Read the forum code of contact
By: 20th October 2005 at 20:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-The F-15's better supersonic performance should give it the edge in terms of BVR combat as the faster launch aircraft will give it's missiles more energy making them faster and longer ranged.
By: 20th October 2005 at 20:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-The F-15's better supersonic performance should give it the edge in terms of BVR combat as the faster launch aircraft will give it's missiles more energy making them faster and longer ranged.
But since the super hornet is much more discret, he will spot the eagle earlier and will be in the best stratagic position.
Of course, I won't add anything about the maintenance of the eagle vs Super hornet
By: 20th October 2005 at 20:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-But since the super hornet is much more discret, he will spot the eagle earlier and will be in the best stratagic position.
Good point, I forgot the SH had low observable stealth features.
By: 20th October 2005 at 21:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-My vote goes for the Eagle. SH may be 'stealthy' but that partial stealth doesn't count much if the jet carries a useful load of bombs and missiles, remember external weapons carriage is one of the bigger contributors to the A/C radar visibility. Aside from this slight advantage the Eagle is better than the SH in all other aspects in my view.
By: 20th October 2005 at 21:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-that might be coz you're biased against the SH.. :p ..but with the AESA radars, would the SH not have an edge over the Eagle in terms of range of detection and RCS figures ? remember, even the Strike Eagle wil be loaded with bombs and have an increased RCS.
By: 20th October 2005 at 22:17 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Hey you asked the question don't moan if you don't like the reply. Agreed the Eagle will also be carrying weapons on the exterior, but the Strike Eagle still has other advantages, helleuva lot faster, can carry more and carry it further - you simply cannot ignore range and F-15Cs also have AESA so it shouldn't be a problem to fit it to the F-15E. Anyway it is not as if the AESA is a light years ahead of the APG-70, easier to maintain yes, but a quantum leap - I don't think so.
By: 20th October 2005 at 23:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Neither has AESA at this time (although it is being flight tested on the SH). Both have X-band RAM treatments. Both carry JDAM, AMRAAM, AIM-9X, datalinks, JHMCS and targeting pods. One can land on a carrier while the other has longer range.
By: 21st October 2005 at 02:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Even you all have AESA, but F15K/T’s APG63V(2/3) still is notably powerful than SH’s projected APG79.
By: 21st October 2005 at 04:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-hey Tomcat, was just kidding man..no offence meant.:)
By: 21st October 2005 at 05:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Can the range of Super H be increased to Eagle level, by more powerful engines and conformal fuel tanks?
Can somebody give a good link for SuperH which gives its latest features like FBW and composite use ?
By: 21st October 2005 at 07:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Aside from this slight advantage the Eagle is better than the SH in all other aspects in my view.
I think that the SH is more maintenance friendly and cost much less than the eagle.
The question should be more "4 eagle vs 5 SH" :p
By: 21st October 2005 at 07:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-more powerful ? I thot the F-414 was more than good enough and in fact it has a very high thrust to weight ratio, probably one of the highest among military turbofans. and why is range being made such a big factor ? if your AF has refuelling capability, how much does it matter that your aircraft may have to be refuelled twice or once ?
By: 21st October 2005 at 09:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-I think it does matter...Range,fuel requirments directly influence the tactics vis-a-vis the combat persistence of the aircraft..The f-15E can stay longer in a fight and can pretty much out last the SH.
Posts: 1,877
By: 21Ankush - 20th October 2005 at 19:20
again read someone dissing the SH as the Subpar Hornet..just how would the SH and the F-15 E Strike Eagle compare ? both carry AESA radars, have comparable weaponry, are twin-engined and have well laid out cockpits. obviously the F-15 stands out in terms of range, but comparing their costs and turn-around rates, which aircraft would be a greater asset to an Air Force ? in close-combat the F-18 supposedly is difficult to beat, thanks to its ability to fly well at low speeds and high AoAs..yet its sluggish and accelerates slowly.
so in air combat, which aircraft would win in a situation where AWACs support may not be available.