F100-PW-229 of 29,160lb, doubled, divided by 1.84 gives 31,695lb of weight.  That is F-15C weight these days.

 

I didn't "invent" anything.  I checked my math, then even spelled out to you the weights I was using.

[Spurts]

In fairness I am not able to locate my MSIP II source and only have 29,500lb for MSIP I for the F-15C so all I can verify is that the F-15E weight you used was too low

[Mig Fulcrum]

6 ore fa, Nahen ha scritto:

I would be careful with this better power-to-weight ratio ... Because while you are right with the F100-PW-220 engines, the versions with the F100-PW-229 engines have a better power-to-weight ratio than the F-15C:
kg of thrust / one kilogram of weight
F-15C: 1.69 (F100-PW-220)
F-15E: 1.49 (F100-PW-220)

F-15E: 1.84 (F100-PW-229)

As far as I know razbam is doing the -220 engines version, am I wrong? I assume it only by the pics they posted, not sure if they specify somewere these info.

[Rainmaker]

5 hours ago, Mig Fulcrum said:

As far as I know razbam is doing the -220 engines version, am I wrong? I assume it only by the pics they posted, not sure if they specify somewere these info.

-229s.

The C's radar, non-AESA at least, is certainly not better than an E's FWIW.

To be clear, I could care less about the whole CFT debate, just clarifying certain points.

[Nahen]

8 hours ago, Spurts said:

Okay, I didn't mean for this to get snarky, but if you want to insult my math, fine.  F-15E-229 without CFT or anything else is 34,600.  No fuel to power the engines, no crew, no CFT.  You claim (invent) 1.84 T/W, that would be 63,664lb or 31,832lb per engine.  Well guess what?  That more than the rating for the F100-PW-229.  I at least gave you the benefit of the doubt that you had an incorrect data source for F-15 mass, as most people do.  Taking the rated values of the F100-PW-229 of 29,160lb, doubled, divided by 1.84 gives 31,695lb of weight.  That is F-15C weight these days.

 

I didn't "invent" anything.  I checked my math, then even spelled out to you the weights I was using.

Empty F-15C airframe mass 12,701 kg (28,000 lb)
Empty F-15 E airframe mass 14,379 kg (31,700 lb)

2 × F100-PW-220 thrust: 14,590 lbf (64.9 kN); 23,770 lbf (105.7 kN) with afterburner

2 × F100-PW-229, thrust: 17,800 lb dry (79 kN); 29,160 lb (129.7 kN) with afterburner

Edited November 29, 2022 by Nahen