F-15E [Aim-9X] [Thread downvoted for Navy hate, eh? XD] :P [v. 0.25]

[andrew123]

The OP post with the F-15E's with the LA tail flash..those are from the now closed 461st Deadly Jesters squadron, stationed at Luke AFB until around 1995...that was MY unit...love those birds!

Politicians always cut corners. At least we still have an Air Force.

I love how this thread is being downvoted for the tomcat bashing. XD XD

MORE! :D

[Im The One]

to be honest the f-14 was great for its job. That being the carriers air superiority fighter (and being the navy's only fighter able to fire beyond the horizon with out the aid of outside radar i.e. e-2c). You cant compare the two of these aircraft together they had there own jobs (one being carrier air superiority (less range) and the other being land based). they both have close to the same speed(tomcat is a hair slower), the tomcat carries more weight (it also carried the deadly aim-54 phoenix, and the aim-7(btw the aim-54 flies farther and faster and is bigger than the 120 amraam)) the tomcat also has a higher wing load that can be loaded on it. Oh and I do prefer the air force its just that I have a soft spot for the f-14 tomcat. and to the one that said the navy can plop a base in the middle of an ocean. where do you plan to refuel and how will your CWIS stop a ripple fire of missiles from a ground attack aircraft, or shall i let a b-52 just drop off some alcms and calcms with a few warheads switched from conventional to nuclear.

[andrew123]

to be honest the f-14 was great for its job. That being the carriers air superiority fighter (and being the navy's only fighter able to fire beyond the horizon with out the aid of outside radar i.e. e-2c). You cant compare the two of these aircraft together they had there own jobs (one being carrier air superiority (less range) and the other being land based). they both have close to the same speed(tomcat is a hair slower), the tomcat carries more weight (it also carried the deadly aim-54 phoenix, and the aim-7(btw the aim-54 flies farther and faster and is bigger than the 120 amraam)) the tomcat also has a higher wing load that can be loaded on it. Oh and I do prefer the air force its just that I have a soft spot for the f-14 tomcat. and to the one that said the navy can plop a base in the middle of an ocean. where do you plan to refuel and how will your CWIS stop a ripple fire of missiles from a ground attack aircraft, or shall i let a b-52 just drop off some alcms and calcms with a few warheads switched from conventional to nuclear.

Yo, the air force has something called C-RAM for anti projectile defense... XD

And don't forget the army's Patriot PAC-3 MSE. XD

As a San Diegan, I actually get to see one of last remaining F-14 examples. XD XD

Edited December 2, 2014 by andrew123

[Im The One]

Yo, the air force has something called C-RAM for anti projectile defense... XD

http://i.imgur.com/I4KCiOJ.jpg

And don't forget the army's Patriot PAC-3 MSE. XD

http://i.imgur.com/TlPc0BX.jpg

As a San Diegan, I actually get to see one of last remaining F-14 examples. XD XD

but you can overwhelm any one of those easily with the right amount of projectiles (and like i said i still like the air force better than the navy)

and why does that army guy look so unsure of what he is doing???? XP

[andrew123]

but you can overwhelm any one of those easily with the right amount of projectiles (and like i said i still like the air force better than the navy)

and why does that army guy look so unsure of what he is doing???? XP

You do realize that the C-RAM is technically a landlocked naval Phalanx CIWS, right?

Even the navy's aegis platforms can be overwhelmed by sheer quantity...

About that army guy... maybe he forgot to charge the batteries?

[Im The One]

You do realize that the C-RAM is technically a landlocked naval Phalanx CIWS, right?

Even the navy's aegis platforms can be overwhelmed by sheer quantity...

About that army guy... maybe he forgot to charge the batteries?

Ok yeah i was pretty sure they were the same, but anyway all the branches were designed to work together to make a next to unstoppable force of machine men and firepower to crush who ever tried to attack us or our friends.

*for thoes about to rock starts to play along with Proud to be an American and cannons going off and everyone stands and salutes*

[ExplorerKlatt]

Love the replica. It looks very much like the real thing.

all the branches were designed to work together to make a next to unstoppable force of machine men and firepower to crush who ever tried to attack us or our friends.

http://i.imgur.com/NQN1ObV.jpg?1

*for thoes about to rock starts to play along with Proud to be an American and cannons going off and everyone stands and salutes*

I agree with this sentiment wholeheartedly.

Also, to the person that said the navy could plop a carrier somewhere with a few hours notice, that is true only if the carrier is already within a few hundred miles of the location.

For example, if a carrier is in the Persian gulf and it is needed in the Indian Ocean, it will take them days to get there.

Once they are there though, they can run near constant flight ops with re supply from the Air Force.

[Hodo]

The only problem I have with this recreation is you are missing the FAST tanks on the side of the intakes. The F-15E those are almost standard on it, it gives it much greater range.

[andrew123]

The only problem I have with this recreation is you are missing the FAST tanks on the side of the intakes. The F-15E those are almost standard on it, it gives it much greater range.

Now that you mention it, I remember why I didn't include them: part count. Seeing the overwhelmingly positive reaction, however, convinced me to start building a variant equipped with FAST tanks.

Expect to see it soon.

Edited December 3, 2014 by andrew123

[Dman979]

So, how bout them Coast Guarders?

[andrew123]

So, how bout them Coast Guarders?

https://m1.behance.net/rendition/modules/29380416/disp/c0019467f520f57adce4e919ce3cb7b6.jpg

That almost looks like a crossbred Iranian F-5 upgrade and the F-20 tigershark. :D

Here's what I have to say about the coast guard:

They're a dedicated bunch, like the actual navy.

I'm engineering the FAST tanks for flight experiments, and possible expedited release.

Edited December 3, 2014 by andrew123

[Dman979]

That almost looks like a crossbred Iranian F-5 upgrade and the F-20 tigershark. :D

Here's what I have to say about the coast guard:

http://i.imgur.com/sejQlMS.png

They're a dedicated bunch, like the actual navy.

I'm engineering the FAST tanks for flight experiments, and possible expedited release.

Cool! The plane is a actually a Mark 10 Javelin. I had never heard of it before.

[Naten]

North Korea's supermanuverable next-generation multirole fighter/interceptor with the most advanced countermeasure and electronic warfare systems ever to be placed on an aircraft; surpassing that of even a dedicated electronic warfare airplane! Can be used for reconnisance, ground-attack, fighter-bomber and interdictor and interceptor roles. Wings can withstand more than a solid meter thick block of concrete, and control allows the pilot to recover from a flatspin, stall or anything in-between or together, at only a few hundred feet off the ground!

I pity the USAF's aircraft technology; flying bricks will be no match for this beast!

[andrew123]

North Korea's supermanuverable next-generation multirole fighter/interceptor with the most advanced countermeasure and electronic warfare systems ever to be placed on an aircraft; surpassing that of even a dedicated electronic warfare airplane! Can be used for reconnisance, ground-attack, fighter-bomber and interdictor and interceptor roles. Wings can withstand more than a solid meter thick block of concrete, and control allows the pilot to recover from a flatspin, stall or anything in-between or together, at only a few hundred feet off the ground!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5e/Santos-Dumont_flying_the_14_bis.jpg

I pity the USAF's aircraft technology; flying bricks will be no match for this beast!

I assume it's blessed by Un's Bordeaux?

Also, a rather rough PAC-2 prototype. I'll have to clean up those features.

[razgriz86er]

cute plane you have there, decided to take a few pictures of it.

[andrew123]

cute plane you have there, decided to take a few pictures of it.

http://i.imgur.com/r7C0NdL.png

Maybe I should pull up...

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Haha.

Edited December 4, 2014 by andrew123

[andrew123]

Hmm... I've officially started working on some weird KSP projects, with no specific goal. I wonder what'll come out of it... :P

One possible product of my misadventures...

I'm coming for you, Spartwo...

Also, some awesome footage for you navy folk. I just love how the US Navy's supercarrier dwarfs all of the LHD's.

Edited December 6, 2014 by andrew123

[MightyDarkStar]

What's so bad about a navy? Naval aviation is usually a synonym for more versatile, sturdier and often prettier aircraft. The US Navy kicked the IJNs arse in the PTO in WWII and Royal Navy carriers sent out punishing waves of Seafires and Sea Furys in the Korean conflict. But, I guess that some naval planes can't land on carriers properly, the corsair for example would usually collapse its gears or simply bounce off the deck..

[andrew123]

I don't hate the navy.

Two ships at RIMPAC.

Older Arleigh Burke.

[zekes]

Maybe I should pull up...

Haha.

NOT LoW ENOUGH

[andrew123]

NOT LoW ENOUGH

Now is it low enough...

Tomcat, surviving ETC 1970...

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Edited December 10, 2014 by andrew123

[andrew123]

Meet the Su-33, the Russian naval counterpart. A navalized F-15 would turn out fugly, or how the Boeing stealth fighter turned out.

Edited December 26, 2014 by andrew123

[andrew123]

Haha. I like how the narrator pronounced Tornadoes...

Also, GO NAVY...

Edited December 30, 2014 by andrew123