15c In F - The McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle is an American twin-engine, all-weather tactical fighter aircraft designed by McDonnell Douglas (now part of Boeing). After evaluations of proposals, the United States Air Force (USAF) selected the McDonnell Douglas design in 1969 to meet the service's need for a dedicated fighter aircraft. The Eagle first flew in July 1972, and entered service in 1976. It is one of the most successful modern fighters, with more than 100 victories and no losses in dogfights, with the majority of kills by the Israeli Air Force.
The eagle has been exported to several countries, including Israel, Japan and Saudi Arabia. The F-15 was originally seen as a pure air superiority aircraft. The design included a secondary ground attack capability
15c In F
Which was largely unused. The aircraft design proved flexible enough that an improved all-weather strike derivative, the F-15E Strike Eagle, was later developed, entering service in 1989 and has been exported to several nations. Several additional F-15 variants have been produced.
A Pilot From The 53rd Fighter Squadron Taxis His F 15c Eagle Aircraft Out To The Runway For A Mission During Operation Deny Flight, The Enforcement Of The United Nations Sanctioned No Fly Zone Over
The USAF had planned to replace all of its Air Force F-15s with the Lockheed Martin F-22 in the 2010s, but the greatly reduced F-22 procurement forced the USAF to replace the F-15C/D in the 2020s to operate. The F-15E Strike Eagle is expected to continue operating in the USAF into the 2030s. The F-15 remains in service with a number of countries, with production of improved variants still ongoing.
The F-15 can trace its origins to the early Vietnam War, where the US Air Force and US Navy battled each other over future tactical aircraft. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara pushed for both services to use as many conventional aircraft as possible, even though performance compromises were involved. As part of this policy, the USAF and Navy had initiated the TFX (F-111) program, with the goal of providing a medium-range interdiction aircraft for the Air Force that would also serve as a long-range interceptor for the Navy.
In January 1965, Secretary McNamara asked the Air Force to consider a new, affordable tactical fighter design for short-range and close air support roles to replace various types such as the F-100 Super Saber and various light bombers in service. Several existing designs can fill this role; the Navy favored the Douglas A-4 Skyhawk and the LTV A-7 Corsair II, which were pure attack aircraft, while the Air Force was more interested in the Northrop F-5 fighter with a secondary attack capability. The A-4 and A-7 were more capable in the attack role, while the F-5 was less capable but could defend itself. If the Air Force chose a pure attack design, maintaining air superiority would be a priority for a new aircraft. The following month, a report on light tactical aircraft suggested that the Air Force purchase the F-5 or A-7, and consider a new, higher-performance aircraft to ensure its air superiority. This point was reinforced by the loss of two Republic F-105 Thunderchief aircraft to obsolete MiG-17s on 4 April 1965.
In April 1965, Harold Brown, then director of the Department of Defense Research and Engineering, stated that the preferred position was to consider the F-5 and begin studies of an "F-X".
Air Force Looks To Retire F 15c As Supplement To F 22 Raptor Force
These early studies envisioned a production run of 800 to 1,000 aircraft and emphasized maneuverability over speed; it also stated that the aircraft would not be considered without some level of ground attack capability.
On 1 August, Geral Gabriel Disosway took command of Tactical Air Command and repeated calls for the F-X, but lowered the required performance from Mach 3.0 to 2.5 to reduce costs.
An official requirements document for an air superiority fighter was finalized in October 1965, and went out as a request for proposals to 13 companies on 8 December. Meanwhile, the Air Force chose the A-7 over the F-5 for the support role on 5 November 1965,
Eight companies responded with proposals. After a short selection, four companies were asked to provide further development. In total, they have developed around 500 design concepts. Typical designs had variable-sweep wings, weighed over 60,000 pounds (27,000 kg), included a top speed of Mach 2.7 and a thrust-to-weight ratio of 0.75.
Hasegawa 1/48 F 15c
When the proposals were studied in July 1966, the aircraft were about the same size and weight as the TFX F-111 and, like that aircraft, were designs that could not be considered an air superiority fighter.
Throughout this period, studies of combat over Vietnam produced troubling results. Theory had emphasized long-range combat using missiles and optimized aircraft for this role. The result was highly loaded aircraft with large radar and excellent speed, but limited maneuverability and often missing a gun. The canonical example was the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II, used by the USAF, USN and U.S. Marine Corps to provide air superiority over Vietnam, the only fighter with sufficient power, range, and maneuverability to provide the primary task of dealing with the threat posed by Soviet fighters while flying visual gagemt rules.
Aircraft closed to visual range and maneuverability, putting the larger American aircraft at a disadvantage to the much less explosive day fighters such as the MiG-21. Rockets proved to be much less reliable than predicted, especially at close range. Although improved training and the introduction of the M61 Vulcan cannon on the F-4 did much to address the differences, these early results led to significant re-evaluation of the 1963 Project Forecast doctrine.
This led to John Boyd's theory of ergy-maneuverability, which emphasized that extra power and maneuverability were important aspects of a successful fighter design, and that these were more important than outright speed. Due to insufficient mastery of the concepts and good timing with the "failure" of the first F-X project, the "fighter mafia" pushed for a lightweight day fighter that could be built and operated in large numbers for assured air superiority.
Behold The Air Force's Updated F 15 Eagle Family Portrait Including The New F 15ex
In early 1967, they proposed that the ideal design would have a thrust-to-weight ratio close to 1:1, a maximum speed further reduced to Mach 2.3, a weight of 40,000 pounds (18,000 kg), and a wing loading of 80 pounds per square foot (390 kg/m
By this time, the Navy had determined that the F-111 would not meet its requirements and began development of a new dedicated fighter design, the VFAX program. In May 1966, McNamara again asked the troops to study the designs and see if the VFAX would meet the Air Force's F-X needs. The resulting studies took 18 months and concluded that the desired functions were too different; the navy emphasized downtime and mission flexibility, while the air force now primarily sought manoeuvrability.
Designed as a high-speed, high-altitude interceptor, the MiG-25 made many performance trade-offs to excel in this role.
Among these was the requirement for very high speed, above Mach 2.8, which required the use of stainless steel instead of aluminum for many parts of the aircraft. The extra weight required a much larger wing to allow the aircraft to operate at the necessary high altitudes. To observers, however, it appeared to be similar to the very large F-X studies, a high-speed aircraft with a large wing offering high maneuverability, which led to serious concerns throughout the Department of Defense and the various weapons that the United States was. outclassed. The MiG-23 was also a topic of concern, and it was believed to be a better aircraft than the F-4. The F-X would outclass the MiG-23, but now the MiG-25 appeared to be superior in speed, altitude and durability to all existing US fighters, even the F-X.
F 15c Eagle [add On]
Both USAF and TAC headquarters continued to call for a multirole aircraft, while both Disosway and Air Chief of Staff Bruce K. Holloway pushed for a pure air superiority design that would meet the expected performance of the MiG-25. During the same period, the Navy had ended its VFAX program and instead accepted a proposal from Grumman for a smaller and more maneuverable design known as the VFX, which later became the Grumman F-14 Tomcat. VFX was significantly closer to the evolving F-X requirements. Air forces in combat were possibly caused by the concern that the Navy's VFAX would be forced upon them; in May 1968 it was said that "We have finally decided - and I hope there is no one who still disagrees - that this aircraft will be a fighter".
In September 1968, a request for proposals was issued to major airlines. These requirements called for a single-seat fighter with a maximum takeoff weight of 40,000 pounds (18,000 kg) for the air-to-air role with a maximum speed of Mach 2.5 and a thrust-to-weight ratio of nearly 1:1 by assignment weight.
It also called for a twin-ginned arrangement, as this was thought to respond more quickly to throttle changes and could offer commonality with the Navy's VFX program. However, the details of the avionics were largely undefined, for example building a larger aircraft with a powerful radar that could detect emy at longer distances was not clear, or alternatively a smaller aircraft that would detect it by emy would make it more difficult.
Four companies submitted proposals, with the Air Force eliminating Geral Dynamics and awarding contracts to Fairchild Republic, North American Rockwell and McDonnell Douglas for
F 15c Eagle Weapons School Ends At Nellis Afb > Air Force > Article Display
Ruger 556 review, vg6 epsilon 556 review, msar stg 556 review, sinn 556 review, sinn 556 i review, meridian 556 review, eotech 556 review, precor efx 556 elliptical review, benchmade 556 review, surefire sfmb 556 review, precor efx 556 review, sinn 556 anniversary review
0 Comments