Brit Reacts To WHY THE F15 TERRIFIED THE SOVIETS!
If You Would Like To Support The Channel: www.paypal.me/kabsayofe
https://www.patreon.com/kabirconsiders
Hi everyone, I’m Kabir and welcome to another episode of Kabir Considers! In this video I’m going React To WHY THE F15 TERRIFIED THE SOVIETS!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmlWmDokzGg
Follow me on social media:
Instagram: @kabirayofe
Twitter: @kabirconsiders
Email me for business inquiries:
If you would like to send me anything, my PO Box address is;
Kabir Considers
PO Box 5026
Hornchurch
RM12 9JG
United Kingdom
___________________________________________________________________________
COPYRIGHT DISCLAIMER
FAIR USE ACT
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favour of fair use.
ALL RIGHTS BELONG TO THEIR RESPECTIVE OWNERS
source
You can’t compare the F35. The F35 is a multi role fighter built to be exported and built in large numbers.
the video 'deep intel on the f-15 ex' is a good primer for what will be entering the fleet soon
Speed is kind of a complicated thing to discuss. The F-15 is still the fastest fighter the US has ever built. At least, on paper. The thing is that in order to reach that top speed of Mach 2.5 (or 2.54 if you want to be really specific) it would need a few things. First it would need to be at an optimal altitude. Higher altitude will, to a point, make the engines more efficient as well as create less air resistance to slow the aircraft. You're also going to want to have a light payload. It's rather unlikely that an F-15 could actually achieve it's quoted top speed with a full load of fuel and 8 missiles. Consider that the F-15 weighs close to 30,000lbs empty, throw in fuel and weapons and suddenly the 48,000lbs of thrust (under testing conditions) from the engines isn't quite enough to break 1:1 thrust-to-weight. In fact, with a maximum payload the F-15C can approach 70,000lbs reducing that TTW to closer to 0.7 to 1. This is why I don't really like that statement that the Eagle can break Mach 1 in a climb. It's technically true, without any weapons and likely a reduced fuel load, but it's not really something it can do in combat unless it's already spent all it's munitions. Even after all that you're going to have to be in afterburner for a significant amount of time which would burn through fuel incredibly quickly. Taking all that into account it's unlikely that a combat ready Eagle with a full payload of weapons and fuel would be able to reach Mach 2.5 before running out of fuel. The F-22, on the other hand, while it has a lower top speed on paper, would likely be able to achieve and sustain a higher speed than the F-15 in an actual combat situation. Thanks primarily to it's more powerful engines that can produce enough thrust to break the sound barrier without needing afterburner and the fact that it's weapons are stored internally, greatly reducing drag. It's likely that an Eagle may be able to "sprint" to a slightly higher speed momentarily but if we're talking about sustained straight line speed the Raptor has it beat.
The reality of the matter is that regardless of the top speed written on the spec sheet, most pilots rarely even break Mach 2 in any fighter. It simply takes too much fuel, doing so would limit them to mere minuets of operation. That's part of the reason why more modern fighters like the F-22 and F-35 just don't have those really high theoretical top speeds. Not only is it unrealistic to go that fast in actual combat but it's not even necessary. Better to design your aircraft to be stealthier with a higher potential sustained cruise speed than to try and make its top speed as high as possible.
The reason the F-22 and F-35 are slower, is that beyond a certain point speed doesn't help you win dogfights, and wastes too much fuel to be practical. As for acceleration, with the help of computer simulation, it was found that superior maneuverability could be achieved with smaller, more efficient engines (and subsequently smaller, lighter gas tanks). They also have thrust vectoring, which makes it possible to achieve greater maneuverability with less thrust. The F-15 is still a great interceptor, but the F-35 and F-22 are superior dogfighters.
The F-35 is the most successful fighter development program in history. The US has already sold over 900 of them to allied countries, and the various US military branches plan to eventually purchase over 2,000. The technology in the F-35 makes it unbeatable, even by the F-22. The 360 degree Augmented reality cockpit view, and it's ability to fire missiles at enemies that are behind it, almost completely negates the maneuverability advantage of the F-22.
People get really confused about the trillion dollar F35 price tag. The trillion dollar figure is the lifetime cost of the program over the next 50 years.
Later F-86's had their noses changed with a cone, and the air intake in a scoop below, not unlike later F-8 Crusaders. Easrler ones had no need of a cone and it was the most direct way to feed the engine. Typical jet fuel isnt all that different from kerosene. The J79 jet engine was pretty smokey, but a great performer and very responsive, and hard to stall. Mach number (speed of sound) varies slightly depending on altitude and relative air density as sound travels faster or slower depending on these variables. Every new plane is the most expensive ever designed. The '15 is still the fastest fighter, edging out even the F-22. Ultimate speed goes to the SR-71, but its not a fighter, and is not on active duty any more.
If I lived that close to the mach loop I would definitely go. So cool
Pls watch more of videos from Mustard, he has tons of amazing content you'd love
The F-4 Phantom's engine smoked because it was using an engine designed for a high-altitude bomber and they had to lower the combustion temperature of the engine to keep it from overheating, which caused an incomplete ignition of the fuel used, and therefore, the smokey exhaust
love this plane. I was first introduced to it when my sister took to me to an airshow in Everett, WA about an hour north of Seattle. I was probably around 11 or 12. They had a static display of the plane and you climb a ladder to look in the cockpit. I was hooked. Later in the day, they did a air display with the F-15 and I was blown away. Of course, they couldn't break the sound barrier, but they did demonstrate takeoff and going vertical. I was the best thing I have ever witnessed in real life. The sound, the power…man I loved it. In Seattle, we get the Blue Angels (f-18) and I do love those too. I have seen the Thunderbirds (F-16) and love those planes too. When I was in the Navy, I saw F-14s and FA-18s quite frequently when we went on deployment with USS Carl Vinson aircraft carrier. I was on CGN-35 USS Truxtun a guided missle cruiser part of the Carl Vinson battle group. On two of the deployments, called West-Pac (western pacific), they did an airshow and since we were at sea, they could break the sound barrier and it was cool to see and hear. But with all that exposure nothing comes close to that first time seeing the F-15 up close.
15:27 not CGI. There’s no reason to add something there when it’s already there. Those are the afterburners in use and it actually looks like that
This crazy tit-for-tat in development all started with a cancelled US aircraft, the XB-70, why else would the Soviets feel the need for a Mach 3 interceptor
ALL jet engines burn some form of KEROSENE fuel, Diesel is one of those kerosene based fuels, BUT diesel fuel CAN NOT be used in jet aircraft, due to the fact that it has so many impurities in it, and this causes it to GEL when it gets cold, and when you have a plane that flies at 45,000 feet or higher, the temperatures up there are far colder than needed to GEL diesel fuel, so much more purified and refined versions of Kerosene were produced, Jp-4 for the Army and Air Force, JP-5 for the Navy and Marine corps, JP-7 for the SR-71, TODAY, those have all gone away and been standardized with JP-8, see the Navy USED to use JP-4, but after the U.S.S, Forestall fire in 1967, that HAD TO CHANGE, JP-4 has a flash point of about -40 farenheight, and because the fuel greatly contributed to the heavy loss of life in that fire, a new jet fuel had to be produced, so the creation of JP-5 came about, nearly identical fuels, but JP-5 has a flashpoint of 175 degree farenheight, which allows for a much greater margin of safety for shipboard operations, but the Air Force REFUSED to use JP-5 regularly so the more dangerous JP-4 hung around till the late 1990's, when the Department of Defense, finally laid down the law because they were finally tired of buying 3 different kinds of jet fuel with the retirement of the SR-71, there was no further need for any more JP-7 to be produced, the DOD forced the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines to use a single common fuel and that fuel was JP-8, the Air Force had to give up some performance advantage that they retained with JP-4 when they went to JP-8, the Navy had to give up some of the fire safety and accept a lower flashpoint of JP-8 everyone had to give up something. but the tax payer was no longer buying 3 different fuels for our aircraft, JP-7 was ONLY for the SR-71, and it had to be that way, the CIA discovered very early in the development of the A-12 program, that JP-4 would boil when it was enclosed in a fuel system and being flown at very high altitude and speed of the A-12 and SR-71, so a special fuel had to be invented for just that airplane, a special ignition system also had to be developed to ignite the JP-7, because it was so resistant to burn, a couple of reactant and toxic chemicals had to be charged into the SR-71 airframe just to get the JP-7 to begin burning, if I remember correctly, the SR-71 could lingt off the engines 5 times before those canisters had to be refilled, anyway, you were asking about the smoke, when the F-4 Phantom was designed and built, we were only about 15 years into jet propulsion, so the engines were still turbojets being used, the first turbofan was still a few years away, and the discovery that higher compression ratios were the key to a cleaner burning jet engine was not to occur until the mid 1970's, which is why the F-14A's also had a smoking issue with it's exhaust, and so did the original F-15's and F-16's, although still not nearly as bad as the F-4 was, with the engine improvements of the F-100 engines in the F-15 and F-16, they were able to eliminate nearly all of the exhaust smoke, but with the F-14, that stayed a problem until the original TF-30's were replaced with the F-110's, and the F-14B's and D's never had that smoking problem again, I hope that answers your questions about jet fuels and jet engine differences
MACH number changes depending on a lot of factors, altitude, humidity, temperature, air density, at sea level on a 59 degree day with a humidity level of about 40% MACH 1 is about 750 miles per hour, but striaght up above the same place on the planet, at 60,000 feet, where the Temperature is -45 degrees and the air is very very thin, and humidity level is about 1%, MACH 1 is about 690 mile per hour, so there is a lot of variables for the actual speed of MACH, it is a numbe that changes a lot depending on conditions.
I worked the 15 for 12 years. Great jet.
They smoked a lot depending on the fuel they used. Like JP5 is almost like kerosene it’s an oily fuel. Also had JP4 and JP8 jet a and jet a1
Mach 1 is 1234.8 kilometers hour or 761.3 mph. A Mach is the speed of sound. I know the 1234 part from school, we had to learn the metric system but we never converted over. We have air shows in the USA. As a kid we could walk up to a plane and take pics, couldn’t get close enough touch one. Parks had older planes we could touch.
It is a classic story where the propaganda that you put out, will cause the thing that you fear the most to happen, the Soviet Union created the MIG-25 to scare the United States, I am guessing that they still did not learn what Japan had to learn the hard way in the 1940's, in Ameica, WE DO NOT GET SCARED, if we percieve something that is "UNBEATABLE" you can bet your last dollar that we WILL make something to not just beat it, but easily beat it, and in the case of the MIG-25 we built 2 fighters that handled the MIG-25 with ease, Iran shot down more than 2 dozen of them during the Iran Iraq war of the 1980's with the F-14 Tomcat with no loses, and the F-15 which has bagged about 6 as well with no losses, so WHEN we percieved a threat that was amplified by PROPAGANDA, we bulit not 1 but 2 of the finest and greatest fighter planes that the world has ever seen in the F-14 and F-15, both have incredible combat records with the F-14 having a minimum record of 152-0-5 and a maximum record of 192-1-5 and the F-15 has a current combat record of 104-0-4, Personally I still believe that the F-14 is the better fighter plane, especially once the terrible TF-30's that it got saddled up with was finally replaced with the F-110's unfortunately the F-14B's and D's NEVER got the chance to rack up any real air to air combat, the entire combat record for the F-14 came with the far less capable F-14A's operated by the U.S. Navy and the Iranian Air Force. BUT did the Soviet union learn from how badly they screwed up with the MIG 25, NOOOOO they did not, they then created the MIG-29, in the mid 1980's, and claimed it to be the Tomcat, Flacon, Hornet and Eagle killer, but again, that was propaganda that the U.S. did not believe this time and we were right, the Isreali's were dropping the MIG-29's regularily with both the F-16 and F-15, the Iranians were dropping them regularily with the F-14, now the Russians are at it again, saying the SU-57 is going to be the most dominate fighter plane of all time, I am betting, that in a dogfight with an F-15, the F-15 will beat it as well, but it MIGHT actually be a good fight this time, and it will be little more than a target for the F-22.
Those early 50s jets dont have a nose cone because the whole nose was a big air intake for the engine.
All Jet fuel is made from Kerosene. And up until the late 1960s, all Jets had a smoke trail. Some Jets produced a smoke trail more prominent than others. But in the late 1960s engineers figured out how to burn Kerosene more efficiently, resulting in a Jet Engine that didn't leave a smoke trail.
The f-15 is still one of the fastest fighter jets, and one of the handful of planes capable of breaking the sound barrier vertically.
How far are you from Lakenheath? That's your best bet for seeing an F-15 in the wild. 48th Fighter Wing has F-35 squadrons too. Bring your camera and go plane spotting. They're so cool. Sometimes you can even see an F-15 and other fighters over the North Sea on flightradar sites.
104 and 0, look out below!
Avionics is what makes planes dangerous. The reality is, awax is the real power. Fighter planes get Intel of maybe 35 enemies the missiles can lock on to, from a kc 135 awax or whatever. 500 miles from line of sight .
2301.807 mph
Please link the original creator in the description. You may try to blanket this video under Fair Use, but not showcasing the creator of this original video or even prevents the original creator the credit for making it. This is bad practice.
A fun fact that's stuck in my mind is that the F-15 is actually longer than a B-17, and I think can carry a greater payload, as well. Another point is that with planes like the F-22 and F-35 have a lower top speed for two reasons, they can't outrun missiles anymore, and while speed still matters, maneuverability's now the emphasis. Part of that's due to the G-force limit humans have, so a lower top end helps a bit, but mostly because of improved design and things like vectored thrust tech.
Kinda interesting how we went from smaller, more nimble planes in Vietnam, to the much larger, but still fairly nimble F-15 types, and then back to smaller, but even more nimble platforms we have today.
0:16: 🛩️ The F-15's historical significance and impact on the Soviets during the Cold War.
3:37: ⚔️ Challenges faced by American Pilots in dogfights against agile migs and the need for a new air superiority fighter.
7:12: ✈️ Innovation driven by survival, F-15's tactical dominance, and superior maneuverability.
10:38: 🦅 The F-15's impressive performance and widespread adoption intimidated the Soviets.
14:38: ✈️ Impact of F-15 on Soviet Union and its continuous dominance in air battles.
Recapped using Tammy AI
Yes, it is the I think designated XE-15 bought back from the Israelis who bought the F-15's from us then modifying them to their spec. And in the process removing all hydraulic system and converting them to fly by wire and computer control which has all the extreme flight parameters for any flight profile. It now is capable of fly maneuveraility as an F-22 if not more so. And it's had all systems brought up to F-35 Standards and increased weapons etc new faster engines the works and it's cheaper to buy from the Israelis as the US facilities are no more. A pilot can literally fly the plane full on with computer aid and protection as it won't allow exceeding design limits. So, now it's a Reborn Terror.
"…is it running on diesel or something?""
Well… yes. Jet fuel is basically the same as diesel.
The the title of "fastest fighter jet" should offer you reams of information Kabir, with regards to the speeds of various different jets around the world. The F-15 Eagle is a "purpose built" jet that is meant to excel and dominate in a dog-fight to establish "air dominance" over a specific theater of operation. If you've learned anything about Newton's First Law of Motion (also known as the Law of Inertia), you know that "an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force."
Fighter Jets, engaged in a "dog fight" cannot travel at supersonic speeds while pulling high G-force evasive maneuvers. The plane and/or the pilot would break apart. A study done after the dog-fights in Vietnam revealed that the average speeds attained during active engagements bordered around the 400 to 600 knots range. This was due to the excessive G-forces exerted on jets and pilots during attacks and evasive maneuvers.
The Russians, Soviets or whatever, have a long storied history of grossly over-exaggerating the capabilities of their military hardware (jets, tanks, ships, etc.). This was compounded by the panic induced, over-estimations that the USA and its allies made whenever these Russian weapon-systems were made public. In retrospect, most of these Russian weapon-systems turned out to be garbage but served the Russians well in their intended panic-inducing, propaganda effects. Just look at the abysmal failures of their Yak-39 VOTL jet, their heavy, unwieldy (albeit fast) Mig-25 Foxbat, or their clunker of an aircraft carrier "Admiral Kuznetsov'.
The F-15 Eagle first entered service in 1974 and it still, far outclasses anything the Russians can field. Even the latest, so-called "stealth fighter", the SU-57 Felon is a loser. It's not even a real stealth aircraft. In fact, its RADAR cross-section is similar to the F-15. The SU-57 is a problem plagued jet still in development with only a handful of working prototypes (not official production models) in service, and it's far too expensive for Russia to produce (especially since India dropped its partnership in the program). The T-14 Armada tank is another abysmal failure that doesn't work as intended. Russia has been typically 30 to 50 years behind the west, depending on the technologies involved. Wow, did I really type out this dissertation?😳 I'm getting too old for this stuff.🦽 Peace Kabir🕊
Hi Kabir, the old jets of the '50s were open on the front because that was the intake. Essentially, the fuselage held the entire engine and the pilot was sitting on top of it.