F15E's trounced by Eurofighters

"Rick Folkers" wrote:

Correct me if I am wrong but I thought that the Brits made the decision to
save
money and not fit the 27MM mauser in the Typhoon. Wonder what they shot
the 15's with? did they have cameras?

They squirted them with BSE-foam, and then went into a paroxysm of
maniacal laughter and frenzied mutual high-fiving.

Grantland

John Cook wrote:

Hi all

Just saw this and it peaked my interest..

"The New Air Superiority Benchmark

Thursday the 19th of February 2004 will mark the day when the
undisputed king of air superiority had to surrender its thirty-year
crown to a newcomer. It happened over the skies of Windermere, in the
scenic English Lake District. Two Eurofighter Typhoon twin-seaters
were on the first RAF formation training flight from Warton Aerodrome
when they were bounced from the eight o'clock by a couple of F-15Es
belonging to the USAFE's 48th TFW, probably the most formidable and
experienced combat unit in the European theatre. The Typhoon crew did
not seem to be intimidated and with two rapid counters ended up on the
F-15 tail, comfortably gunning the trailing one, who was in full
afterburner, wings rocking and wondering what had happened.

It is fair to expect that the most surprised by this first encounter
result would be the F15 crew, used to dominate the skies since the
mid-seventies and with an exchange ratio record of 101 wins to zero
losses, and a bunch of die-hard Eurofighter critics without much
knowledge of the new fighter air combat capabilities. It is
understandable if the RAF rookies would also show their surprise at
the outcome, as one does not expect to win an air engagement on the
first training sortie with a brand new machine against one of the best
combat units in the world, riding what up to now has been the best
fighter in history.

But that is history now!

Those definitely not surprised by what the events over the Lake
District skies signify are the top echelon in the Air Combat Command,
the Chief of Staff and the RAND Corp. analysts and boffins. They have
been saying for years that the F-15 is no match to the new generation
of European fighters and even to the Su-35 Flanker. They know what
they say: their operational analyses studies and other simulated
evaluations-as indeed have ours, both at the industry and government
level-have shown that the F-15 is unable to gain air superiority
against Eurofighter Typhoon. Now they have the first real indication
that their worries were not unjustified and that the F/A-22 was the
right choice, if they want to maintain the air superiority also in the
future."

http://users.boardnation.com/~warpla...y;threadid=445

Cheers

Usually, F-15E's carry Conformal Fuel Tanks (CFTs). These are not often removed, as it's
a hassle, and for Strike Eagle missions, the range/weapons carriage is worth more than
the loss in maneuverability. These would have seriously compromised the ACM capabilities
of the F-15Es in the incident discussed.

This is not to say that the Eurofighter does or does not have an advantage over the F-15E
in ACM, just that this incident tells one very little, without knowing how the aircraft
were outfitted.

Does anyone know if the F-15Es in this scenario were carrying CFTs?

"Mike Zaharis" wrote in message
...


John Cook wrote:

Hi all

Just saw this and it peaked my interest..

"The New Air Superiority Benchmark

Thursday the 19th of February 2004 will mark the day when the
undisputed king of air superiority had to surrender its thirty-year
crown to a newcomer. It happened over the skies of Windermere, in the
scenic English Lake District. Two Eurofighter Typhoon twin-seaters
were on the first RAF formation training flight from Warton Aerodrome
when they were bounced from the eight o'clock by a couple of F-15Es
belonging to the USAFE's 48th TFW, probably the most formidable and
experienced combat unit in the European theatre. The Typhoon crew did
not seem to be intimidated and with two rapid counters ended up on the
F-15 tail, comfortably gunning the trailing one, who was in full
afterburner, wings rocking and wondering what had happened.

It is fair to expect that the most surprised by this first encounter
result would be the F15 crew, used to dominate the skies since the
mid-seventies and with an exchange ratio record of 101 wins to zero
losses, and a bunch of die-hard Eurofighter critics without much
knowledge of the new fighter air combat capabilities. It is
understandable if the RAF rookies would also show their surprise at
the outcome, as one does not expect to win an air engagement on the
first training sortie with a brand new machine against one of the best
combat units in the world, riding what up to now has been the best
fighter in history.

But that is history now!

Those definitely not surprised by what the events over the Lake
District skies signify are the top echelon in the Air Combat Command,
the Chief of Staff and the RAND Corp. analysts and boffins. They have
been saying for years that the F-15 is no match to the new generation
of European fighters and even to the Su-35 Flanker. They know what
they say: their operational analyses studies and other simulated
evaluations-as indeed have ours, both at the industry and government
level-have shown that the F-15 is unable to gain air superiority
against Eurofighter Typhoon. Now they have the first real indication
that their worries were not unjustified and that the F/A-22 was the
right choice, if they want to maintain the air superiority also in the
future."


http://users.boardnation.com/~warpla...on=display;thr
eadid=445

Cheers

Usually, F-15E's carry Conformal Fuel Tanks (CFTs). These are not often
removed, as it's
a hassle, and for Strike Eagle missions, the range/weapons carriage is
worth more than
the loss in maneuverability. These would have seriously compromised the
ACM capabilities
of the F-15Es in the incident discussed.

This is not to say that the Eurofighter does or does not have an advantage
over the F-15E
in ACM, just that this incident tells one very little, without knowing how
the aircraft
were outfitted.

Does anyone know if the F-15Es in this scenario were carrying CFTs?

The pictures I've seen of the F15 don't (obviously at least) show any CFTs.

Ian wrote:


The pictures I've seen of the F15 don't (obviously at least) show any CFTs.

Which F-15? The air superiority (A, B, C, D) ones rarely use CFTs. I think the
only ones that do use them are the ones in Iceland, so they can divert to the UK
if necessary, according to Air International.

Almost all of the pictures of operational E models have them installed. I don't
believe that they're permanent, but they look like they're a pain in the behind
to remove, and there's nothing that E's generally do that would necessitate
their removal. They do lower the aircraft's G limits and add weight, which
would decidedly handicap them in the WVR arena.

"Mike Zaharis" wrote in message
...


John Cook wrote:

Hi all

Just saw this and it peaked my interest..

"The New Air Superiority Benchmark

Thursday the 19th of February 2004 will mark the day when the
undisputed king of air superiority had to surrender its thirty-year
crown to a newcomer. It happened over the skies of Windermere, in the
scenic English Lake District. Two Eurofighter Typhoon twin-seaters
were on the first RAF formation training flight from Warton Aerodrome
when they were bounced from the eight o'clock by a couple of F-15Es
belonging to the USAFE's 48th TFW, probably the most formidable and
experienced combat unit in the European theatre. The Typhoon crew did
not seem to be intimidated and with two rapid counters ended up on the
F-15 tail, comfortably gunning the trailing one, who was in full
afterburner, wings rocking and wondering what had happened.

It is fair to expect that the most surprised by this first encounter
result would be the F15 crew, used to dominate the skies since the
mid-seventies and with an exchange ratio record of 101 wins to zero
losses, and a bunch of die-hard Eurofighter critics without much
knowledge of the new fighter air combat capabilities. It is
understandable if the RAF rookies would also show their surprise at
the outcome, as one does not expect to win an air engagement on the
first training sortie with a brand new machine against one of the best
combat units in the world, riding what up to now has been the best
fighter in history.

But that is history now!

Those definitely not surprised by what the events over the Lake
District skies signify are the top echelon in the Air Combat Command,
the Chief of Staff and the RAND Corp. analysts and boffins. They have
been saying for years that the F-15 is no match to the new generation
of European fighters and even to the Su-35 Flanker. They know what
they say: their operational analyses studies and other simulated
evaluations-as indeed have ours, both at the industry and government
level-have shown that the F-15 is unable to gain air superiority
against Eurofighter Typhoon. Now they have the first real indication
that their worries were not unjustified and that the F/A-22 was the
right choice, if they want to maintain the air superiority also in the
future."


http://users.boardnation.com/~warpla...y;threadid=445

Cheers

Usually, F-15E's carry Conformal Fuel Tanks (CFTs). These are not often
removed, as it's
a hassle, and for Strike Eagle missions, the range/weapons carriage is
worth more than
the loss in maneuverability. These would have seriously compromised the
ACM capabilities
of the F-15Es in the incident discussed.

This is not to say that the Eurofighter does or does not have an advantage
over the F-15E
in ACM, just that this incident tells one very little, without knowing how
the aircraft
were outfitted.

Does anyone know if the F-15Es in this scenario were carrying CFTs?


Yes. ALL F-15Es from the 48th FW at Lakenheath carry CFTs. If they were in
the Lake District, then they also had external fuel tanks. Hardly a BFM/ACM
configuration.

Wake me when they do a planned training sortie with the C models from
Lakenheath.

"John Doe" wrote in message thlink.net...
"Mike Zaharis" wrote in message
...


John Cook wrote:

Hi all

Just saw this and it peaked my interest..

"The New Air Superiority Benchmark

Thursday the 19th of February 2004 will mark the day when the
undisputed king of air superiority had to surrender its thirty-year
crown to a newcomer. It happened over the skies of Windermere, in the
scenic English Lake District. Two Eurofighter Typhoon twin-seaters
were on the first RAF formation training flight from Warton Aerodrome
when they were bounced from the eight o'clock by a couple of F-15Es
belonging to the USAFE's 48th TFW, probably the most formidable and
experienced combat unit in the European theatre. The Typhoon crew did
not seem to be intimidated and with two rapid counters ended up on the
F-15 tail, comfortably gunning the trailing one, who was in full
afterburner, wings rocking and wondering what had happened.

It is fair to expect that the most surprised by this first encounter
result would be the F15 crew, used to dominate the skies since the
mid-seventies and with an exchange ratio record of 101 wins to zero
losses, and a bunch of die-hard Eurofighter critics without much
knowledge of the new fighter air combat capabilities. It is
understandable if the RAF rookies would also show their surprise at
the outcome, as one does not expect to win an air engagement on the
first training sortie with a brand new machine against one of the best
combat units in the world, riding what up to now has been the best
fighter in history.

But that is history now!

Those definitely not surprised by what the events over the Lake
District skies signify are the top echelon in the Air Combat Command,
the Chief of Staff and the RAND Corp. analysts and boffins. They have
been saying for years that the F-15 is no match to the new generation
of European fighters and even to the Su-35 Flanker. They know what
they say: their operational analyses studies and other simulated
evaluations-as indeed have ours, both at the industry and government
level-have shown that the F-15 is unable to gain air superiority
against Eurofighter Typhoon. Now they have the first real indication
that their worries were not unjustified and that the F/A-22 was the
right choice, if they want to maintain the air superiority also in the
future."


http://users.boardnation.com/~warpla...y;threadid=445

Cheers

Usually, F-15E's carry Conformal Fuel Tanks (CFTs). These are not often
removed, as it's
a hassle, and for Strike Eagle missions, the range/weapons carriage is
worth more than
the loss in maneuverability. These would have seriously compromised the
ACM capabilities
of the F-15Es in the incident discussed.

This is not to say that the Eurofighter does or does not have an advantage
over the F-15E
in ACM, just that this incident tells one very little, without knowing how
the aircraft
were outfitted.

Does anyone know if the F-15Es in this scenario were carrying CFTs?


Yes. ALL F-15Es from the 48th FW at Lakenheath carry CFTs. If they were in
the Lake District, then they also had external fuel tanks. Hardly a BFM/ACM
configuration.

Wake me when they do a planned training sortie with the C models from
Lakenheath.


The other problem is that they are comparing aircraft whose mechanical
technology is 20 years apart. Electronics may be equal(even if you
ignore the fact that the 'E' is configured/equipped for a strike role
rather than A2A) but the mechanical design has several generations of
difference.

"Charles Samardza" wrote
"John Doe" wrote

John Cook wrote:

Hi all

Just saw this and it peaked my interest..

"The New Air Superiority Benchmark
....

Wake me when they do a planned training sortie with the C models from
Lakenheath.


The other problem is that they are comparing aircraft whose mechanical
technology is 20 years apart. Electronics may be equal(even if you
ignore the fact that the 'E' is configured/equipped for a strike role
rather than A2A) but the mechanical design has several generations of
difference.

Actually,_one_generation apart although that generation is about 30 years
long. Typhoon benefits from better propulsion technology, controls
technology and somewhat better structural technology so it would be strange
if a Typhoon wasn't substantially better than a F-15C. In fact if it turns
out not to be, a passel of British aero- and -propulsion engineers should be
looking for jobs.

On Mon, 1 Mar 2004 21:55:56 -0500, "Paul F Austin"
wrote:

Apparentley the time taken from the bounce until the Typhoons had
achieved a clear shot on the F15E's rear l was 9 seconds.

Not Too Shabby!!!


Wake me when they do a planned training sortie with the C models from
Lakenheath.


The other problem is that they are comparing aircraft whose mechanical
technology is 20 years apart. Electronics may be equal(even if you
ignore the fact that the 'E' is configured/equipped for a strike role
rather than A2A) but the mechanical design has several generations of
difference.

Actually,_one_generation apart although that generation is about 30 years
long. Typhoon benefits from better propulsion technology, controls
technology and somewhat better structural technology so it would be strange
if a Typhoon wasn't substantially better than a F-15C. In fact if it turns
out not to be, a passel of British aero- and -propulsion engineers should be
looking for jobs.

Actually,_one_generation apart although that generation is about 30 years
long. Typhoon benefits from better propulsion technology, controls
technology and somewhat better structural technology so it would be
strange
if a Typhoon wasn't substantially better than a F-15C. In fact if it turns
out not to be, a passel of British aero- and -propulsion engineers should
be
looking for jobs.

Now the story is they were C models?