F-15C Top Speed in Lomac

[britgliderpilot]

Here or thereabouts:

 

http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?p=88431

[GGTharos]

Hey GG, I've been trying to find the PW engine thread but it's gone.

It appears the this site cleared out it's old stuff (I only see 3 pages history).

 

 

anyway.. this is nothing to get my nickers in a twist..

 

why implode tho? Pressure will drop outside the Jet, but the pressurized

cockpit with still be at 14psi (thereabouts).

 

 

Pressure -drop- at supersonic speed? The reason why your canopy's going to implode is that the friction will heat it up quite a bit, and cause it to fail. That assumes some other overspeed condition doesn't nail you first.

I'm talking about low-altitude supersonic flight here.

[bflagg]

Go to the bottom of the main page and change your display options. ;)

 

Thanks GOYA, that did it..

 

My options reset on me and I didn't even think to check here...

 

thanks

[bflagg]

Hey GG, I've been trying to find the PW engine thread but it's gone.

It appears the this site cleared out it's old stuff (I only see 3 pages history).

 

 

anyway.. this is nothing to get my nickers in a twist..

 

why implode tho? Pressure will drop outside the Jet, but the pressurized

cockpit with still be at 14psi (thereabouts).

 

GGTharos...

Please reread it again..

NASA

 

"Maximum speeds are listed as Mach 2.54 and 1.21 at 40 000 feet and sea level, respectively."

 

Maybe I'm just misunderstanding somehting here............

[Mizzy]

 

Was this deliberately implemented because its a "western jet" and developers are from Russia or what? Because all of ruskies aircraft have performance which match with published fact sheets just F-15C doesnt.

 

 

Just for the record, the F15 had little chance against the Su27 short or long range and was a dead duck short to medium with the Mig 29. The F15 was nothing more than BVR and clear off before it got in any trouble.

 

I can understand why you need more top speed :D

 

Just my observation on the F15.

 

Mizzy

[Bungle_uk]

GGTharos...

Please reread it again..

NASA

 

"Maximum speeds are listed as Mach 2.54 and 1.21 at 40 000 feet and sea level, respectively."

 

Maybe I'm just misunderstanding somehting here............

 

The way I read it bflagg. mach 2.54 and 1.21 at 40 00ft and sea level. i.e. 2.54 at 40000 and 1.21 at sea level.

[bflagg]

You are absolutly freakin right... I transposed the values...

 

GG and Brit is right...

bowing to GG and Brit.. :icon_pray

 

I've been handed my hat so many times on this board I've gathered

quite a collection... (hey, at least I'm asking and learning!)

 

anyone wanna buy a hat?

(cheap too!)

[GGTharos]

Just for the record, the F15 had little chance against the Su27 short or long range and was a dead duck short to medium with the Mig 29. The F15 was nothing more than BVR and clear off before it got in any trouble.

 

I can understand why you need more top speed :D

 

Just my observation on the F15.

 

Mizzy

 

 

Err, no. Given the recorded performance of R-27's, the F-15C had a pretty even chance against the 27 BVR, and with IRCM is had a pretty good chance short range, too. Those fighters are fairly well matched.

 

The MiG doesn't have much of a chance if it's detected BVR, and not much of a chance if it doesn't manage to drag its opponent down to a low speed fight, and its opponent is using IRCM. It's just a short range defense fighter - the 27 is much better equipped to take on the F-15.

 

You might want to try applying some proper combat techniques before getting into what's what ;)

[Mizzy]

You might want to try applying some proper combat techniques before getting into what's what ;)

 

Well that told me :) I wasn't being serious btw.

 

Mizzy

[tflash]

Err, no. Given the recorded performance of R-27's, the F-15C had a pretty even chance against the 27 BVR, and with IRCM is had a pretty good chance short range, too. Those fighters are fairly well matched.

 

The MiG doesn't have much of a chance if it's detected BVR, and not much of a chance if it doesn't manage to drag its opponent down to a low speed fight, and its opponent is using IRCM. It's just a short range defense fighter - the 27 is much better equipped to take on the F-15.

 

You might want to try applying some proper combat techniques before getting into what's what ;)

 

hello GGTharos,

 

Could you elaborate somewhat on the F-15C's IRCM? Do you mean flares or is the F-15 equipped with other means to protect itself against IR missiles?

 

I can imagin that chaff are automatically managed by the TEWS, but how about flares?

[GGTharos]

IRCM just means Infra-Red Counter Measures ...

 

but yes, I specifically meant flares. It turned out, according to some reports, that the R-73 was very vulnerable to being spoofed if you flared before it was launched.

 

This incidentally works in LOMAC, though I think it is a coincidence and not necessarily purposefully programmed behavior.

 

The same will likely work on the AIM-9 in LOMAC as well.

[Kula66]

Surely, the problem with possible lack of being able to reach top speed is more that it may reveal a general under-powered modelling of the LO F-15 ... I would suggest people would rarely go M2.5 ... it would just drink fuel at a incredible rate. But if it means under-modelling of the climb rate or turn rate ... this is more important.

[GGTharos]

Top speed's pretty important too ... esp. when you're running (either away, or past the opposition to penetrate the AWACS defense for example) ... and yes, more importantly, it matters how fast you get up to that speed.

[KILSEK]

Hi all.

 

Did you ever notice that in the F-15C and the Su-33, if you get into a dive and get betty to start screaming "maximum speed" your roll control do not respond properly? Pitch and yaw work, but roll control reverse themselves, L=R and R=L. Why is that? -KILSEK

[S77th-GOYA]

Surely, the problem with possible lack of being able to reach top speed is more that it may reveal a general under-powered modelling of the LO F-15 ... I would suggest people would rarely go M2.5 ... it would just drink fuel at a incredible rate. But if it means under-modelling of the climb rate or turn rate ... this is more important.

 

Funny you should mention it. I saw the published climb rate of 50,000ft/min for the 15. That'sabunchaclimbrate. Not sure how they figure that, but I'd imagine they wind it out at 1000ft or so, and then start the climb.

[britgliderpilot]

Roll reversal due to shockwaves forming over the control surfaces at very high speeds.

 

Cool new feature. Should be there in the Su27 as well, but I haven't experienced it yet . . . .

[Kula66]

Funny you should mention it. I saw the published climb rate of 50,000ft/min for the 15. That'sabunchaclimbrate. Not sure how they figure that, but I'd imagine they wind it out at 1000ft or so, and then start the climb.

Remember that may not necessarily time to 50,000'. It may be the time between 10k and 20k averaged for a full minute ... if the value was time-to-50000 then we may be able to try and reproduce it ... I know that by the time I get to 40,000 I'm down to 300kts and starting to loose control and thats from a 675kts start at 500' ... and a 15-20deg climb

[GGTharos]

THat is what is known as 'initial climb rate' meaning from low altitude, high-speed pull the nose up all the way and see how fast the plane's reaching for the sky right at -that- moment.

 

As for climbing the 15C to 40K feet, you can do it in under 2.5 minutes if you do it right, from brakes off.

[Kula66]

So any news on whether the 15s performance is going to be modified in 1.11? The plane does appear to have a number of issuse ... No IFF, impact of G-loc model on turning at corner speed, low climb rate, missing radar modes, minimal nav mode modelling, low top speed, AMRAAM issues, no cup holders ... we don't want to make too easy for you Flanker drivers!

[spearsd]

Bump ;-) Is F15 flight modeling adjusted at all in 1.11?

 

So any news on whether the 15s performance is going to be modified in 1.11? The plane does appear to have a number of issuse ... No IFF, impact of G-loc model on turning at corner speed, low climb rate, missing radar modes, minimal nav mode modelling, low top speed, AMRAAM issues, no cup holders ... we don't want to make too easy for you Flanker drivers!

[Pilotasso]

Surely, the problem with possible lack of being able to reach top speed is more that it may reveal a general under-powered modelling of the LO F-15 ... I would suggest people would rarely go M2.5 ... it would just drink fuel at a incredible rate. But if it means under-modelling of the climb rate or turn rate ... this is more important.

 

I rarely reach speeds in the order of mach 2 while intercepting because at that time I have an eternal fuel tank and 8 missiles onboard. But I have reached maximum speed at mach 2 several times and 2.4 a couple of times while evading all the way to the base. unless a bandit is in front of me theres no way anyone can catch me then. :D

[Fudd]

Isnt the real issue the limitations of the mechanical components of the aircraft. I am sure that the top speeds given in many texts are not entirely accurate. If an F-15 pilot chose to fly his aircraft at full afterburner until he ran out of fuel, doesnt he risk engine overspeed or oil pressure problems??

 

Case and point:

 

I use to work on CH-53's. Many publications say that the CH-53 can fly at 200+ KIAS (and it can do faster), however the last NATOPS that came out instructed pilots not to fly over 180 KIAS mostly likely due to the fact that failures of components are more likely when flown at top speed. I also know that if a pilot were to "pull" to much collective, he can easly overspeed the engines and over tourqe driveshafts and gearboxes.

 

So its highly likely that the F-15C can fly faster that publications say, but how fast before stuff breaks??