User Panel
Bet a slick one with half tanks would be fun to stand on its tail.
|
|
|
And we should be cranking out more F-15's , damm good jets that can still get the job done.
|
|
Man this is unbelievable. 40 years??
What an airframe. My all time favorite from a looks perspective, but damn the performance is STILL there. Not only have ours never been shot down, but the Israelis or anyone else using them. Crazy. |
|
Quoted:
Bet a slick one with half tanks would be fun to stand on its tail. The #1 thing I wish I could do before I die is to fly one all-out. Too bad I don't even know how to fly.........ahahaha. |
|
Quoted:
Man this is unbelievable. 40 years?? What an airframe. My all time favorite from a looks perspective, but damn the performance is STILL there. Not only have ours never been shot down, but the Israelis or anyone else using them. Crazy. They like to fly em with one wing too! |
|
I'm 40 and a scary badass motherfucker too
Seriously though, let the record speak for itself. It's the Michael Phelps of air combat. Bitches |
|
At the rate we are going, I hope those airframes have another century or two left in them.
|
|
|
Quoted:
And we should be cranking out more F-15's , damm good jets that can still get the job done. Oh, Boeing is cranking them out, just not for the US. Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and S. Korea are all getting shiny new Strike Eagle variants. That doesn't even take into account the "Silent Eagle" version that Boeing is pushing for foreign sales. I doubt the US will ever see another new Strike Eagle airframe in it's inventory, though I will be happy enough when all of our Strike Eagles can just get AESA radars. |
|
Quoted:
Bet a slick one with half tanks would be fun to stand on its tail. You sir, are looking for the Streak Eagle. |
|
Quoted:
One of my favorite books. Bought it when I was 10 or 11 in the Misawa AFB BX. 26 years ago. I'm old. http://www.modelsforsale.com/listphotos/SQ1024.jpg Best, JBR I had that book too. Hell, I had a shit ton of that series. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
And we should be cranking out more F-15's , damm good jets that can still get the job done. Oh, Boeing is cranking them out, just not for the US. Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and S. Korea are all getting shiny new Strike Eagle variants. That doesn't even take into account the "Silent Eagle" version that Boeing is pushing for foreign sales. I doubt the US will ever see another new Strike Eagle airframe in it's inventory, though I will be happy enough when all of our Strike Eagles can just get AESA radars. I really hope when we export shit like this to certain countries that we put killswitches on them or crap avionics/countermeasures. |
|
|
Not a pound for air to ground! This is what happens when no expense was spared, 40 years later its still a viable weapons platform. Damned shame as that will probably never happen again.
|
|
Absolutely beautiful bird, it would be the eqivalent of having the P-51 Mustang still in frontline use in 1985! Ain't technology and design wisdom grand.
|
|
I'm an ex jet mech and the f-15 was my bird, I love that jet! Anyone here make it to Nellis? I'm 82-86.
|
|
I had the honor of working with one of the chief engineers of that plane after he had retired. Lot's of respect for those engineers of that era.
|
|
Awesome plane. Still a very viable piece of equipment 40 years later.
Silent Eagles instead of F-35's would have been interesting.
|
|
...and we'll use it for another 20 years. Terrifying.
We're ahead of the rest of the world. Way ahead. But not 60 years ahead. (Don't get me wrong... I love it... but I love the F-4... And the P-51... If we let the Democrats run the show, the USAF would be flying Sopwith Camels...) |
|
Quoted:
Bet a slick one with half tanks would be fun to stand on its tail. When I was a kid I saw one blast off on an unrestricted climb from the tower at Luke. Pretty much cemented I'd work in Aviation Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Quoted:
First aircraft I worked on. First aircraft someone handed me the controls All pictures below were taken by yours truly. Got my ride on A1063 http://i.imgur.com/6dm2c.jpg http://i.imgur.com/dOoQM.png http://i.imgur.com/DdGyn.jpg http://i.imgur.com/YrGT3.jpg http://i.imgur.com/UJNt1.jpg http://i.imgur.com/84p44.jpg http://i.imgur.com/pFBjJ.jpg http://i.imgur.com/nwg8l.jpg http://i.imgur.com/ywBGT.jpg http://i.imgur.com/7jqQA.jpg http://i.imgur.com/HdB4H.jpg http://i.imgur.com/amX8n.jpg http://i.imgur.com/XosbX.jpg What's a skunk works logo doing on a McD jet? |
|
The local AFB had a big airshow after Desert Storm in '91. All the inventory was there––B1B, A10, even had the first public showing of the F117. The Blue Angels were the headline act of the show. However, a solo F15 went before the BAs and stole the show from them. It had to be the most impressive demonstration I've ever seen. The pilot of the F15 brought it in low and level over the field, stood it on its tail and accelerated straight up, out of sight. Then he turned it over and pointed it straight down, accelerating again. He flared out just above the ground. It was amazing to see.
|
|
Awesome plane. Still a very viable piece of equipment 40 years later.
Silent Eagles instead of F-35's would have been interesting. Agreed. |
|
While sitting on the flight line at Kadena some years ago waiting for a C-130 to the mainland I had the privilege of watching Eagles do take-offs where they basically shot straight up into the air. It was really impressive. I don't know much about it but it seems like we might be better off spending our money on a shit-ton of Eagles instead of a handful of raptors. Then again, I don't know much.
|
|
|
Quoted:
While sitting on the flight line at Kadena some years ago waiting for a C-130 to the mainland I had the privilege of watching Eagles do take-offs where they basically shot straight up into the air. It was really impressive. I don't know much about it but it seems like we might be better off spending our money on a shit-ton of Eagles instead of a handful of raptors. Then again, I don't know much. I agree with you, not that I know shit about air power either It just seems that as great as the F-22 is, 187 is not enough to give much coverage world wide, let alone accounting for down time for maintenance, or God forbid losses in combat. IMO we would be better off with newer F-15s with the latest avionics. YMMV. |
|
Quoted: Man this is unbelievable. 40 years?? What an airframe. My all time favorite from a looks perspective, but damn the performance is STILL there. Not only have ours never been shot down, but the Israelis or anyone else using them. Crazy. That's because the Eagle, and also the F-16, which is only a couple of years newer, both represented the first generation of aircraft that could be designed to reach performance and maneuvering limits which were defined by pilot endurance rather than engine and aerodynamic performance. Once you've reached the point where the endurance of the human pilot is the limiting factor, then beyond that point, there isn't any point to designing an airframe that's able to deliver still more punishment to the occupant. In order to achieve big improvements in aircraft agility at this point, you'll have to take that weak fleshy thing out of the cockpit and let him oversee things from the ground where he won't get crushed in the next max G maneuver. And removing that fragile animated bag of bones and glop from the cockpit also allows you to delete all those unnecessary life support and human interface systems which add weight, cost, and complexity to the overall design. My guess is that the thrust-vectored maneuvering performance made available for the F-22 probably represents what's very close to the limit of what can be achieved in a fighter that has to carry a human pilot. And, thrust vectoring was tested in the 80s and early 90s on the F-16, in a 3D vectored form which is even more maneuverable than the 2 D (vertical plane only) vectoring that the F-22 uses. Once the man is removed from the cockpit, and the internal computer is smart enough to perform the tasks that a good pilot does, but even faster, then the ensuing increases in maneuvering performance will be terrifying...and fatal to a human pilot. I predict the first unmanned, autonomous, ACM-capable fighter will be designed for a 15 G maneuvering limit, at the very least. Possibly more than that. 20? 30? I don't know, but with no human to support, the thing could be built very robustly indeed. CJ |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Man this is unbelievable. 40 years?? What an airframe. My all time favorite from a looks perspective, but damn the performance is STILL there. Not only have ours never been shot down, but the Israelis or anyone else using them. Crazy. That's because the Eagle, and also the F-16, which is only a couple of years newer, both represented the first generation of aircraft that could be designed to reach performance and maneuvering limits which were defined by pilot endurance rather than engine and aerodynamic performance. Once you've reached the point where the endurance of the human pilot is the limiting factor, then beyond that point, there isn't any point to designing an airframe that's able to deliver still more punishment to the occupant. In order to achieve big improvements in aircraft agility at this point, you'll have to take that weak fleshy thing out of the cockpit and let him oversee things from the ground where he won't get crushed in the next max G maneuver. And removing that fragile animated bag of bones and glop from the cockpit also allows you to delete all those unnecessary life support and human interface systems which add weight, cost, and complexity to the overall design. My guess is that the thrust-vectored maneuvering performance made available for the F-22 probably represents what's very close to the limit of what can be achieved in a fighter that has to carry a human pilot. And, thrust vectoring was tested in the 80s and early 90s on the F-16, in a 3D vectored form which is even more maneuverable than the 2 D (vertical plane only) vectoring that the F-22 uses. Once the man is removed from the cockpit, and the internal computer is smart enough to perform the tasks that a good pilot does, but even faster, then the ensuing increases in maneuvering performance will be terrifying...and fatal to a human pilot. I predict the first unmanned, autonomous, ACM-capable fighter will be designed for a 15 G maneuvering limit, at the very least. Possibly more than that. 20? 30? I don't know, but with no human to support, the thing could be built very robustly indeed. CJ This would seem to be borne out by the fact that the F-22 "oxygen problems" turned out to be related to the suits the pilots have to wear to survive flying the beasts. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
While sitting on the flight line at Kadena some years ago waiting for a C-130 to the mainland I had the privilege of watching Eagles do take-offs where they basically shot straight up into the air. It was really impressive. I don't know much about it but it seems like we might be better off spending our money on a shit-ton of Eagles instead of a handful of raptors. Then again, I don't know much. I agree with you, not that I know shit about air power either It just seems that as great as the F-22 is, 187 is not enough to give much coverage world wide, let alone accounting for down time for maintenance, or God forbid losses in combat. IMO we would be better off with newer F-15s with the latest avionics. YMMV. I am constantly reminded that we were able to defeat German tanks in WWII despite their sophistication by the use of sheer numbers. I feel like we are repeating the Wermacht's mistakes. |
|
When I went to the Alliance airshow in Fort Worth back in 2008 or 2009 there was a Strike Eagle demo.
It was the best aircraft demo I have ever seen. Even my dad said it was the best, and he has over 5000 hours in F4s and F18s. |
|
I feel insanely blessed to have had a few flights in B and D model Eagles. Was able to experience a gate climb, some 1 v 1 BFM, fly the jet for a while, as well as earn a 9G pin. Learned first-hand what G-LOC was the first time I underwent that many Gs .
When I was a kid in the 70s (completely smitten by the F-15, mind you) I would've never imagined all those years later I would actually get paid to sit in the back and shoot photos and video. |
|
Quoted:
The local AFB had a big airshow after Desert Storm in '91. All the inventory was there––B1B, A10, even had the first public showing of the F117.... Do you mean at that particular show? Because it most definitely appeared at the NAS Jacksonville show in 1990. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Wow, another one of those planes where the plane is older than the pilots.
|
|
Used to live in the flight path of Bergstrom AFB here in Austin. Pairs of F-4's would cruise almost directly overhead 3 or 4 times a day no more than 3 or 4 thousand feet up. Beautiful, beautiful airplanes! Shook the walls, rattled all the glass...
Then the Tx ANG got F-15's and F-16's. Again flew over in pairs, but soooo much more quiet. The F-15 was the most perfect looking jet I'd ever seen, I loved waiting outside for them to come over. Apologies to the great F-15, but then one day I saw a B1-B fly overhead. |
|
Quoted:
I'm an ex jet mech and the f-15 was my bird, I love that jet! Anyone here make it to Nellis? I'm 82-86. Nellis 05-09 |
|
Quoted:
Wow, another one of those planes where the plane is older than the pilots. The design is 40 years old. We don't have any 40 year old eagles flying around. |
|
It's a sexy bird, glad I get to see them fly every day. I'm really not impressed with the P&W FW-100-229s though, what a pile of crap.
The raptor is even sexier, and has completely amazing motors in comparison. |
|
Quoted:
Used to live in the flight path of Bergstrom AFB here in Austin. Pairs of F-4's would cruise almost directly overhead 3 or 4 times a day no more than 3 or 4 thousand feet up. Beautiful, beautiful airplanes! Shook the walls, rattled all the glass... Then the Tx ANG got F-15's and F-16's. Again flew over in pairs, but soooo much more quiet. The F-15 was the most perfect looking jet I'd ever seen, I loved waiting outside for them to come over. Apologies to the great F-15, but then one day I saw a B1-B fly overhead. Didn't live near the flightpath, but started HS at a school near it. Was awesome to watch pairs of Ole Smoky fly over. My math class was in one of the portables so the teacher had to stop his lecture briefly every time pair would fly over. |
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.