Trident Posted December 12, 2005 Posted December 12, 2005 Yep, the Sue is constructed with a significant fraction of titanium in the airframe, probably more than any other tactical aircraft until the F-22 came along.
britgliderpilot Posted December 12, 2005 Posted December 12, 2005 Yep, the Sue is constructed with a significant fraction of titanium in the airframe, probably more than any other tactical aircraft until the F-22 came along. And it still weighs 30 tonnes ;) http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/britgliderpilot/BS2Britgliderpilot-1.jpg
Trident Posted December 12, 2005 Posted December 12, 2005 Hehe, if there's anything wrong with the Flanker designs it is that they tend to be a bit on the heavy side. The F-15C is about 3 tons lighter empty (but the Su-27 has 44kN more thrust, so there :D )! As an aside, the F-22 in its series configuration appears to weigh a good bit upwards of 15 tons empty now, pretty hefty aswell ;)
D-Scythe Posted December 12, 2005 Posted December 12, 2005 Hehe, if there's anything wrong with the Flanker designs it is that they tend to be a bit on the heavy side. The F-15C is about 3 tons lighter empty (but the Su-27 has 44kN more thrust, so there :D )! Try 33.6 kN more thrust ;) As an aside, the F-22 in its series configuration appears to weigh a good bit upwards of 15 tons empty now, pretty hefty aswell ;) ...And it has a 100 kN thrust advantage over both the Eagle and the Flanker. BTW, about the titanium thing - how much of it was built into the Flanker by weight percentage? I know in the F-15C, 25-28% of it was titanium (can't remember the exact figure).
Trident Posted December 12, 2005 Posted December 12, 2005 Try 33.6 kN more thrust ;) True, I was using 100kN instead of 106 for the F100, my bad :) They're pretty damn close anyhow. BTW, about the titanium thing - how much of it was built into the Flanker by weight percentage? I know in the F-15C, 25-28% of it was titanium (can't remember the exact figure). I've seen only one source actually give a number and it was 30% IIRC. FWIW, on the F-22 it accounts for about 36%.
Maximus_G Posted December 12, 2005 Posted December 12, 2005 One of the advantages of F-15C compared to the A-model (I think) was that a software limitation was removed to increase the manueverability of the aircraft, allowing higher G's? Under the Multi-Stage Improvement Program (MSIP), upgrades were progressively incorporated onto the F-15C production line... An overload warning system was provided to prevent pilots from accidentally exceeding 9g during combat maneuvering. The F-15C specifically had titanium spars built into the wings to withstand high Gs - the F-15A was only rated at 7.3 G I think, and this was increased to 9 in the F-15C. The F-15A was designed initially to 9Gs, but the "peace-time" limitation for the bird was 7.33. Concerning structural differences between the A and C models: Internally, the F-15C differs from the F-15A in having additional wing leading and trailing edge tanks, and additional tanks in the central fuselage, bringing total internal fuel capacity to 2070 US gallons (not counting the fuel in the FAST packs). The additional weight of fuel raised the gross weight of the F-15C to over 68,000 pounds. Consequently, tires, wheels, and brakes had to be strengthened to cope with this increased weight.
Recommended Posts