McDonnell-Douglas F-15 Projects

[KJ_Lesnick]

Was the F-15U or F-15U+ faster, slower, or the same as the regular F-15?

Kendra

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I would have to say it's from the 80's, because that's when I was reading Flight alot. That's an image I clipped out, I didn't save the magazine, so I can't be precise on the date.

Thanks to the wonders of Flight Archive, article found:

http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1990/1990%20-%202652.html

 

[smurf]

Yes, thanks; well worth fishing through the adverts for the whole thing.

 

[Matej]

Note that only four pages forward there is also a drawing of Hornet 2000 and General Dynamics Falcon 21.

 

[LowObservable]

An interesting scan from an AFRL brochure cover...

Also, re "F-15U" of the early 1990s. The idea was Super Hornet-style reduced signatures, but also quite a lot more internal fuel.

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

So, the F-15U had roughly the same speed as an F-18?


KJ_Lesnick
BTW: That picture of an F-15 with an F-18's wings isn't what the F-15U was. The F-15U had a more highly-swept clipped wing.

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

How much bigger was the F-15U in terms of length, and span over the F-15E?

KJ

 

[GTX]

Here you go - RF-15 demonstrator

Regards,

Greg

 

[Pyrrhic victory]

Anyone have any info on electro-optical system planned for the F-15? I had heard there was wiring in the left wing root for a TISEO-esque system in the Rodans.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

F-15 Wild Weasel project and a pic of the demonstrator.

Source:

Peter E Davies & Tony Thornborough, F-15 Eagle (Crowood, 2001)

 

[Deino]

F-15 Wild Weasel project and a pic of the demonstrator.

Source:

Peter E Davies & Tony Thornborough, F-15 Eagle (Crowood, 2001)

Interesting, esp. the antenna (?) between the engines and under the nose !

Deino

 

[Just call me Ray]

Interesting, esp. the antenna (?) between the engines and under the nose !

Deino

The antennae is the same setup that the F-4G got replacing the Vulcan cannon, in fact it's even the same exact fairing.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Merged with existing topic

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Some models of different warloads for future F-15 variants dating back to the 1970s.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Projected FAST pack variants

Source:
James Perry Stevenson, McDonnell-Douglas F-15 Eagle Aero Publishers 1978

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Naval F-15 with Phoenix, same source. Note wing fold, leading edge flaps.

 

[GTX]

Interesting loadout proposals, thanks!

Regards,

Greg

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Overscan are any of these F-15 naval and various strike configuration images available in higher resolution?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Yes, in James Perry Stevenson's book ;D

See the "fair use" section of the forum rules.

 

[flateric]

Have ordered my copy today ... for around three bucks...

 

[frank]

Note also the new nose gear.

Naval F-15 with Phoenix, same source. Note wing fold, leading edge flaps.

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

I would assume the Naval F-15 design is fitted with an AWG-9 to guide the AIM-54's?

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

Those thrust-vectoring F-15 designs look pretty cool. Why were they cancelled exactly?

KJ Lesnick
BTW: I take it the 25 mm caseless GAU-7 ammo was cancelled due to problems with the ammunition?

 

[F-14D]

I would assume the Naval F-15 design is fitted with an AWG-9 to guide the AIM-54's?

Yes, which was one of the reasons its development would be so expensive.

 

[F-14D]

Those thrust-vectoring F-15 designs look pretty cool. Why were they cancelled exactly?

KJ Lesnick
BTW: I take it the 25 mm caseless GAU-7 ammo was cancelled due to problems with the ammunition?

If you are talking about the STOL versions, USAF official policy has always been that no runway is every going to be taken out, so there is no need to develop anything for that situation.. Therefore, they were never going to develop anything like that, because that might call into question the fundamental way it operates. As far as air-to-air TV, in the early days the technology wasn't there to have the flight control systems that would really be able to use that technology. By the time the necessary technologies materued enough to truly make it practical, missiles with Helmet Mounted Sights were being deployed and they are much more effective (and cheaper) than TV, so it just wasn't worth the money. Also, doing TV on an F-15 might emerge as a threat to funding for the F-22 and this could not be allowed.

The GAU-7 did die because of problems with the caseless ammunition. Since using guns in fighter combat has been a poor way of knocking down other fighters (although I guess it beats ramming) since the early '60s (and yes, the Vietnam experience confirmed this), it wasn't worth the money and time to fix it. The M61 was good enough.

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

Yes, which was one of the reasons its development would be so expensive.

Was there any difference in the radome diameter?

KJ

 

[F-14D]

Yes, which was one of the reasons its development would be so expensive.

Was there any difference in the radome diameter?

KJ

Unknown, but cutting down the size of the antenna would reduce performance, but matching the F-14 antenna size would increase the size of the radome cutting down on approach visibility which gets back to the issue of landing on carriers.

 

[aerostable_slug]

Some models of different warloads for future F-15 variants dating back to the 1970s.

Was the targeting turret on the centerline of some of these proposals the AN/AAS-33 TRAM from the A-6E or was it a new development?

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

Was there any difference in the radar capabilities of the F-15N vs the F-14A?

KJ Lesnick

 

[F-14D]

Was there any difference in the radar capabilities of the F-15N vs the F-14A?

KJ Lesnick

Since they never built an F-15N it's hard to answer that, but assuming they both used the AWG-9, the F-14 would have the advantage of larger antenna and probably more power. One can assume the F-15N would have been able to be fitted with TCS & IRST, or maybe one can't assume that.

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

Sad, looking at those beautiful F-15 models loaded with all that Air-to-Ground ammo, how good it would have been in the attack-role: Damn shame that through stupidity and politics, they decided "Not a Pound for Air-to-Ground".


KJ

 

[flateric]

Very nice find, Paul...and our old unknown F-15 mod here as well...

 

[Deino]

Just found at the ARC sadly without any source !

Deino

 

[hesham]

Hi,

is this report contain a project for the MD F-15 ?.
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19720020348_1972020348.pdf

 

[flateric]

The large-scale model was configured to represent a typical high-speed aircraft developed in a general study by the NASA on
advanced high-speed fighter concepts.

 

[Lampshade111]

I still like the idea of a EF-15F for the USAF. Sort of like the USN's EA-18G.

 

[hesham]

My dears and my friends,please watch this;

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19820024444_1982024444.pdf

 

[hesham]

And;

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19840024284_1984024284.pdf

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Responsive Air Launch
Using F-15 Global Strike Eagle
Timothy T. Chen, Preston W. Ferguson,
David A. Deamer, and John Hensley
The Boeing Company

4th Responsive Space Conference
April 24–27, 2006
Los Angeles, CA

http://www.responsivespace.com/Papers/RS4%5CPapers%5CRS4_2001P_Chen.pdf

 

[CFE]

Responsive Air Launch
Using F-15 Global Strike Eagle
Timothy T. Chen, Preston W. Ferguson,
David A. Deamer, and John Hensley
The Boeing Company

4th Responsive Space Conference
April 24–27, 2006
Los Angeles, CA

http://www.responsivespace.com/Papers/RS4%5CPapers%5CRS4_2001P_Chen.pdf

I've seen a mockup of another F-15-launched SLV that resulted in a few powerpoint charts, but not much more. The knowledgeable people I spoke with regarded the idea as a crack-smoker's delusion. The SLV was pretty heavy and very draggy, not to mention that it had very little ground clearance since it was mated to the F-15's center hardpoint.