aurcov… (then called ACA/EAP/TKF/JF90) originally had the same operational requirement of SC Mach 1.5, just like the ATF did.
Too bad the EF didn’t meet this requirement, while the F 22 surpass its own requirement :diablo:
So, while the Europe prepared an aerodynamically super advanced and nimble interceptor, US went for a stealthy and more endurable version of the similar op req.
So now the EF is more “aerodynamically super advanced” than the F 22 ?:p
This is why Jumper said for EF and F22, they’re like “F1 and NASCAR”, although he forgot to say which is which. 😉
He was polite: the guy was a guest in UK and was offered a ride in their newest fighter. What could he say?
aurcovOriginally Posted by METEORSWARM
Efa supercruiser is 1,5 mach with external tank(1000)+4 asraam + 2 iris t.No, Mach 1.2-1.3. Mach 1.5 is estimated with uprated (EJ220) engines.
And without external tank, I might add (the table clearly indicate only internal fuel)
aurcovOperationally, acceleration is far more important than SC.
Agreed 100 %. But the Raptor has the best acceleration too.
If the raptor is as stealthy as claimed, then what is the rush? why use the extra fuel for 100 or 200 nm of SC speeds?
If higher speeds are a necessity because of tactical situation (urgent deployment to a location or to avoid imminent danger or to give a boost to its own weapons), then fvck SC and hello full afterburner.
If there is a need to fly over 1.7M (up to 2.4M), the Raptor can use AB. But as I said, it will reduce the engines life.
aurcovWell, now a million dollar question would be: does it really matter? Unless you wanna start counting spent barrels of fuel, then who cares? If you are able to evade a kill or to achieve a kill by using supersonic speed, then you’ve made a good job, who will ever ask you about having or not having used afterburner?
I don’t know if it really matters. But it’s a fact — MiG 31 can go faster but only with AB. OTOH, it could matter: remember that AB wears engines like hell. I remember I red the MiG 31 must have the engines removed if it used this feature for 2-3 missions! While the F 22 can supercruise in every mission…
I get a feeling that the SC feature is being grossly highlighted as one of the F-22’s virtues but the practical application still somewhat escapes me. Finally, if you are flying fast, then you are not only increasing the max. kinetic range of your weapons, you are also increasing the firing envelope of your opponent’s missiles on head-on engagements. What’s the big deal, then?
Remember the F 22 RCS is the smallest head-on.
aurcov250NM on internal fuel only with with 6 MRAAM and 2 SRAAM but the EF have the higher fuel fraction.;)
The table show the EF supercruising range not radius. Which means it can fly 250 Nmiles (at 1.2M) loitering (I guess subsonic) for 30 min. and flying back subsonic. And that’s less than an F 22 can , not to mention the much slower speed (1.2M<1.7M). So comparing the Ef with F 22 is a “little” exageration…to be polite…
aurcovI have no idea where these two AFB are, but according to the RANGE, the supercruise radius of Raptor really is shorter than MiG-31, and the speed is less also.
The MiG 31 can’t “supercruise” (flying >1M without using afterburners). It can cruise supersonically at high speed for a decent distance, but that’s not supercruise.
aurcovLOL, I didn’t. 😀
Fiinally, F22 has larger weapon bays than F35, so it’s more efficient in the “first-day” combat anyway.
Nope. The F 35 weapon bay > F 22
aurcovSo BAE UK is not involed in the F-35s EWs at all? Knew that about the INEWS, but wonder about the F-35. Nontheless DASS will be upgraded by that time as well and so far we don’t know any real specific details to compare. So it might be, or might not be.
When BAE acquired Sanders (a company that manufactured some of the most classified EW stuff for US armed forces) the UK company agreed to the firewalls imposed by US Government. There is no (legal) way for the parent company to use the Sanders know-how in its own product. They only pick the profits (pretty large, since BAE North America manufactures the EW systems for F 22 and F 35, F 15 SK, etc.). Probably the only thing that DASS and DEWS have in common is that they use PowerPC processors. I’m not saying that DASS is bad; OTOH is hard for any company (including from US) to compete with the BAE-NA because they benefit from the huge US Govt. investment in the F22 development.
As many errornously assume the radar doesn’t represent the entire avionics suite, just a part of it. And note he did not even refer to the F-15SE, but the F-15 in general.
OK let’s take it step-by-step: the hypotethical SE will have the APG 63 (V)3 or even better APG 63(V)4, DEWS, Link 16-MIDS, IRST+Sniper. What do you consider inferior to the EF stuff?
Also you just picked up some of the things I mentioned, but left out others I wonder why…?
Name those things and I’ll try to answer.
Show us some confirmed figures if you care about that.
It’s a question of logic: in this moment, an F 15E isn’t considered able to supercruise, since it can do 1.2, but without any load. The new CFT will hold 4 AAMs internally, so probably the new F 15 SE will qualify for SC (note that I’m referring only to P&W229/GE129 powered F 15). Also, from what members of forum posted, the EF can SC for 250 miles. I’ve said that with the huge combat radius of the present F 15 E/I/SK/SG (1000 Nmiles without EFTs-you saw the Boeing presentation page 11), even if the new SE won’t be able to supercruise, it will still be able to match the distance the EF would supercruise, using the AB.
aurcovAnd you are certain DASS won’t be upgraded? Who is providing large portions of the DASS and the F-35s EW suite? Does the DEWS include FOTD, MAWS or LWR?
If you are refering to BAE Systems, I have to point (for the N-th time) that the F 35 (as well as the f 22) EW suite is made by BAE Systems North America, the former Sanders Corp. in Nashua, New Hampshire. There is nothing in common between the DASS and the EW suite of the F 35 (and F 15 SE). And while there are no details about the DEWS, you can bet that at least FOTD (all the USAF F 15 have them) and MAWS (at least 3 US companies offer them) are included. LWR is futile against any other threat that MANPADS.
I could be wrong on that, but doesn’t Tiger Eye feature its own TGP, not Sniper?
The Tiger Eye used a new version of the LANTIRN for SK and Sniper for Singapore (the Sniper is more aerodynamic).
DME-P, TERPROM, MLS…
And you are sure that the F15 SE won’t have them because…?
The fact is aerodynamics play an important part when it comes to performance figures. TWR alone won’t tell you that an aircraft is capable climbing or accelerating faster, aerodynamics play in as well. That’s the reason why the Typhoon can supercruise with M 1.2+ in a configuration comprising 6 AAMs and 1 tank for example, while the F-15 could not. Let alone that static numbers tell you pretty much nothing about the performance in dynamically changing environments. Comparing likes with likes might be the most fair condition, rather than comparing the worst case for AC one and the best case for AC B.
An F 15 E (with 229/129) with CFT but without nothing else can supercruise. It wasn’t considered a “real” supercruise because many A/C can do this when clean: any F 16 blk. 50/52 or F 18 C/D with the F404-GE-402 engines can make 1.2 M. But being unarmed this is considered useless. OTOH the new F 15 SE will have 4 AAMs inside the modified CFTs, so probably, it can “supercruise”. And even equiped with the “normal” CFTs (that allows F 15 E to fly a combat radius of ~ 1000 Nmiles) one can burn more fuel and fly in supersonic for at least the 250 Nmiles (the EF combat radius in SC), if needed.
aurcovBased on what. Oh it has a new EWS (is it developed right now?) it must be superior, let me guess because it is american.
Spear the cheap irony. It is superior because is derived from the F 35 EW suite. Or do you consider EF suite better than F 35? :p
Will it? It might indeed yes, oh Tigereye, plus Sniper? Unlikely it has both and the IRST is long wave only, not dual band.
The Tiger Eye has the LW AAS 42 in the pylon and the MW Sniper ( http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2009/03/f-15-silent-eagle-media-briefi.html at page 14/20)
Left out the navigation stuff huh? MIDS is a joint not soley US programme, and communication equipment includes radios as well.
MIDS is US above all. The European had minor role. As about navigation, what has EF over the F 15?
What a surporise that the much larger and heavier F-15 has a longer range. Come up with some data or explicite statements rather than generalised claims.
Go here http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2009/03/f-15-silent-eagle-media-briefi.html at page 11/20.
BTW ever heared about aerodynamics?
In my aerodynamics book, an F 15 with CFTs and 4 AAMs (or even with 8 AAM and “older” F 15 E CFT) is more aerodynamic than an EF with 8 AAMs and 3 EFTs.
aurcovBy which time Tiffy WILL be sporting CAESAR, possibly EJ230 but probably not CFTs (which would add about 2,400kg/3,000l) but the point is even if it isn’t CFTs could be knocked up fairly quickly for any prospective customer
If the tiffy (:p pathetic nickname, BTW) will “sport” AESA and EJ 230 it just be on par with the hypothetical SE in therms of radar performance and T/W ratio.
Don’t get me wrong: I don’t think either that Boeing will see any SE order. OTOH, as I said earlier, that’s a big retrofit market. Japan will keep the F 15 for at least 10-15 years, S. Arabia for at least 20, USAF “E”s will last until 2040, as will the SK and Singapore.
aurcovNaah – Sweden will happily sell you used JAS39A dirt cheap, then keep calling up with offers to upgrade them. :diablo:
New or used, it will be F 16 for Romania. And from US not from Israel. No chance for the swedish thing, even if they offer free…
aurcovThe biggest advantage the EF has over the SE is that IT EXISTS , while the SE will never do so !
But some of its features can be fitted into existing F 15 C/J/E/I/S/SK/SG. There are around 700 of them.
aurcovHighly integrated and automated avionics, with comprehensive sophisticated navigation and communication systems, MMI, most complete and advanced EWS, dual-band long range IRST/FLIR sensor, more sophisticated helmet in comparison to the JHMCS, full sensor fusion…
– The F 15 SE DEW suite (based on F 35 one) is better than EF DASS;
– The SE will carry the same Tiger Eye IR/optical suite (long range IRST-AAS 42 + Sniper) as the SK or Singapore F 15s already do.
– The EF “comprehensive sophisticated communication systems” is the US manufactured MIDS Link 16;
Can you prove the AN/APG-63(V3) is capable of detecting the Typhoon without being detected? Certainly not so its nothing else than hot air and wishful thinking!
And I assume you can prove that the crappy C(R)APTOR “is capable of detecting the SE without being detected” …
Can an operationally configured F-15 carrying 2 drop tanks and 8 AAMs climb to 40k ft in 90 sec? Can the F-15 climb to 25k+ ft in the vertical directly from takeoff?
The SE would have a combat radius of ~720 Nmiles without EFT (about the same radius of an EF with 3 EFTs) so it won’t need EFTs . And an F 15 SE without EFT will do better than an EF with 2 EFTs.
Does the F-15 regualrly operate at altitudes above 40-50k ft without AB?
If that F 15 has P&W229 or GE 129, yes it does.
aurcovWhat is the predicted best front RCS of this new F-15? 1m2? 2m2?
Much smaller. The F 16 has a (frontal) RCS of ~ 1m2, and isn’t considered LO. The F 18 E/F is ~ 0.1 m2. Probably the F 15 SE will be similar.
The engines looks pretty exposes still like in the F-18E.
And still like in a F 18 E/F this can be cured with blockers.
Sign In
