Correction: Thanks @fredjoeme1284 for pointing out that there were 2 F-15E losses in combat: (1) F-15E (88-1694/SJ) of 333rd FS, 4th FW from Seymour Johnson AFB, NC was shot-down near Tikrit in Iraq on 6 April 2003, the pilots were Killed in Action. (2) F-15E-46-MC, 88‑1692, c/n 1101/E076, of the 336th FS, 4th TFW, USAF, was shot down by an Iraqi SA-2E missile during Operation Desert Storm. Both crew members ejected and were POWs.
Curiously though, the ACTIVE in Ace Combat uses the 2D vector nozzles rather than the correct 3D nozzles. I have to admit, I prefer the look of the rectangular nozzles.
@@rapidsqualor5367. Yes, but it’s designed that way to have high AO, & lobbying high off bore Fox two missiles for modern day dogfights. The F15 & 16 were designed to be 2circle gun & BOV fighters, not up close dog fighters.
@@bri-manhunter2654 The F-16 was also designed for energy retention. I read the cranked arrow wing of the F-16XL was great for lift but dropped a lot of speed in maneuvers needed in a close up fight. I would suspect this short take off F-15 would also loose more energy than the original design. With the F-35, instead of maneuvering the plane to launch at a enemy high off bore the missile itself will do the off bore maneuver. What is " 2circle gun" ?
@@rapidsqualor5367 One-circle and two-circle fights. The two primary domains of dogfighting. Two-circle fights are more common and favor aircraft with high mechanical energy retention and fast turn rate; such as the F-5, F-16, and F-15. One-circle fights are less common, and favor aircraft with high alpha controllability, high vortex lift, and small turn radius; such as delta wing jets (Typhoon, Rafale, J-10) and jets with large LERX and/or thrust vectoring (Su-35, MiG-35, etc).
5:50 that's cool to find out that this F-15 Active helped test the Quite Spike program. With the fruit of that research the X-59 rolling out this year (2024)
Wikipedia says this aircraft is currently "on display at Edwards AFB", but Edwards is a big place and much of it is off-limits to the public, including the Air Force Flight Test Museum. There is an "air park" next to it which is open to the public (hard not to be since the aircraft are sitting outside), but the Google Earth image shows no Eagles there. There is an SR-71 and one of the two F-16XLs, however. But I wish that museum was open to the public...
Check with them. If you're in the area, I'd suggest calling the base Public Affairs Office. Some bases have museums and such on base that aren't accessible on a day to day. But sometimes you can get a tour, or they'll have an "Open House" where you can go see it.
I’ve personally seen the F-15 STOL sitting at the end of one of the taxiways by a hanger on google earth. It was outside next to some other jets. Not sure if it was waiting for a restoration or something.
The STOL/MTD thrust reversing was really impressive in flight, given the advantage they offered, I think that the 2D nozzles were the better option. FWIW, I worked on the STOL/MTD back in the day.
It seems they're not required. Sandboxx News did an interesting piece on how the fly-by-wire system in the EX largely negated the need for thrust vectoring. ruclips.net/video/kbbWn6Z_8aY/видео.html
the idea anyone will have nice runways in a real peer fight is quite silly. they should make that a very important design consideration for all these crafts.
Today F-15EX with advances in control and fly-by-wire can do most things that even F-22 can do. Adding this + Silent Eagle features would probably baloon the price of EX
@@danpatterson8009 No doubt, but the f15 ex is something else with being cheaper to run per hour, range speed and weapon load, alas the aging air frame unfortunately...
This plane wins by strategy, no tactics. By being more adapted to the mission profile itself, than excelling in a certain type of performance. Also the speed made it evasive.
Actually Russia don't have engines with 2D thrust vectoring at all. It was in development in 80s, but thrown away for full 3D nozzle because it not affects thrust power.
@@WolfeSaber yeah, but the su57 holds the longest range air-to-air kills in history, further than the f22/f35 missiles will even fly. The only place those aircraft outdo the su57 is numbers. Even from a standpoint of stealth, anyone who understands geometric stealth (which is all we can get concrete information on for any of the 3 aircraft) would also be able to come to the conclusion that It's quite well built from 3 directions. The f35, for example, is well built from 1.
@@deven6518 Well, the US is building better missiles, like one that is half the size as the standard, but still performs just as well as the full size ones. Also, the Felons are built from substandard parts, like bubbles in the canopy.
The in-air thrust reversing to slow rapidly can also be used as flight control or thrust vectoring out either side port individually. Giving the 2d thrust vectoring from the rear a 3d kind of maneuverability that is different than normal the 3d thrust vectoring version. I speculate that is why the raptor flies like a spaceship and just different enough to trick the eyes and confuse its prey. I think that is the real secret of the raptor that we dont know about. Because since the f15 stol mtd....we haven't heard anything about it except on passenger planes and it works totally different and only used on landing once the wheels have made contact...definitely not for in-air use.
I worked on the STOL/MTD nozzles as well as the first ACTIVE mock-up to prove that it could work. The STOL nozzles were a MAJOR pain to build and not really durable enough for service which is why the F-22 nozzles are much improved. The 360 vectoring wasn't as helpful as originally hoped for and only expands the flight envelope a bit in areas that are rarely entered so they haven't been implemented in our production aircraft. Someone told me that the vectoring in flight of the 360 nozzles were about half as effective as they had thought they'd be and for the weight, complexity and additional cost were deemed to be something not needed. If you've ever piloted a jet boat you instantly see the problem with them....unless they're making lots of thrust they don't do anything and this really narrows down the window where they provide an advantage.
@@recoilrob324Also, the USAF found that supermaneuverability could actually be counterproductive, as pilots in exercises would often violate doctrine and get into low-speed turning fights, where anything can happen even if you have the advantage. So the benefit wasn’t really there when U.S. aircraft could still dominate where their doctrine taught them to fight anyway.
@@bluemarlin8138 How maneuverable an aircraft is in today's world means very little with other factors much more important. How well the radar works, the missiles and counter measures all are of much greater importance than the 'dog fighting' capability. Even the F-35 (Fat Amy) which can't come close to dealing with F-16 or F-22 in an actual 'gunfight' is very likely to never encounter one in its' service life because things have gone REALLY BAD if it does. I know the fighter pilots do practice such things...just in case, but it would be a desperate scenario if needed and...hopefully...no pilot is ever going to be put into that situation.
0:07 "...and yet has never been lost in combat". That is not true, during the gulf war, 2 were shot down, one by AAA on the very first day, the other by a Russian made SAM on day 3. You should have said "in aerial combat".
It's also been shot down in A2A combat by Syrian and Iraqi fighters. Of course the US will never admit it but here is an account of a Syrian Mig 25 shooting down an F15 in Gulf War 1: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samurra_Air_Battle
Apologies if i missed it but how come the f15's currently in service still don't have at least the canards which improved it massively on their own? I have always loved the f15 in all varients and even the f15 active from TC's H.A.W.X games.
Too expensive for the benefit. The F15 is pretty much just going to be used in the Middle-East and here in the U.S. It's not going to fight any wars where it'll matter anymore
"It may be not only American, but also Russian and Chinese designers have the F15 agility program to thank, at least in some way." 🤣😂🤣 Why? Did Americans share any of their research data?
Esa versión del F15 sale en el OVA patlabor 2 la única diferencia son los timones de cola parecidos al xf 23 de Northrop Grumman de resto el avión es igual
The F-15 and F-16 are iconic American aircraft which have demonstrated and continue to demonstrate their military prowess today.👍🏻🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸👍🏻 Would love to have seen this variant go into serial production. But eventually, the older technology gives way to newer technologically advanced aircraft.
F15 S/MTD and Su47 are my favorite planes. I love anything with interesting designs, and quite frankly, anything with canards. I love these planes because they’re really maneuverable, and highly capable. It would’ve been cool to see them both enter service, but alas, not.
su47 isnt really capable a lot of russian planes are simply maneuverable but thats all, theyre really bad at anything else exept maneuverability whitch is pretty much useless bcs dogfights are a thing of the past and thats why sukhoi or mig has no chance against advanced us planes with powerfull radar and armanent russia simply chose the old path with their planes and thats why they dont have any chance agains us fighters that are designed to shoot down a plane from far away where weak russian radars cant eve reach
there is a lot of tiny little small moving parts that make up the vector thrusting technology which can be taken out by a simple piece of shrapnel . F15 yep just love it
Considering all the technical advantages stated in this video, why hasn't this technology been implemented into existing F-15s, especially since they continue to serve as the backbone of the US Air Force?
US fighter doctrine emphasizes BVR, where supermaneuvrability is not considered necessary. This is why the F-22 has been discontinued, and why thrust-vectoring on the F-35B supports VTOL/STOL instead of maneuvering. US would rather spend our tax dollars on the F-35 variants, and developing NGAD / CCA, instead of prolonging the life of weapon systems originally designed in the previous century.
1. While these modifications increase agility, it also decrease range due to added weight and drag 2. Even with these modifications, F-16 is still nimbler and more cost-effective for dogfight purpose 3. Last but definitely not least: *cost*
The Su-35 flew with full 3d vectoring in 1987 under the name su-27m, M for modernization prior to this MIG and Yak was experimenting with it since the early 70's.
Nope. The 1980s versions of the Su-27M only had canards, and it didn’t actually fly until 1988. Due to control issues in certain maneuvers from the change in the center of mass, Sukhoi added thrust vectoring to the 11th model in 1995, almost 10 years after the U.S. did it, and called it the Su-37. This model, like the Su-35, has 2-D nozzles that can only deflect 15°, but they’re on a canted axis to simulate 3-D vectoring. The Ruzzians didn’t have a practical 360° nozzle like the one on the F-15 ACTIVE until the Su-57, and that one is being replaced with a 2-D nozzle to try to improve stealthiness. Maybe they could have designed one in the 90s if they’d had the funding, but they didn’t, just like they don’t have the funding now to build a clean sheet stealth aircraft, so they just dressed up the Su-27 airframe with some low-observable features and called it the Su-57. Not that the Su-27 airframe isn’t good, but some of its features make it impossible to base a true stealth aircraft off it. Ruzzia also doesn’t have the precision machining tech to make a true stealth aircraft. Yak was experimenting with a swiveling nozzle for STOVL only, to compete with the Harrier. The Yak-38 ended up being one of the worst military aircraft in history. The Yak-41 might have been ok, but we’ll never know. And no, the F-35 wasn’t based on it. At all.
@@pigmoonk2545 If that's your opinion, that's fine. I'm not going to bother trying to change your mind. Either way, history will be the one to determine that in the end.
Soviets developed thrust vectoring before the f15 stol/mtd. Those aircraft were already in the air before the f15 stol/mtd, with their thrust vectoring, and its 3D, not 2D. Sooo.....what are you talking about?
This beautiful and unique fighter jet is the Father of Thrust Vectoring of which other nations immediately saw as a pivotable technology for increasing the maneuverability of ANY fighter jet. And the Arrogance of the Russian pilots in the SU-27 issuing a challenge to any fighter jet to a dogfight where the winner takes both jets home. I would have loved to see the look on his face if an American Pilot showed up with THIS remarkable Fighter that is responsible for the very existence of his fighter's thrust vectoring. The F-15 STOL/MTD with all the technology of the current Strike eagle would have eaten the SU-27 as nothing more than a light snack, ready eat 10 or more of its squadron mates. The Arrogance of the Russians and Chinese who think they are par with the USA in technology, this aircraft was around long before the latest Soviet aircraft came along. Russia is a minimum of 20 years behind American Aviation technology. TWENTY YEARS MINIMUM! And the Gap widens at a steady pace, because of the Russo-Ukraine war and the Embargoes and Sanctions put on Russia and China for their bad behavior. the best these countries can do is to try their best to copy what they see and try to assume what kind of technology that is inside of our aircraft and trying to use public information given by the Government to American citizens as intelligence for their own use. Little do they realize that the only thing given to the public is basic information and the stats given for any American aircraft are downplayed. the capabilities in actual combat are much different and this sets a low bar for America's enemies. And China tries to say that their latest fighters are every bit as good as ours. L O L For a nation that is so stagnant that they need to steal technology in order to keep up, and that is a very loose interpretation since they aren't keeping up at all, and the aircraft they sell to their lesser allies always regret their decision to buy anything Chinese. nothing ever works right and always fails or has a very short service life, and the performance technology isn't anywhere near par with American aircraft. even now, the Chinese aircraft and anti-aircraft missile systems they sell are so poor in performance that they cannot even lock onto aircraft that is within visual range. and the Stealth technology China has built into their fighter is not stealth at all, but only in name and perhaps looks, but are very visible to our radar. in a war China would be slaughtered and made to look like a toddler before a fully armed military. The same goes for everything they build, EVERYTHING!
The F-15EX is one of the most expensive aircraft in existence and its main pros are in its payload carrying capabilities, its speed and RADAR power, it's effectively an interceptor that is also very capable in dogfighting and strike missions. If you put 3D thrust vectoring nozzles and canards on it, you make it even more expensive and take away from its best features. Modern short range IR missiles almost negate the value of an aircraft to be highly manoeuvrable as they can engage an aircraft at any aspect and can even hit targets behind the defending aircraft. Also, as air to air missiles have become more capable and reliable along with onboard RADAR, the relevance of dogfighting has been reduced dramatically.
My question was? Why the US didnt put F15 Active into Productions line?? If they know F15 with canard and thrust vectoring better than original F15, even ini F15EX didnt have the technology,
@@firemustang6678 Not really. The Active was a great tech demonstrator, but just because you can make a cool tech work doesn't mean it'll be useful. Take the canards, they look cool, and do help with ACM at lower speeds. But you also have to factor in the weight of the canards, the motors, the structural reinforcement, controls, etc... That weight could also be fuel, ECM gear, or munitions. Not worth it. Any technology from any of it's programs that were useful have already been implemented into modern F-15's.
1. Cost 2. These modifications Increase agility, but decrease range and probably affect speed too, due to added weight and drag 3. Even with these upgrades, F-16 is still better at dogfight anyway, so it's better for F-15 to stick on its original role as heavy fighter
Seems you are right. I found these: F-15E (88-1694/SJ) of 333rd FS, 4th FW from Seymour Johnson AFB, NC was shot-down near Tikrit in Iraq on 6 April 2003, the pilots were Killed in Action. And F-15E-46-MC, 88‑1692, c/n 1101/E076, of the 336th FS, 4th TFW, USAF, was shot down by an Iraqi SA-2E missile during Operation Desert Storm. Both crew members ejected and were POWs.
0:07, can you please provide evidence of your claim here. Never been lost in combat. It's been shot down a number of times both in A2A and from SAMs. Here is an account of an F15 being shot down by an Iraqi Mig 25 in Gulf War 1: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samurra_Air_Battle
Nope. The F-15 was built to counter the MiG-25. The Su-27 was built to counter the F-15, and came out over a decade later. The Su-27 doesn’t have TV either. The Soviets didn’t test TV on an Su-27 variant until 1995. That’s where the Su-37 and Su-35 came from. The 35 had 2D vectoring, and the 37 had 2D vectoring and canards.
Correction: Thanks @fredjoeme1284 for pointing out that there were 2 F-15E losses in combat: (1) F-15E (88-1694/SJ) of 333rd FS, 4th FW from Seymour Johnson AFB, NC was shot-down near Tikrit in Iraq on 6 April 2003, the pilots were Killed in Action. (2) F-15E-46-MC, 88‑1692, c/n 1101/E076, of the 336th FS, 4th TFW, USAF, was shot down by an Iraqi SA-2E missile during Operation Desert Storm. Both crew members ejected and were POWs.
Was the first one from a SAM too? Normally quoted is zero downed in air-to-air.
Haven't forgotten about the f15 active, it was a mainstay in ace combat
Curiously though, the ACTIVE in Ace Combat uses the 2D vector nozzles rather than the correct 3D nozzles. I have to admit, I prefer the look of the rectangular nozzles.
@@vidyajamesu me too, i prefer the looks of it even though its more of form over function, but its still badass.
Same, I was going to say I will never forget the coolest looking F-15 ever.
Ikr, and the fact that it was only Grabacr Squadron flying the F-15 Active made it even more memorable.
@@alexandergodfreykleinhans8059 the firat time i fought them was terrifying, they got so mich missile lock on me when i can't even get on their 6.
I played Ace Combat 5 as a kid.
I never forgot this gem. ✊️
The FAEB on the F-15 Active was a mini nuke in that game lol
Have to say though, the 2D vectoring nozzles look absolutely badass
Interestingly, the canards on the F-15 STOL/MTD were basically the stabilators from the F/A-18 Hornet.
They weren't basically the stabilators, they are the stabilators
They added weight, added drag and moved the center of lift forward.
@@rapidsqualor5367. Yes, but it’s designed that way to have high AO, & lobbying high off bore Fox two missiles for modern day dogfights. The F15 & 16 were designed to be 2circle gun & BOV fighters, not up close dog fighters.
@@bri-manhunter2654 The F-16 was also designed for energy retention. I read the cranked arrow wing of the F-16XL was great for lift but dropped a lot of speed in maneuvers needed in a close up fight. I would suspect this short take off F-15 would also loose more energy than the original design. With the F-35, instead of maneuvering the plane to launch at a enemy high off bore the missile itself will do the off bore maneuver. What is " 2circle gun" ?
@@rapidsqualor5367 One-circle and two-circle fights. The two primary domains of dogfighting.
Two-circle fights are more common and favor aircraft with high mechanical energy retention and fast turn rate; such as the F-5, F-16, and F-15.
One-circle fights are less common, and favor aircraft with high alpha controllability, high vortex lift, and small turn radius; such as delta wing jets (Typhoon, Rafale, J-10) and jets with large LERX and/or thrust vectoring (Su-35, MiG-35, etc).
I like how most people use my video on this plane. It was taken at the 2005 Edwards AFB airshow.
GOOD JOB! 👍
Do you have anymore footage of it?
@@genchar692 ruclips.net/video/ejxstV3sPhg/видео.htmlsi=4iSDzlaTRU5ApCJF
@@genchar692 RUclips won't let me send the link I've tried several times
@@SPak-rt2gb have you tried uploading them to RUclips?
5:50 that's cool to find out that this F-15 Active helped test the Quite Spike program. With the fruit of that research the X-59 rolling out this year (2024)
ruclips.net/video/V59ffvGBaiw/видео.html
F-15J Kai Eagle Plus in Patlabor 2 definitely take inspiration from this.
This F-15 variant is mainstay fighter in Ace Combat series.
i was finding an ace combat fan amongst this place
@@Keryaken133 I'm an Ace Combat fan as well.
Ace combat has made a ton of plane nerds including me
@@Prizz419 ME TOO MAN.
Among my favorite picks for Ace Combat Zero and Skies Unknown.
Wikipedia says this aircraft is currently "on display at Edwards AFB", but Edwards is a big place and much of it is off-limits to the public, including the Air Force Flight Test Museum. There is an "air park" next to it which is open to the public (hard not to be since the aircraft are sitting outside), but the Google Earth image shows no Eagles there. There is an SR-71 and one of the two F-16XLs, however. But I wish that museum was open to the public...
Check with them. If you're in the area, I'd suggest calling the base Public Affairs Office.
Some bases have museums and such on base that aren't accessible on a day to day. But sometimes you can get a tour, or they'll have an "Open House" where you can go see it.
maps.app.goo.gl/wiaounieWsaBuY917. Google maps shows it at the corner of Lilly and Walker on display.
I’ve personally seen the F-15 STOL sitting at the end of one of the taxiways by a hanger on google earth. It was outside next to some other jets. Not sure if it was waiting for a restoration or something.
@@tristansundquist1834 Looked at it. Looks like it's in an Airpark.
The STOL/MTD thrust reversing was really impressive in flight, given the advantage they offered, I think that the 2D nozzles were the better option. FWIW, I worked on the STOL/MTD back in the day.
Nothing Looks More Menacing Than A F-15 From The Front/Face View ....
F14...
@@skyraider87 I don't think it does, but I call the F-14 "the Hulk" because it was built like Hulk!
Sorcerer squadron, is that you?
Thoroughly enjoyed that!!
I was thinking of the F-15EX getting 3D nozzles
It seems they're not required. Sandboxx News did an interesting piece on how the fly-by-wire system in the EX largely negated the need for thrust vectoring. ruclips.net/video/kbbWn6Z_8aY/видео.html
I wish there was more footage of it performing maneuvers with the 3D nozzles out there.
Not sure it’s forgotten, as many of the lessons learned were implemented on the F-22.
They did mention the Raptor.
That difference in landing distance! 😮😮
And take off as low as 42 miles per hour,...WOW!
@@raptorsean1464 people who haven't seen how big an F15 is probably don't appreciate how bonkers that all is.
the idea anyone will have nice runways in a real peer fight is quite silly. they should make that a very important design consideration for all these crafts.
@@TfiveR The Eagle is basically a brick on radar. Whereas something like the Hornet has a RCS comparable to stealth fighters without RAM coatings.
Very impressive, like the Hunting H.126 which is a jet with a stall speed of 32 miles per hour
This was the hero airplane in the Dave Brown novel, Day of the Cheetah.
Great book...great series!
Dale, you mean?
lol.. Ooops. Yep. Dale Brown.@@jtho8937
J.C Powell and his EX were my favorite in that series
Dude I read the book for a school project and even designed a Vtol Vr (vr flight sim) map based off dreamland
Today F-15EX with advances in control and fly-by-wire can do most things that even F-22 can do. Adding this + Silent Eagle features would probably baloon the price of EX
The problem is that F-15EX is still overall inferior to F-22 or F-35 (4.5 gen vs 5 gen fighters) and more expensive. Love me some Eagle tho.
I like his voice! It sounds like the narrator in Cinesound newsreels from "old days".
How come Australia never has F-15??
Because we had mirages, f111 and then hornets, super hornets and f35s instead
We'd probs be better off with f-15s over f-35 imo
@@kevinruddthestudrudd0074 Very good
@@kevinruddthestudrudd0074 For looks I'd agree but 40 years of technical development counts for something.
@@danpatterson8009 No doubt, but the f15 ex is something else with being cheaper to run per hour, range speed and weapon load, alas the aging air frame unfortunately...
This plane wins by strategy, no tactics. By being more adapted to the mission profile itself, than excelling in a certain type of performance. Also the speed made it evasive.
That f-15 look is from the ace combat game series
It looks amazing with the canards!
One of my favorite Ace combat planes.
You kiddin'? I love this plane.
That background music at 0:28 is glorious
America should've built these in small numbers. Foreign customers would love to have some of these in their Airforce.
I didn’t forget, I used this lots in AC04
The su 30 MKI has 3d thrust vectoring, I believe, not 2d
Actually Russia don't have engines with 2D thrust vectoring at all. It was in development in 80s, but thrown away for full 3D nozzle because it not affects thrust power.
And they had it first
The SU-57 is better suited for close range combat, like most Russian jets. An F-35 can just scan and pop the targets from hundreds of miles away.
@@WolfeSaber yeah, but the su57 holds the longest range air-to-air kills in history, further than the f22/f35 missiles will even fly. The only place those aircraft outdo the su57 is numbers.
Even from a standpoint of stealth, anyone who understands geometric stealth (which is all we can get concrete information on for any of the 3 aircraft) would also be able to come to the conclusion that It's quite well built from 3 directions. The f35, for example, is well built from 1.
@@deven6518 Well, the US is building better missiles, like one that is half the size as the standard, but still performs just as well as the full size ones.
Also, the Felons are built from substandard parts, like bubbles in the canopy.
Great channel.
The in-air thrust reversing to slow rapidly can also be used as flight control or thrust vectoring out either side port individually. Giving the 2d thrust vectoring from the rear a 3d kind of maneuverability that is different than normal the 3d thrust vectoring version.
I speculate that is why the raptor flies like a spaceship and just different enough to trick the eyes and confuse its prey.
I think that is the real secret of the raptor that we dont know about.
Because since the f15 stol mtd....we haven't heard anything about it except on passenger planes and it works totally different and only used on landing once the wheels have made contact...definitely not for in-air use.
Can't forget it since it's my favorite aircraft ever, thanks to Ace Combat for making me fall in love with it
If the improvements were so good, how come they never implemented it into production F-15 E's? Thrust vectoring is a huge advantage.
I worked on the STOL/MTD nozzles as well as the first ACTIVE mock-up to prove that it could work. The STOL nozzles were a MAJOR pain to build and not really durable enough for service which is why the F-22 nozzles are much improved. The 360 vectoring wasn't as helpful as originally hoped for and only expands the flight envelope a bit in areas that are rarely entered so they haven't been implemented in our production aircraft.
Someone told me that the vectoring in flight of the 360 nozzles were about half as effective as they had thought they'd be and for the weight, complexity and additional cost were deemed to be something not needed. If you've ever piloted a jet boat you instantly see the problem with them....unless they're making lots of thrust they don't do anything and this really narrows down the window where they provide an advantage.
@@recoilrob324 Fantastic answer, thanks! I'm sure very few could have given me/us this detailed, in the know reply. Cheers
@@recoilrob324Also, the USAF found that supermaneuverability could actually be counterproductive, as pilots in exercises would often violate doctrine and get into low-speed turning fights, where anything can happen even if you have the advantage. So the benefit wasn’t really there when U.S. aircraft could still dominate where their doctrine taught them to fight anyway.
@@bluemarlin8138 How maneuverable an aircraft is in today's world means very little with other factors much more important. How well the radar works, the missiles and counter measures all are of much greater importance than the 'dog fighting' capability.
Even the F-35 (Fat Amy) which can't come close to dealing with F-16 or F-22 in an actual 'gunfight' is very likely to never encounter one in its' service life because things have gone REALLY BAD if it does.
I know the fighter pilots do practice such things...just in case, but it would be a desperate scenario if needed and...hopefully...no pilot is ever going to be put into that situation.
0:07 "...and yet has never been lost in combat". That is not true, during the gulf war, 2 were shot down, one by AAA on the very first day, the other by a Russian made SAM on day 3. You should have said "in aerial combat".
It's also been shot down in A2A combat by Syrian and Iraqi fighters. Of course the US will never admit it but here is an account of a Syrian Mig 25 shooting down an F15 in Gulf War 1:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samurra_Air_Battle
All this tech was used to also influenced f22 raptors. Use the same vector system. And f35 does to takeoff vertically essentially.
Apologies if i missed it but how come the f15's currently in service still don't have at least the canards which improved it massively on their own?
I have always loved the f15 in all varients and even the f15 active from TC's H.A.W.X games.
Too expensive for the benefit. The F15 is pretty much just going to be used in the Middle-East and here in the U.S.
It's not going to fight any wars where it'll matter anymore
"It may be not only American, but also Russian and Chinese designers have the F15 agility program to thank, at least in some way." 🤣😂🤣 Why? Did Americans share any of their research data?
Delta Wing F-16: Finally! a worthy opponent! our battle will be legendary!
No one who plays Ace Combat has forgotten it.
These square exhaust nozzles should have come on the new F15
Cuties, babies of all kind are the most precious there is.
Love them, care them and grow them strong and smart.
Come take a look :)))
Was there ver a Delta wing version of the F-15 like the F-16 XL ?
Forgotten? This is one of the best planes in Ace Combat 4, c'mon.
These were more terrifying in ac5, by 8492 squadron, boi those guys can mauled you to death with the f15 active
A.G.R.E.E.D.
I love this variant of the F-15 Eagle.
You should probably have mentioned that ACTIVE is an anagram. It stands for Advanced Control Technologies for Integrated Vehicles.
Esa versión del F15 sale en el OVA patlabor 2 la única diferencia son los timones de cola parecidos al xf 23 de Northrop Grumman de resto el avión es igual
Now waiting for the F-15 Hyper Lance
Wrong info. India's Su30 MKI has 3d thrust vectoring.
Wrong, it was actually Pakistan
@@crispay8304 india doesnt make jets
it is 2d actually
@@MichaelKing-tp6le they make the tejas. Hal is the name of the companyi
@@aquilesca5tr0it's 3d. I don't think the soviets/Russians have ever mass produced 2d vectoring.
7:00 is just...chiefs kiss
Dozens of victories? Doesn’t give the respect it deserves, the F15 is 104-0 it is undefeated in true air to air combat
Wasn't one of the Decepticon F-15s in the cartoons of this design?
nice video... very informative👍
I wish we could have put these on the EX model
The F-15 and F-16 are iconic American aircraft which have demonstrated and continue to demonstrate their military prowess today.👍🏻🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸👍🏻
Would love to have seen this variant go into serial production. But eventually, the older technology gives way to newer technologically advanced aircraft.
Imagine if we got this F-15, we basically combine russian supermaneuvrability with american technology
F-15 ACTIVE MY BELOVEEEEDDDDD
Can someone explain why 2D thrust vectoring is not incorporated into the new F15EX fighter?
F15 S/MTD and Su47 are my favorite planes. I love anything with interesting designs, and quite frankly, anything with canards. I love these planes because they’re really maneuverable, and highly capable. It would’ve been cool to see them both enter service, but alas, not.
su47 isnt really capable a lot of russian planes are simply maneuverable but thats all, theyre really bad at anything else exept maneuverability whitch is pretty much useless bcs dogfights are a thing of the past and thats why sukhoi or mig has no chance against advanced us planes with powerfull radar and armanent russia simply chose the old path with their planes and thats why they dont have any chance agains us fighters that are designed to shoot down a plane from far away where weak russian radars cant eve reach
there is a lot of tiny little small moving parts that make up the vector thrusting technology which can be taken out by a simple piece of shrapnel . F15 yep just love it
If you get hit with even a 9, your probably out of the fight anyway, I see what you mean though.
Realy I like this powerful fighters jets
I fly it all the time ... my favorite aircraft. Ace Combat 4.
Actually that design is not forgotten, it is now in the f-22's thrust vectoring sustem (too similar).
Ace combat saga fans: Nah, Ive knew this plane for decades
Considering all the technical advantages stated in this video, why hasn't this technology been implemented into existing F-15s, especially since they continue to serve as the backbone of the US Air Force?
I'm going to guess that the main reason is cost of the upgrades doesn't provide enough value over the f15s they are using currently
US fighter doctrine emphasizes BVR, where supermaneuvrability is not considered necessary. This is why the F-22 has been discontinued, and why thrust-vectoring on the F-35B supports VTOL/STOL instead of maneuvering. US would rather spend our tax dollars on the F-35 variants, and developing NGAD / CCA, instead of prolonging the life of weapon systems originally designed in the previous century.
A lot of it has. But a lot of it isn't as useful as most think, so It's not gonna be put into service.
1. While these modifications increase agility, it also decrease range due to added weight and drag
2. Even with these modifications, F-16 is still nimbler and more cost-effective for dogfight purpose
3. Last but definitely not least: *cost*
"At least in some way" lmao
'
beautifully F-15 eagle...
but have 2 error designs...
better time to change 2 little designs
It’s my favorite aircraft
It's kind of a shame that a stopgap update to the f15 that has stealth skin, and canards and thrust vectoring.
This variant of the F-15 is my favorite aircraft, ever. I hope to see it one day in person 🤞🤞🤞
It was a truly crazy thing to work on... It had parts from every model of F-15 (A-E).
The Su-35 flew with full 3d vectoring in 1987 under the name su-27m, M for modernization prior to this MIG and Yak was experimenting with it since the early 70's.
Nope. The 1980s versions of the Su-27M only had canards, and it didn’t actually fly until 1988. Due to control issues in certain maneuvers from the change in the center of mass, Sukhoi added thrust vectoring to the 11th model in 1995, almost 10 years after the U.S. did it, and called it the Su-37. This model, like the Su-35, has 2-D nozzles that can only deflect 15°, but they’re on a canted axis to simulate 3-D vectoring. The Ruzzians didn’t have a practical 360° nozzle like the one on the F-15 ACTIVE until the Su-57, and that one is being replaced with a 2-D nozzle to try to improve stealthiness. Maybe they could have designed one in the 90s if they’d had the funding, but they didn’t, just like they don’t have the funding now to build a clean sheet stealth aircraft, so they just dressed up the Su-27 airframe with some low-observable features and called it the Su-57. Not that the Su-27 airframe isn’t good, but some of its features make it impossible to base a true stealth aircraft off it. Ruzzia also doesn’t have the precision machining tech to make a true stealth aircraft.
Yak was experimenting with a swiveling nozzle for STOVL only, to compete with the Harrier. The Yak-38 ended up being one of the worst military aircraft in history. The Yak-41 might have been ok, but we’ll never know. And no, the F-35 wasn’t based on it. At all.
Misinformation at its finest The US will always be steps ahead of Russia stop copying from the us you and your spies
ノズルがUSBケーブルになっているので充電も出来ます！
not to disparage the F-15, but it has never met an equal opponent, so i would be more impressed if it had
its almost purely BVR now. Dogfighting is dead
The same thing was said in the 50's. And the 60's. And the 70's....
Dogfighting will always make a comeback in some way.
@@Plaprad It wont anymore. Your comment shows you are not in the industry. Paper warrior.
@@pigmoonk2545 If that's your opinion, that's fine. I'm not going to bother trying to change your mind.
Either way, history will be the one to determine that in the end.
@@Plaprad Its not my opinion. Non industry insiders shouldnt speculate on topics they dont know about. And yeah its you.
@@pigmoonk2545 Rather rude to simply insult someone for their opinion without knowing anything about them.
Soviets developed thrust vectoring before the f15 stol/mtd. Those aircraft were already in the air before the f15 stol/mtd, with their thrust vectoring, and its 3D, not 2D. Sooo.....what are you talking about?
They called it the eagle with a purpose
This beautiful and unique fighter jet is the Father of Thrust Vectoring of which other nations immediately saw as a pivotable technology for increasing the maneuverability of ANY fighter jet. And the Arrogance of the Russian pilots in the SU-27 issuing a challenge to any fighter jet to a dogfight where the winner takes both jets home. I would have loved to see the look on his face if an American Pilot showed up with THIS remarkable Fighter that is responsible for the very existence of his fighter's thrust vectoring. The F-15 STOL/MTD with all the technology of the current Strike eagle would have eaten the SU-27 as nothing more than a light snack, ready eat 10 or more of its squadron mates. The Arrogance of the Russians and Chinese who think they are par with the USA in technology, this aircraft was around long before the latest Soviet aircraft came along. Russia is a minimum of 20 years behind American Aviation technology. TWENTY YEARS MINIMUM! And the Gap widens at a steady pace, because of the Russo-Ukraine war and the Embargoes and Sanctions put on Russia and China for their bad behavior. the best these countries can do is to try their best to copy what they see and try to assume what kind of technology that is inside of our aircraft and trying to use public information given by the Government to American citizens as intelligence for their own use. Little do they realize that the only thing given to the public is basic information and the stats given for any American aircraft are downplayed. the capabilities in actual combat are much different and this sets a low bar for America's enemies. And China tries to say that their latest fighters are every bit as good as ours. L O L For a nation that is so stagnant that they need to steal technology in order to keep up, and that is a very loose interpretation since they aren't keeping up at all, and the aircraft they sell to their lesser allies always regret their decision to buy anything Chinese. nothing ever works right and always fails or has a very short service life, and the performance technology isn't anywhere near par with American aircraft. even now, the Chinese aircraft and anti-aircraft missile systems they sell are so poor in performance that they cannot even lock onto aircraft that is within visual range. and the Stealth technology China has built into their fighter is not stealth at all, but only in name and perhaps looks, but are very visible to our radar. in a war China would be slaughtered and made to look like a toddler before a fully armed military. The same goes for everything they build, EVERYTHING!
Ace Combat fans beat everyone here by 10+ years😂
the fact we didn't make this was beyond stupid or put the tech in the F-15 EX
The F-15EX is one of the most expensive aircraft in existence and its main pros are in its payload carrying capabilities, its speed and RADAR power, it's effectively an interceptor that is also very capable in dogfighting and strike missions. If you put 3D thrust vectoring nozzles and canards on it, you make it even more expensive and take away from its best features.
Modern short range IR missiles almost negate the value of an aircraft to be highly manoeuvrable as they can engage an aircraft at any aspect and can even hit targets behind the defending aircraft. Also, as air to air missiles have become more capable and reliable along with onboard RADAR, the relevance of dogfighting has been reduced dramatically.
My question was? Why the US didnt put F15 Active into Productions line?? If they know F15 with canard and thrust vectoring better than original F15, even ini F15EX didnt have the technology,
Super maneuverability won't help you dodge missiles. It just helps them see you better and track you easier since it makes you slow
@@wruenvadam yuppp... And Im thinking too, theres no way to Dodge missile anyway, but, F15 Active better in all aspects than original one
@@firemustang6678 Not really. The Active was a great tech demonstrator, but just because you can make a cool tech work doesn't mean it'll be useful.
Take the canards, they look cool, and do help with ACM at lower speeds. But you also have to factor in the weight of the canards, the motors, the structural reinforcement, controls, etc... That weight could also be fuel, ECM gear, or munitions. Not worth it.
Any technology from any of it's programs that were useful have already been implemented into modern F-15's.
1. Cost
2. These modifications Increase agility, but decrease range and probably affect speed too, due to added weight and drag
3. Even with these upgrades, F-16 is still better at dogfight anyway, so it's better for F-15 to stick on its original role as heavy fighter
Unless you NEED a short take off and landing F-15, it's pretty pointless (although totally cool). The F-15 is supposed to be a BVR killer (and it is).
Yes daddy!
Cause 🦅it’s the American eagle
I think 1or 2 F15s were shot down during the first gulf war
They should have never given it to NASA
Agile Eagle
It has USB ports in the rear
I thought the thumbnail eagle was from ace combat
Come on war thunder give us the f15 active
"Never been lost in combat" That is false. Two were shot down in the Gulf War.
Seems you are right. I found these: F-15E (88-1694/SJ) of 333rd FS, 4th FW from Seymour Johnson AFB, NC was shot-down near Tikrit in Iraq on 6 April 2003, the pilots were Killed in Action. And F-15E-46-MC, 88‑1692, c/n 1101/E076, of the 336th FS, 4th TFW, USAF, was shot down by an Iraqi SA-2E missile during Operation Desert Storm. Both crew members ejected and were POWs.
I think people say that in the context that it was never shot down by another plane or with the distinction that the F-15E is separate from the F-15
I’m glad they didn’t continue with the full variant as tho canards are god awful looking.
What relevance F15 has to Australian Aviation?
I talk to pilot at airshow i still want ome
0:07, can you please provide evidence of your claim here. Never been lost in combat. It's been shot down a number of times both in A2A and from SAMs.
Here is an account of an F15 being shot down by an Iraqi Mig 25 in Gulf War 1:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samurra_Air_Battle
Am I only one who saw 2 USB instead of nozzles on preview?
Correction... The f15 was built to counter su27... Which had thrust vectoring... So the soviets had it first..
Nope. The F-15 was built to counter the MiG-25. The Su-27 was built to counter the F-15, and came out over a decade later. The Su-27 doesn’t have TV either. The Soviets didn’t test TV on an Su-27 variant until 1995. That’s where the Su-37 and Su-35 came from. The 35 had 2D vectoring, and the 37 had 2D vectoring and canards.
Su30 n other variant all have 3 dimensional
Why are these narrated by a Pommy? 😁
Because Jack Thompson would have been too expensive? 😅
😂 Both comments are Gold!
Money..
AI narration?
why they dont make'm today if they were better?