Talk:McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle article.|
|Archives: 1, 2, 3|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Edit request for unit cost
- Don't think so. Factoring inflation can be inaccurate and might be considered original research. -Fnlayson (talk) 18:07, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Edit Request F-15/E
Isn't there a F-15/E somewhere because i pretty sure there is one and if there is one it should be added in with it's predecessor's. EthanKid17 18:15, 10 May 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by EthanKid17 (talk • contribs)
- You should look through this article for the F-15E links.. -Fnlayson (talk) 18:20, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Interesting F-15 image
Recent contract http://www.defense.gov/contracts/contract.aspx?contractid=4820 for mod kits to change 68 F-15S to F-15SA for Saudi Arabia, variants not actually mentioned in article! MilborneOne (talk) 20:30, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
- The F-15S and SA are F-15E-based versions. See the McDonnell Douglas F-15E Strike Eagle article. The SA upgrades are mentioned there, but the mod kit contract has not been added there yet. -Fnlayson (talk) 20:50, 27 June 2012 (UTC)
F-15s bested Indian Su-30MKI and MiG-29 during Red Flag 2008
This is based of the Speech of an US Col. which was rebutted by the IAF as well as the USAF.
here is the IAF's version of Red Flag 2008
Apart from that, this is another article showing otherwise
- You and your 'IP pals' have repeatedly removed the text on this without any explanation, which looks like vandalism. There's just as must evidence for this as Cope 2004, which you have left alone. -Fnlayson (talk) 16:58, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
I will do more research on Cope India 2004 and get back. But in this case, it seems a conclusion is being made based of a person's speech which was officially never accepted by anyone, rather it became famous around the internet among people who rather wanted ot see the USAF win over the IAF. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 13:24, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
New lede image
- That does look better. But either image is fine with me. -Fnlayson (talk) 12:58, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
can anyone add there if even first version used "glass" cockpit or they were good old "clocks" avionics like in f-4 and many other planes in taht time used. 2A00:1028:9199:52F6:81B1:C0BB:E0CE:B38 (talk) 15:17, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
F-15E vs S-75/MiG-25 its fact (english WWW//)
A few F-15E(and versions) was shot down by fire from the ground, or hit by a missile air-to-air. The fact that the loss is not denied, but there is a dispute about the causes (AAA or air defense missiles and air-to-air missiles).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 14:11, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
- The F-15E is the strike version and is mainly covered at McDonnell Douglas F-15E Strike Eagle, not here. Also, the text about combat wins and losses states air superiority versions, the A/B/C/D models. It can't get much clearer than this, imo. -Fnlayson (talk) 21:21, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
- Main article: List of F-15 operators
Israeli Air Force has operated F-15s since 1977. The IAF has 43 F-15A/B/C/D (20 F-15A, 6 F-15B, 11 F-15C, and 6 F-15D) aircraft in service as of January 2011.
+ think you know that many times the air-to-air missile got into F15 but the plane was not shot down and was repaired + There are good sources I can add more (especially this)
+ Operational history Introduction and early service + http://www.airwar.ru/history/locwar/bv/mig25isr/mig25isr.html but not F-15E_Strike_Eagle exactly F-15, on the source strictly as F15 and does not E version but without the debris on the ground.
- I do not think that Airwar.ru is a WP:Reliable Source - as such, what it says cannot have any bearing in formal work such as an encyclopedia. Kyteto (talk) 15:08, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
I had made a minor edit.
"A variety of air-to-air weaponry can be carried by the F-15. An automated weapon system enables the pilot to perform aerial combat effectively and safely, using the head-up display and the avionics and weapons controls located on the engine throttles or control stick. When the pilot changes from one weapon system to another, visual guidance for the required weapon automatically appears on the head-up display."
- That's certainty not what the text means. Don't you think inadvertently releasing a weapon would be unsafe? -Fnlayson (talk) 01:59, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- Maybe "...enables the pilot to release/use weapons effectively and safely..." would be worded better. Because "...enables the pilot to perform aerial combat effectively and safely..." might be a bit misleading. It's not a big deal anyway. Green547 (talk) 00:19, 5 March 2015 (UTC)