F-15 Eagle: History, Performance & Discussion

Machinery of War Discussion Aircraft
65

Wut? Do you know what radius is? It 50km, not 120km.

F15A has better high altitude performance than a tomcat A. The F15 can sit comfortably +30Kft unlike the 14A and stay suspersonic. The pw100 220 has higher thrust at +M1.3. You can see with full fuel, 4aim7s, 4aim9s and centerline pylon, the 220 equiped eagle can sustain 3.3Gs at Mach 1.6 @ 30kft, meanwhile the 200 eagle maxes at 3Gs at Mach 1.3 and drops steeply where it can’t sustain a turn beyond Mach 1.54.

In terms of radar, even a pre-psp is superior to it imo. MPRF is quite a thing + better processing. Psp I would say range very close to f14A. I showed ranges in old forum
eagle radar

Amraam B has higher range than sparrows, mostly due to better guidance/trajectory which is probably(confident) due to using DG instead of just APN( just PN in WT). Also not limited to seeker range, which limits sparrow ALOT. The EFFECTIVE RANGE is considerably higher, proper inertial nav, lofting, tws. Notching is unknown but objectively better than sparrow by a large margin. Range gates, faster processing, mprf, more filters at a higher rate, narrow BW, multiple waveforms that change. Cesar Rodriguez fired the amraam (one) beyond 36Nm at the serbian Nig-29(which left a falling fireball) during Kosovo campaign. Rmax where both fighters are at Mach 1, headon at 10kft is 19-20Nm, Nez is 7-8Nm.

2 Likes
66

I never said I didnt want AMRAAM??? What are you talking about? I said the maps are too small, particularly considering upcoming missiles. Maybe work on your reading comprehension…

As for if AMRAAM is relevant to the F-15, you don’t have a crystal ball, its entirely possible gaijin decides to add the F-15 with the AMRAAM, particularly considering the fact that if they don’t, the Su-27 is likely to outclass it in nearly every way in WT

1 Like
67

The F-14s radar would be superior with the proper TCS-guided CW antenna. The radar is not accurate, it lacks the multiple target selection and essentially all of its’ radar modes are condensed into three modes.

2 Likes
68

The gripen comes with AIM-120B, not AIM-120A. The range is also not “70km”, as if that even mattered without context to start off with.

1 Like
69

The upcoming missiles do not increase total range at 10km.
Instead of insulting people cause you didn’t read their posts, read their posts.

I don’t need a crystal ball to know AMRAAM on F-15 is BR 12.7+. It’s easily predictable.

@MiG_23M

RB99 is AMRAAM B, but I never said it couldn’t come with it, OR it would come with RB99.
I just said AMRAAM A as my prediction as that’s the likely one. Tho we can see depending on what happens this Winter.

70

He’s not insulting you, he made good points.

71

The F-14’s Radar+TCS isn’t better than the F-15’s MPRF. MPRF means smaller notch and rear-aspect usability, and the F-15 radar IIRC should be able to follow a target through the notch if it sustains a turn. If the target stays in the notch it’ll trash the missile anyways so it doesn’t matter. Like theoretically the F-14 does have more radar range, but maps and the radar render limit don’t let it exploit this.

The flight performance isn’t clearcut, both have almost-identical sustained rates but the F-15’s sustained rate is at higher speeds. I think the F-15 has better acceleration and even with the F-14B needing buffs to its high speed performance, the F-15 has it beat.

On the balance the F-15 is probably the better plane.

2 Likes
72

The F-14 already can’t sit at its’ peak sustained turn rates because it runs into a G-overload limit, because of this it will always have a higher usable sustained turn rate and shares extremely good high-alpha capacity (and in some cases, better than the F-15).

The radar has a standard SRC mode that is quite capable for rear-aspect shots at high altitudes, along with the TCS it would be able to guide AIM-7s through a notch as well as keep better track of a target at close range where the MPRF radar on the F-15 would lose it. I would make the argument that the F-14 radar is better for this reason, and the F-14D which is likely more in-line with the F-15C has further improvements to the AWG-9 weapons system. Once the AIM-54 is fixed and performs as it should we could also see a huge advantage for simply having a longer range (and reduced smoke) missile.

That leaves the AMRAAM, if the F-15 receives AIM-120s I would argue it has (quite) a bit of an advantage at closer ranges.

73

The AIM-7F should be significantly more resistant to Notching as well due to how the seeker works(especially when using the PD waveform instead of FM-CW for guidance), but at least until DECM, ECM and Jamming are modeled / implemented it would practically make SARHs undodgeable so I get there being a fudge factor at least, for now.

It shouldn’t in co-alt / Look-up scenarios as there is no MLC for the returns to get lost in(and that Notching the missile’s antenna is likely to be transitory at best, as the geometry resolves rapidly though the Notch, or the doppler filter was bypassed entirely anyway), additionally. The AWG-9 is mechanized to the point where tracks can automatically bypass the MLC filter depending on look angle with the appropriate switchology.

With the added IRSTS (ALR-23) / TCS(AXX-1) / IRST(AAS-42) / TCS + IRST sensors The F-14’s FCS won’t care about chaff either, and with basic trailing (Cold / Tail target Aspect) / Centroid (Beam / Notch Target Aspect) / leading (Hot / Nose Target Aspect) edge return filtering; Range and Range Rate calculations aren’t impacted either. So it would be very hard to actually cause a F-14 to drop a track for practically any reason whatsoever if all of the systems were working in concert had they actually been modeled, and even the radar alone would practically require active jamming to defeat.

Sure the APG-63 might have better detailed performance & resolution owing to being more modern(the AWG-9 has its roots in the AN/ASG-18 (F-108), which itself is an upscaled variant of the F-101’s MA-7 and further the E-1 FCS on the F-89, so is practically nearly 30 younger) and using improved methods and components. But the AWG-9 has better resistance & performance especially at long range, where the AIM-54 does its best work and where it matters most to an F-14 vs F-15 comparison as they are otherwise similarly equipt in terms of ordnance; with Sparrows, Sidewinders, Agiles and AMRAAMs(F-14D) so have broadly equivalent engagement capabilities in the same scenario, sure in a non-engineered(live) situation one will have better performance so there will be some slight variance.

1 Like
74

I’d say the F-14D likely heavily exceeds the F-15C in terms of radar, at least until the F-15C variants which received AESA radars. The AN/APG-71 is the the unholy offspring of the F-15E Strike Eagle’s excellent AN/APG-70 and the F-14A/B’s AWG-9. They share more than 75% of major components and the APG-71 is (from what I gather) more tailored for the air to air role than the APG-70. It also has incredible range, to the point where its limited by the antennae, and pairing 2 F-14D’s together with datalink allow its full scan range of 740km.

75

I might expect dev consider 2 F-15 from Israel (F-15A Baz & F-15C Akef pre-MSIP) 2 F-15 from USAF (F-15A MSIP retrofit countermeasures, IR AAM AIM-9J/AIM-9L & SARH AIM-7F) (F-15C pre-MSIP with IR AAM AIM-9L/AIM-9M & SARH AIM-7M), and F-15J pre-MSIP this year

76

So where would that leave the US F-16ADF if the F-15’s turn up with equivalent ordnance? Maybe it’s going to be the introductory AMRAAM equipt airframe if they are refitting existing aircraft.

As that gives each of the Teen series a defined role; The F-14 has its long range advantage, the F-15, the edge in a dogfight and otherwise general superiority, The F-16 missile jousting, and support, and the F/A-18 with A2G.

Really its too hard to tell exactly what the plans are, and how Gaijin are going to implement them as there is a lot of potential for significant overlap, especially considering omitted Strike and Attack airframes.

77

Again, the F-15 is not going to have a particular edge in dogfighting and “general superiority” over the F-14… unless it has AMRAAM… or at least a superior AIM-7 such as AIM-7P Block 2. Maybe some better IR missiles.

There is no reason each teen series has to fill a specific role. They can all do similar stuff and provide options rather than each fulfilling a dedicated purpose. Give them all AMRAAMs if they were compatible, idc.

1 Like
78

Except that they were literally created to meet varied design goals and so have a mix of characteristics to meet them, this causes them to have comparative strengths and weaknesses, especially when comparing the Series chronologically there is little overlap for the most part especially within a given service.

You won’t find an F-15 / F-14 with the AGM-65 (where the F-16 / F/A-18 do out of the box), though they both have respective access to the GBU-8/B & AGM-53.

The F-16A doesn’t get Sparrows
The F/A-18A has issues with range and fuel

etc. etc. so on so forth.

This is exactly the reason why we haven’t seen them added in chronological order, and with a blockwise implementation as the differences tend to be gradual and slight for the most part, and so in order to make things different, they jump around a little. Additionally filling the needs / & gaps of the Tech Tree they reside within. was to make them subtlety different and allow them a more specific role.

The thing is that additions are made gradually over time as capabilities and performance escalate, so the order in which they appear and capabilities are refit will matter significantly from a balance perspective, Sure a ordnance restricted F-15E would play practically the same as the existing F-14B, but that would have a number of negative impacts going forward mostly relating to the powercreep of future additions, in response as there are downsides to only being able to add noticeable sidegrades to . Just look at the state of the Japanese Air tree, its stuck waiting for an F-15, and it would have probably suited things overall to have added the F-15A with La Royale for a number of reasons.

79

Except that they were literally created to meet varied design goals and so have a mix of characteristics to meet them, this causes them to have comparative strengths and weaknesses, especially when comparing the Series chronologically there is little overlap for the most part especially within a given service.

As an example, The Yak series, I-185, Lavochkins’ all have strengths and weaknesses. The A6M, J2M, and Ki-64 series also provide this. There is a myriad of aircraft at lower BR’s dedicated to certain things that have specific strengths and weaknesses. Examples include the Yak-9T, or even early jets such as the F-84 vs F-80, MiG-9 vs La-11, etc. There is a lot of variety. We don’t need to pretend that they’re going to add “X” vehicle simply because it has “Y” capability at a given time… they could add aircraft that could be considered adequate for the same BR as current top tiers.

You won’t find an F-15 / F-14 with the AGM-65 (where the F-16 / F/A-18 do out of the box), though they both have respective access to the GBU-8/B & AGM-53.
The F-16A doesn’t get Sparrows
The F/A-18A has issues with range and fuel
etc. etc. so on so forth.

These are all issues to note, but without some unique qualities the variety means nothing. Two labels on the same yogurt is not variety. You’ll pick your favorites based on what you like or what you need. This is no different than aircraft in the same tech tree and BR such as P-63, P-38s, etc.

This is exactly the reason why we haven’t seen them added in chronological order, and with a blockwise implementation as the differences tend to be gradual and slight for the most part, and so in order to make things different, they jump around a little. Additionally filling the needs / & gaps of the Tech Tree they reside within. was to make them subtlety different and allow them a more specific role.

They don’t need to be added in any specific order. They could add them all at the same time for all I care. There is no “need” to fill gaps, there will be a myriad of options and it will fill up over time. Not a huge issue by any stretch of the imagination. This isn’t a game played by OCD people explicitly.

The thing is that additions are made gradually over time as capabilities and performance escalate, so the order in which they appear and capabilities are refit will matter significantly from a balance perspective, Sure a ordnance restricted F-15E would play practically the same as the existing F-14B, but that would have a number of negative impacts going forward mostly relating to the powercreep of future additions, in response as there are downsides to only being able to add noticeable sidegrades to . Just look at the state of the Japanese Air tree, its stuck waiting for an F-15, and it would have probably suited things overall to have added the F-15A with La Royale for a number of reasons.

Again, variety. It really does not matter which is added first or how they buff / gimp it. They can do whatever they think will make them money. Examples such as the La-174 back in the day had no need to be added and didn’t provide Russia with something super competitive against the CL-13 at the time.

80

I guess F-15A from USAF & F-15A Baz from IDF minimum 12.0, especially F-15A from USAF retrofitted AN/ALE-40 countermeasures, IR AAM AIM-9J/AIM-9L sidewinder & AIM-7F Sparrow

81

I’d agree, though pending the exact implementation of the radar could potentially see 12.3, if the additionally extend the BR range.

82

Personally, I think IR AAM & SARH AAM on F-15A from USAF not much as MiG-29A 9-12A, F-16A Block 15 ADF, MiG-29 9-13, Shenyang J-8H & J-8D except performance and guess AN/APG-63 radar similar to AN/AWG-9 from F-14A & F-14B Tomcat

For F-15A Baz (IDF) better F-15A (USAF) especially AN/ALE-45 CMD 240 chaff, 120 flares total & equipped Python 3

83

F-16 would stay at 12.0, that’s where it’s left.

@MiG_23M F-15C will be a better dogfighter with a better radar for its 12.3 role.
We’re not at F-15 AMRAAM BRs yet.

1 Like
84

The F-14B is already here so I don’t see how the F-15 would be a better dogfighter… the F-14 outrates it and also has great high alpha but due to the swing wing has better low speed performance I would expect. At least, that’s what the publicly known information suggests.

Historically, the Tomcat was limited to 6.5-7G against the F-15C during mock dogfights, the F-15C was limited to 9. This is why the F-15 usually came out on top during training but this would not be reflected in war thunder. Likewise, the MiG-23 series also suffered in real life from artificial limitations, and in the cases where they exceeded these limitations they were found to be quite capable even against the likes of the Tomcat and MiG-29 during training.

I don’t think the F-15 series will offer anything better than the F-14 without some improvement in armament, and if not… it’s sole reason for appearing will be to add variety to the tech tree as I said in my previous statements.