Low wing load of F-15A/C, F-15E doesn’t has it.
I’d still say those <15% of additional empty weight are made up for by the 25% additional thrust produced by the stronger engines, at the very least making the aircraft not a brick.
While it may be outshined by the many supermaneuverable aircraft around, the F-15 is still very much and agile plane that I wouldn’t exactly call a brick.
Sure you might call it that fully loaded and fueled, but then I’d challenge you to find an aircraft that wouldn’t be in that scenario.
28 deg/sec instant, 20 deg/sec sustained turn, 9g+ capability and a stabilized angle of attack of about 35 AoA. It can fly without a wing and survive an AIM-9 hit, that’s pretty nice for a brick.
2 Likes
I checked your bug report and its still being worked on, i can understand the frustration but sadly getting some things fixed take time, im sure that it will be fixed as soon as possible.
5 Likes
Can i ask where did you found information about instatenous turn?
Wasn’t it F-15D?
Condition : 10 000 ft, 4* AIM-7, ± 38 000 pounds.
I don’t want to give the exact source, it’s not secret, but I have it for my own use.
Maybe an F-15B
It’s for F-15A/C or F-15E?
The Strike Eagle is less agile than the A/C, if you mean the indications for instantaneous turn rate , it’s for the C version
This.
1 Like
Nice :
1 Like
It this was WT those wings would be gone after that
1 Like
Not when you remove the CFTs from it. Better engines and more deflection from the stabs
F-15 A/B/C/D vs E ?
Correct. The F-15EX program has given us good insight into this. They had to reverify the entire F-15 flight regime to ensure it matched, despite the heavier wing structure like the F-15E, and having the same engine power as the -229s.
There is also this demonstration for the F-15QA which shows what the F-15 is capable of, just not necessarily without computer assistance.(Mouse aim is effectively FBW)
2 Likes
EX benefits mostly from today’s FBW. With the same control system, a lighter A/C would be more interesting.
The EX shows what a 1970s airframe can do.
The thing is, you could theoretically do the same thing with an F-15A/C, though with less engine power, assuming the pilot is flying 100% correctly. And in game with Mouse Aim you are getting FBW
Lighter, older versions of the F-15 are “lighter”, engine power isn’t everything. And in the end, the pilot makes the plane. FbW or CAS…
The acceleration is cracked without CFTs, superior to the 220s C’s. It also flies higher. Above 60k ft (18.3km) between M1.4 and M.2.2(max 63k ft). Reaching 65k ft. The C eagle can fly above 55k ft between M1.1 and M2.3 and tops exactly at 59k.
The 5,100lbs lighter frame of the C with 229s would’ve made an animal. Had they just made the engines same dimensions and a bit more money…
Some dude in another forum did the math with several manual and put the 129s on a C airframe. The EX uses these engines if I’m not mistaken.
2 Likes