F-14 vs. F-15 accel.

IIRC, the Eagles were flying with 3 tanks (retained) and (obviously) a
combat load.

"John Carrier" wrote in message
...

"Guy Alcala" wrote in message
. ..
John Carrier wrote:

According the diagrams, the F14A was superior in the 1.6+ regime. Of
course, by then the Eagull was about two miles in front in a drag race.
F-15 enjoyed a fairly significant PsubS anywhere one might choose to
fight
in the real world. Then again, nobody killed nobody with PsubS.

My thanks to you and Pechs. My question was based around the Iraqi
bugout to
Iran in DS, when F-15s were sometimes unable to close into AIM-7 range in
a
tail chase of Iraqis at high Q on the deck (I've seen claims of 700 kts
for
some, probably MiG-23s or Fitters, with F-15s firing AIM-7s at 650KCAS @
12,000 feet). Any opinions on whether the F-14 or F-15 had better
endurance
at say M1.2-1.4 @ ca. 12kft, once they accelerated to that speed? I
figure
the AIM-54 would give them a fair range advantage tail-on, but whether it
was
enough to overcome the slower accel due to the drag of carrying a couple,
I
don't know.

650??? I've had F-8's, F-4's and F-14's all faster. The Turkey is a
legitimate 800 knot airplane down low. As to 1.2-1.4 supersonic
endurance, the Turkey hands down. OTOH, Buffaloes are never a good weapon
for fighter vs fighter, even in a tail chase.

R / John

Frijoles wrote:

IIRC, the Eagles were flying with 3 tanks (retained) and (obviously) a
combat load.

The tanks were punched, and 650 KCAS or so was apparently enough to get them in
the envelope. Although ISTR being told that the F-15 has never gotten within a
mile of its 800KCAS limit in level flight. 730KCAS or so on the deck is
floating around in my memory, but don't put a lot of weight on that in this
case.

Guy

Guy,

What engine trim was set for the F15? I recall typically they are
usually at 96%.

~j