Originally Posted by huh_what
Two completely different designs.. F-15 is an air superiority fighter originally built for the airforce by McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing). The F-14 is a sweep wing air superiority fighter built for the Navy by Grumman.
Is the f-15 and the f-14 of the same project, different models for the navy and the air force or two completely different designs?
Originally Posted by huh_what
Two completely different designs.. F-15 is an air superiority fighter originally built for the airforce by McDonnell Douglas (now Boeing). The F-14 is a sweep wing air superiority fighter built for the Navy by Grumman.
Two completely different projects. The fact that they look similar is by accident.
F/A-18E/F Super Hornet: The Honda Accord of fighters.
yeah they do look similar
if they painted the f-14 in air force logos and the f-15 in navy logos, a bet some people would be fooled(if looked at from the side)
the wing gives the f-14 away
![]()
That, and the F-14 is a two-seater.
"The right man in the wrong place can make all the difference in the world. So wake up, Mr. Freeman. Wake up and smell the ashes." G-Man
F-15 B/D/E/I/S/DJ/T/K are all two seaters as well. Only the F-15A/C's are single seaters.Originally Posted by leibstandarte10
> huh_what
> Is the f-15 and the f-14 of the same project, different models for the navy
> and the air force or two completely different designs?
Actually one of the designs of FX program was a swing wing! Col. John Boyd got somebody angry at him so as a punishnment, he was ordered to go in and make changes on the project. They figured for them it was a "win/win" situation. If Boyd straightened out the new fighter -great. If he didn't, place the blame on him and get him out of the USAF, either way they did not have to deal with him. He used his relatively new "energy maneuvering" theory to this project. Boyd hated the F-15A, it was too large, too complex.
His next project was more to his liking the F-16A.
The F-15A is a air superiority fighter and interceptor intended to be automated so it could engage in killing bad guys very quickly and effeciently. In a NATO/WP conflict it would be out numbered at least 3:1 and NATO needed the F-15 to hold at least a 6:1 kill ratio. If it didn't then the attack planes and helos would die in greater numbers, it would hasten the need for NATO to go nuclear or lose!!
The F-14 was a interceptor with fighter capabilities. Its number one task was to defeat the Soviet Naval Aviation (SNA) mainly Tu-95's that would stay off at greater ranges than what the F-4 Phantom 2 could deal with. To have greater autonomy than the F-4, greater endurance and much greater range. These features would allow it to patrol at distances greater than 300 miles at around 20,000 feet from the carrier. Having all this cruise speed and time it would still have to slow down to get aboard the boat. Without the swingwings, the F-14 would have needed larger wings and have problem with a high pitch AoA when comming back to the carrier.
This aircraft would have to carry the large missile from the TFX (F-111) Program, the Phoenix Missile. With this missile the fighter could stand back, fire the missiles at the incomming bombers while avoiding the escort fighters.
The Soviet Union believes in "attached escort," not detached like the USAF (fighter sweeps, etc.)
The reason the two aircraft look a lot alike is because of stability issues at speeds of Mach 1.2 and higher. The F-15's wing is classified as a "semi-delta". The F-14 with its wings swept back also forms a delta wing with the delta's advantages.
Both aircraft are designed to accell in maneuvering in the high transonic speed range at altitudes between 20,000 feet to 30,000 feet. This is an area in which the LWF's do not accel in.
Adrian
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Share this thread with friends: