Register here

Author Topic: USAF plans F-15 modernization  (Read 73619 times)

Offline Dragon029

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 622
Re: USAF plans F-15 modernization
« Reply #30 on: February 13, 2015, 06:38:14 am »
Depending on the attachment system, it might be just plain impossible to eject anyway.

Offline fightingirish

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2087
Slán,
fightingirish

Slán ist an Irish Gaelic word for Goodbye.  :)

Avatar:
McDonnell Douglas Model 225 painting by "The Artist" Michael Burke (Tavush) 2018, found at deviantart.com and at Secret Projects Forum » Research Topics » User Artwork » McDonnell Douglas Model 225 Painting

Offline bobbymike

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 8522
Re: USAF plans F-15 modernization
« Reply #32 on: June 30, 2015, 10:19:39 pm »
Legion Pod Completes First Flight Test

7/1/2015

​Lockheed Martin’s Legion Pod successfully tracked multiple airborne targets during its first flight test aboard an F-16 aircraft flying from the company’s Forth Worth, Texas, facility. The multi-function sensor system, which was integrated on the F-16 “without making any hardware or software changes to the aircraft,” is available to meet USAF requirements for the F-15C infrared search and track program of record, according to a June 30 company release. More flight tests are expected on both F-16s and F-15Cs this year. “With our most advanced hardware and software, a hot production line, and an established logistics depot, Legion Pod provides a high-performance, low-risk, affordable capability to warfighters today,” said Paul Lemmo, vice president of Lockheed’s missile and fire control
Books are the quietest and most constant of friends; they are the most accessible and wisest of counselors, and the most patient of teachers.

Charles W. Eliot

Offline kcran567

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 660
Re: USAF plans F-15 modernization
« Reply #33 on: July 01, 2015, 01:38:01 am »
These pod systems are all hanging low underneath the aircraft. Are they meant more for ground targets, and lesser for air to air? It seems the entire top view of the IRST pod is going to be unable to "see" the front/top view above the aircraft fuselage and nose in turns and if a target is approaching from above.
« Last Edit: July 01, 2015, 01:39:34 am by kcran567 »

Offline bring_it_on

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1837
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: USAF plans F-15 modernization
« Reply #34 on: July 01, 2015, 02:53:30 am »
These pod systems are all hanging low underneath the aircraft. Are they meant more for ground targets, and lesser for air to air? It seems the entire top view of the IRST pod is going to be unable to "see" the front/top view above the aircraft fuselage and nose in turns and if a target is approaching from above.

You can fly at higher altitudes and have multiple aircraft spaced when it comes to altitudes. I believe that these pods also have data links to share information with other pod users.
Old radar types never die; they just phased array - Unknown

Offline Pioneer

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1590
  • Seek out and close with the enemy
Re: USAF plans F-15 modernization
« Reply #35 on: July 08, 2015, 07:01:34 pm »
Quote
The USAF is not currently considering adding, for example, the large area display or decoupled cockpits that Boeing is offering to international F-15E customers. "However, we continue to look for opportunities to leverage to meet the warfighter's needs," the F-15 SPO official says.

For the price of a couple of F-35s they could replace all the older CRT and LCD displays in our F-15s and F-16s, but noooooo...

I'm glad they're improving our older aircraft but it seems compared to new built F-15s for South Korea and Singapore & Saudi Arabia along with all those block 60+ F-16s being manufactured it is kind of lacking. Sure we have our 195 F-22s and F-35s but other countries will be buying and upgrading those F-35s while other countries develop and sell their own 4++ and 5th generation fighters.

Quote
The USAF also hopes to add an infrared search and track (IRST) capability to the F-15C, which could significantly boost the air-to-air capability of the venerable air superiority fighter. "The IRST program will restart in fiscal year 2015," the official says. But "the F-15E will not receive the IRST" because it is not primarily tasked with air-to-air missions.

We had IRST since the 1950s and had it on our F-14s, what the heck is taking so long for something many other countries develop, buy and use? Never should have gotten rid of our F-14s, we could have at least used its IRST or a design based off of it for improvements to our aircraft.

I like the way you think John21!! :P ;)
But may I add.......

Unfortunately and most regrettably the “infrared search and track (IRST) capability” on the F-15A/C Eagle is some 40 years too late! It could and should have been a part of the design during its design process (along with the intended and warranted all aspect AIM-82 or later AIM-95 Agile IR missile). But I guess with the USAF’s obsessive (and successful) cry of a ‘Fighter Gap’ (just as it had successfully done with its deliberate and orchestrated ‘Bomber and Missile Gap’ catch cry) in response to the Mig-25 ‘Foxbat’, its principle ability of close-in-air combat was hijacked by long-range (Aim-7F Sparrow’s) missiles!

Its ironic that the U.S. military and NATO was so surprised and concerned about the appearance of the MiG-29 ‘Fulcrum’ equipped with its S-31E2 KOLS IRST in Finland in 1986. The fact that the USAF had known and employed IRST on its Convair F-102 Delta Dagger’s from 1956. And realistically, how long has it been since the USAF had access to the former East German MiG-29’s and seen and experienced firsthand how potent its IRST system is in dissimulated air combat, and yet the USAF are still only talking about introducing an IRST system 


Well hang on John21, why not consolidate cost (I know I know an oxymoron in the Pentagon's vocabulary  ::) ) and introduce the intended F-35's CRT and LCD displays into these upgrades of the F-15 and F-16, which could then be removed and recycled back into the actual F-35 if and when the F-35 is truly deemed operational and able to effectively replace the F-16 in USAF service!  :o

Regards
Pioneer

And remember…remember the glory is not the exhortation of war, but the exhortation of man.
Mans nobility, made transcendent in the fiery crucible of war.
Faithfulness and fortitude.
Gentleness and compassion.
I am honored to be your brother.”

— Lt Col Ralph Honner DSO M

Offline Void

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 129
Re: USAF plans F-15 modernization
« Reply #36 on: July 08, 2015, 10:58:16 pm »
It is not a coincidence the US Navy is much bigger on IRSTs than the USAF - the sea is a very benign environment with minimal infrared clutter.

IRSTs have serious issues with clutter. They cannot directly measures range or doppler and it is very, very difficult for a computer to distinguish the optical flow of the background from target motion. Prior to the 1990s (western, Russian IRSTs got the capability even later) IRSTs could not even be used for look-down shoot-down engagements overland. The IRSTs that were available during the cold war would have been essentially useless in the low altitude combat that was anticipated over Europe.
Radar provides more reliable tracks in general and far more reliable tracks in the presence of ground clutter. It is also largely independent of atmospheric effects. IRSTS can achieve some very impressive tracking ranges under good conditions especially between two aircraft at altitude. But the probability of say a 100km cloud free line of sight at the same time there is little or no haze is... much less good.


Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11230
Re: USAF plans F-15 modernization
« Reply #37 on: July 09, 2015, 05:34:39 am »
The fact that the USAF had known and employed IRST on its Convair F-102 Delta Dagger’s from 1956.

Funny thing is many US fighters have had IR sensors on them.  In addition to the Tomcat and F-102 there was the F-101, F-106, F-4, F-8, XF-108, YF-12, and probably others I'm missing. 
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Jeb

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 246
Re: USAF plans F-15 modernization
« Reply #38 on: July 09, 2015, 08:51:23 am »
The fact that the USAF had known and employed IRST on its Convair F-102 Delta Dagger’s from 1956.

Funny thing is many US fighters have had IR sensors on them.  In addition to the Tomcat and F-102 there was the F-101, F-106, F-4, F-8, XF-108, YF-12, and probably others I'm missing.


I wonder how much functional use IRST got on those platforms? Except for the TCS on the F-14, it always seemed like RADAR was *the* sensor of choice.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11230
Re: USAF plans F-15 modernization
« Reply #39 on: July 09, 2015, 09:01:14 am »
The fact that the USAF had known and employed IRST on its Convair F-102 Delta Dagger’s from 1956.

Funny thing is many US fighters have had IR sensors on them.  In addition to the Tomcat and F-102 there was the F-101, F-106, F-4, F-8, XF-108, YF-12, and probably others I'm missing.


I wonder how much functional use IRST got on those platforms? Except for the TCS on the F-14, it always seemed like RADAR was *the* sensor of choice.

That'd be a question for some of the older pilots over on F-16.net. 
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline LowObservable

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2145
Re: USAF plans F-15 modernization
« Reply #40 on: July 09, 2015, 11:21:30 am »
I don't think they were used much. They were bedevilled by false alarm rates and (absent fusion) were one more thing for the pilot to monitor.

Offline Pioneer

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1590
  • Seek out and close with the enemy
Re: USAF plans F-15 modernization
« Reply #41 on: July 10, 2015, 01:27:31 am »
Quote
I guess I just don't understand why, if Japan can do it right, why can't we?

I take the analogy that the USAF willingly took its eye off the ball, when it came to the F-15 in its service, when it got infatuated with the 'paper' capabilities and wet-dream about its F-22 and F-35! Poor old Eagle's, I guess if they could talk, they'd understand what its poor cuz - the A-10 Thunderbolt II has had to contend with all its life!  ::)

Regards
Pioneer 
And remember…remember the glory is not the exhortation of war, but the exhortation of man.
Mans nobility, made transcendent in the fiery crucible of war.
Faithfulness and fortitude.
Gentleness and compassion.
I am honored to be your brother.”

— Lt Col Ralph Honner DSO M

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 11230
Re: USAF plans F-15 modernization
« Reply #42 on: July 10, 2015, 02:56:37 am »
Quote
I guess I just don't understand why, if Japan can do it right, why can't we?

I take the analogy that the USAF willingly took its eye off the ball, when it came to the F-15 in its service, when it got infatuated with the 'paper' capabilities and wet-dream about its F-22 and F-35!

You do realize the design of the F-15 was wrapped up about 15 years before they even started talking about the F-22 right?
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8099
  • The path not taken.
Re: USAF plans F-15 modernization
« Reply #43 on: July 10, 2015, 03:04:11 am »
He's talking about the advanced upgrades (and at least one new variant) that were shelved in the expectation that the ATF would shortly be coming down the road.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline fredymac

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1297
Re: USAF plans F-15 modernization
« Reply #44 on: July 10, 2015, 03:54:29 am »

I seem to recall the F-14 IRST was used to provide visual confirmation of target friend/foe status and not for missile guidance.  As has been mentioned already, a passive imaging sensor can’t give you range unless you calculate parallax over a tangential distance relative to the target bearing.  You would not have enough information to select between a short or long range missile.


If you want an optical alternative to radar, it would have to be a LIDAR.  This would give you both bearing and range.  If I were trying to come up with a way to counter radar stealth, I would be experimenting with ways to shrink a kilowatt class beacon laser into a fighter nosecone plus an associated beam director.  The Airborne Laser (before it was killed), had a TIL (Track Illuminator Laser) designed to provide this function (coaxial to the main HEL laser and fired through the 1.5 meter beam director).