F-15's Grounded

[414Flyer]

Actually it was a sex change operation. He went from Sam to Samantha. Just ask the World Famous Mako's, he / she / it was in their squadron.
Every community has their not so secret secrets.
It's usually better to let a dead dog lie.

One of my friends who flew UH-60s told me a very similar story, about someone going on vacation as Rob and coming back as Rebecca. I wonder if some of those stories are urban legends that get passed around.

 

[wms]

Biff - there is no doubt that Pratt does produce a good product...case in point - the -119's on the F-22 are mega-powered galore and have 99.999% reliability from 1K @ 600 kts to 55K @ M 1.7. They're simply awesome.

My point really is most dudes that have never flown the F-16 tend to scoff it's single motor. That's OK, I did it as well when I was a brainwashed Eagle guy. But once I started flying the F-16 with GE's, I realized that this engine was incredible. I had one engine issue (minor) over 2.5 years of flying the jet before I TX'ed to the F-22. Every engine shop guy loved the GE and spit on the Pratt. The early A model Viper's did have some issues (mainly with the turkey feathers falling off in flight), but that's a distant thing of the past. I'd fly a GE F-16 across the pond anyday of the week - and if you had the chance to fly it, you would as well. Night and day compared to the -100's in the F-15C's.

The -100 and -200 P&Ws are a different animal from the DEEC engines. As a jet mech and crew chief on both the GE and P&W on both the 15 and 16, the DEEC P&Ws were the most reliable. We had so little work on the 100DPs and PW220/220Es that we had a hard time staying proficient, even in the early test days of O&E. However, as GE worked the bugs out of their engines(we were time-changing them at 25 hours in GE in the late 80s) and the P&Ws started getting some time on them, the reliability shifted.

 

[Jafo73]

Now if you're talking about crossing the pond, well, you have to choose the GE TF-39 (W/HT90 turbines) powered FRED. Large and in charge. First generation of the high bypass turbofans. A classic. Just like the Commodore 64. They give you FOUR (4) of the old motors, just in case you want to turn one or two of them off. And if you're gonna do that, well why go to Ramstein, just divert into Shannon.

As to the crossing itself, make sure to stop by Franco's by Dover's North Gate, to get the small ham, spinach and cheese calzone. More than enough for the crossing. After you pass 10,000 feet, put the Jump Seater in the front, heat up the pie in the oven, gorge, then take a nice nap in the bunk room. You'll be refreshed for the arrival and landing, and have the energy to race gokarts at the indoor track not far from the base.

Without delving into funding battles, the C-5M SuperGalaxy will make the crossing even better. Maybe 25% more fuel efficient with the CFM-6's, and more reliability and power. Fuel burn alone make return on investment a short order. Less fuel loaded in the tanks means more cargo on the floor. Further leverages Global Reach capabilities, without needing the tanker formation Barney requires.

And that's all I'm going to say about that... for now.

FRED's engines are nothing but god-awful noise makers. Grossly underpowered!

 

[pkober]

I for one welcome the F-15's to the aircraft falling apart pool. Us in the Herc, or four fans of freedom, antiques rooadshow, etc..., community have had aircraft falling apart for years.

Welcome.

 

[popgoesbubble]

Scapdog

How come the F-22 does not improve on the F-15 top end Speed and Service Ceiling? I read the F-15 tops out at 2.5 mach and 60000 feet. And the F-22 shows around 1.6 mach and 50000 feet? Is this correct or Classified data or does it not really matter anymore when designing fighters. I understand an AIM 120 or R-77 will match speed and Altitude and G's on any fighter and it looks like Air to Air combat is moving back to the late 50's early 60's where you wont get in close to use IR or guns. Do you think Radars IFF are getting to the point where Blue on Blue engagements are not going to be an issue.

I remember the Air force did a test I believe called Aim Val back in the 80's where if you took an F15 and put it up against say a 2nd gen fighter like Mig 21 but match it with R73 /Helmet sight and the test showed that the fight could be won by an less expensive older designed fighter vs a modern 4th Gen fighter when carrying All aspect IR missiles during close in dogfights. So do you still train for and think the F22 would even want to get in a close in dogfight with an Adversary.

 

[BiffF15]

Scapdog

How come the F-22 does not improve on the F-15 top end Speed and Service Ceiling? I read the F-15 tops out at 2.5 mach and 60000 feet. And the F-22 shows around 1.6 mach and 50000 feet? Is this correct or Classified data or does it not really matter anymore when designing fighters. I understand an AIM 120 or R-77 will match speed and Altitude and G's on any fighter and it looks like Air to Air combat is moving back to the late 50's early 60's where you wont get in close to use IR or guns. Do you think Radars IFF are getting to the point where Blue on Blue engagements are not going to be an issue.

I remember the Air force did a test I believe called Aim Val back in the 80's where if you took an F15 and put it up against say a 2nd gen fighter like Mig 21 but match it with R73 /Helmet sight and the test showed that the fight could be won by an less expensive older designed fighter vs a modern 4th Gen fighter when carrying All aspect IR missiles during close in dogfights. So do you still train for and think the F22 would even want to get in a close in dogfight with an Adversary.

Pop,
The F15 was a large leap over the F4. The F22 is several times that difference. It is the number one fighter in the world, and by the looks of things will stay that way for a while. It improves upon everything current fighters do, plus brings stealth, supercruise, and a massive speed advantage. It's hard to kill what you can't see regardless of what type of missiles you are carrying. If you do see it, you are a bleeding swimmer in shark infested waters far from shore and it's probably too late anyway as he (F22 / shark) knows exactly where you are and what you are doing and won't be denied his next meal.
Biff

PS Don't believe everything you read. Some airplanes are impressive on paper yet in all reality aren't so impressive in the air.

 

[mzaharis]

Scapdog

How come the F-22 does not improve on the F-15 top end Speed and Service Ceiling? I read the F-15 tops out at 2.5 mach and 60000 feet. And the F-22 shows around 1.6 mach and 50000 feet?

I'm not Scrapdog, and I've never flown a military aircraft, but here's a quote from the January 7 Aviation Week that discusses the altitude thing from an exercise in Alaska. The article also provides some "independent source" confirmation for what BiffF15 says:

The F-22's operating altitude and additional speed during the Alaska exercise also garnered praise.
"We stayed high because it gives us an extra kinetic advantage with shooting, speed and fuel consumption," Tolliver says. "The Raptor typically flies way higher than everybody else and it handles like a dream at those altitudes." Tolliver wouldn't confirm the operating altitude, but Pentagon officials have put it at 65,000 ft., which is at least 15,000 ft. higher than the other fighters.


(Probably a subscription link)
http://www.aviationweek.com/publica...ml&headline=Raptor+Scores+in+Alaskan+Exercise