I read something about Tactics onces.
Its inluded the typical merge maneuveres. But sometimes pilots choose to go into the “Egg” vertical, i think this maneuvere is not used as much these days.
But reading about it, it was belived that an F-16/F-15 pilot should very much deny or not do such verticals vs any potensial Su-27 and Mig-29 jets.

Could this be due the the slow speed handeling, and that the Russian fighter was able to take advantage when coming around the top of the Vertical”Egg” due the lower speed?

The “egg” in terms of ACM tactics is not a specific maneuver. It is a concept called the “Tactical Egg” and refers to the general idea that a fighter should not execute maneuvers purely in the horizontal or vertical:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]216105[/ATTACH]

The idea is that if we consider a point in space, and the fighter is executing maneuvers on every possible planar that intersects that point, then the shape drawn by those maneuvers becomes egg-shaped. This is because gravity assists the aircraft in coming over the top of a loop, but works against it as it pulls out of the bottom of a loop.

More generally, the “egg” shows why relying purely on E-M diagrams is not necessarily a good indicator of real-world turn performance, because gravity affects turn rate and airspeed bleed rate if a maneuver is done outside the horizontal plane.

Link to article about first AESA equipped F-15Cs becoming operational in 2010:

Minor correction: those were the first AESA equipped Air National Guard F-15Cs. The USAF had 18 F-15Cs with the earlier APG-63(V)2 AESAs operational as far back as 2000 based at Elmendorf.

Nice new look. I like that it’s fresh but still works the same in terms of organization etc. Nicely done.

One quibble / request: would it be possible to make posts by users on your ignore list smaller? They are now a lot bigger than they used to be. It would be nice if we had the option not to see them at all, really.

What you did was generalise from your experience with one subtype (operated by no other air force) of the engine on a subtype (operated by no other air force) of an aircraft, operated in different flight regimes to all the other users, to all the other types & subtypes & combinations thereof & say “it’s crap”, although none of the multiple other users have had the same problems.

Funny, I only saw him refer to “USN Adours” in his post. Not sure why you’re being so defensive on the in-general Adour’s behalf in any case. From the USN’s perspective the engine is crap, many other aircraft with other engines have no trouble operating with that regime. If the USN were operating the aircraft outside of agreed-upon parameters, that would be one thing, but in this case the manufacturer and the operator agreed ahead of time, yet the engines are not living up to their billing. So it’s pretty justifiable to call them “crap” in that instance. The fact that the engines don’t have problems with other operators who use them in a less demanding way is irrelevant.

The RN & the Spanish, Italian, & Indian navies have coped.

They all operate Harriers. There’s no such thing as a bolter or a waveoff with a Harrier. But with arrested landings, it’s not uncommon for pilots to fail to get aboard multiple times and need to hit a tanker.

… the one pic I have shows clearly an export F-15C single-seater but also clearly with the antennas outfit in both tailbooms like the F-15E who stood by.

There really are not separate assembly lines for the single and 2 seaters; the aircraft are built in sections and assembled on the same line. The tooling is different for single seat and 2-seat sections. The specific avionics systems aren’t really a structural difference.

I also seem to remember me having read, that the 5 israeli F-15D-50-MC produce in the same time frame were delivered almost with F-15E standard.

Yes, like I said above, the 3 F-15D-50-MC sold to Saudi Arabia were structurally like F-15Es but with -D systems for the most part.

Another question … do anyone now if all these 9 F-15C are still in aktive use … some source claimed No. 1327 to be lost, but in the description of the incident stood that it was an midair collision between two F-15Ds and that there would be 2x 2 people involved.

Both F-15C 90-0267 / 1327 and F-15D 90-0272 / 1332 were with RSAF 13th Squadron and were written off Jul 2, 1996 due to the same incident. Most likely the accident report you read was mistaken.

It was a strategic error to believe that the west would allow Iraq to threaten or control so much of the world´s crude oil reserves. Iraq totally ignored the end of the Cold War. … Just 3 years later the forces which could have been deployed would have been smaller.

This is an excellent point. Regardless of “Israeli standards” or not, the U.S. sent its “tip of the spear” units from Germany to Saudi Arabia. Units like the U.S. Army VII Corps and the 36th TFW from Bitburg, that were trained and equipped to fight and win while outnumbered more than three to one. By 1994 none of these units existed.

The most succinct way to phrase it is that without American industrial support in WWII, western Europe would all be speaking German today; and without American military support in WWII, western Europe would all be speaking Russian.