I read the USAF AIB (accident investigation board) reports regularly and have for a long time, and I have never heard of this tactic being used before. A Kadena based F-15C was performing ACM (dogfighting) with an F-22 back on June 11, 2018. Trying to do a reversal the F-15 pilot went from a left turn to a right turn but he did so using right rudder and differential afterburner use:

"The MP recalled an airspeed of approximately 220 to 230 KIAS and 5,900 feet MSL during this
maneuver (Tab V-2.3). The MP used right rudder and pro right yaw differential throttles; left
engine in maximum afterburner and right engine in minimum afterburner to reverse the turn
direction to the right (Tab V-2.3 and V-2.9)."

In all of my years invested into aviation I have never once heard of this being a 'thing', have you? In fact the only time I can remember differential afterburner use being used was in SR-71's, under certain conditions while tanking they would light one burner and keep the other engine at military power. I find it interesting and curious that it was used during combat maneuvers. Thoughts?

Every little bit helps...

If memory serves, some F-14 bubbas used it, too. I'd imagine their much wider cans would have an appreciably greater effect than the more centerline Eagles.

Quick toss out, the SR-71 would light a burner (or two) on the boom because they were power-limited when heavy at AR altitude - versus increasing yaw rates like your AIB seems to indicate - they'd park an engine (usually left, IIRC, as their windshield de-fog only worked on the left side) at min AB and then control fore and aft with the right. I've tanked Strike Eagles doing the same thing whilst high and heavy over A-stan. Really cool at night.

LyleLanley wrote:

Every little bit helps...

If memory serves, some F-14 bubbas used it, too. I'd imagine their much wider cans would have an appreciably greater effect than the more centerline Eagles.

Quick toss out, the SR-71 would light a burner (or two) on the boom because they were power-limited when heavy at AR altitude - versus increasing yaw rates like your AIB seems to indicate - they'd park an engine (usually left, IIRC, as their windshield de-fog only worked on the left side) at min AB and then control fore and aft with the right. I've tanked Strike Eagles doing the same thing whilst high and heavy over A-stan. Really cool at night.

Thanks for the clarification, I remembered it vaguely having something to do with weights and minimum speeds but not enough to post it with confidence. Very cool that you've tanked F-15E's doing it, interesting job you have/had there for sure!

LyleLanley wrote:

Every little bit helps...

If memory serves, some F-14 bubbas used it, too. I'd imagine their much wider cans would have an appreciably greater effect than the more centerline Eagles.

Quick toss out, the SR-71 would light a burner (or two) on the boom because they were power-limited when heavy at AR altitude - versus increasing yaw rates like your AIB seems to indicate - they'd park an engine (usually left, IIRC, as their windshield de-fog only worked on the left side) at min AB and then control fore and aft with the right. I've tanked Strike Eagles doing the same thing whilst high and heavy over A-stan. Really cool at night.

I think it was more prevalent with the F-14 B's and D's as they could trust their GE engines. I'm sure it was tested in the A's but was quickly ruled out in the squadrons when flame outs became such an issue. I would have thought that the F15 would not have gained a lot of extra yaw but then, if it mattered, it mattered!

LyleLanley wrote:

Every little bit helps...

If memory serves, some F-14 bubbas used it, too. I'd imagine their much wider cans would have an appreciably greater effect than the more centerline Eagles.

Quick toss out, the SR-71 would light a burner (or two) on the boom because they were power-limited when heavy at AR altitude - versus increasing yaw rates like your AIB seems to indicate - they'd park an engine (usually left, IIRC, as their windshield de-fog only worked on the left side) at min AB and then control fore and aft with the right. I've tanked Strike Eagles doing the same thing whilst high and heavy over A-stan. Really cool at night.

Were either type actually “gaining” fuel or just sending out the exhaust. We rarely did it in Hun because you weren’t taking on fuel, just burning it. True it was on the drogue.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Were either type actually “gaining” fuel or just sending out the exhaust. We rarely did it in Hun because you weren’t taking on fuel, just burning it. True it was on the drogue.

I'd assume so. I mean, I know the SR-71 guys were (understandably) paranoid about getting their gas, but with the boom's offload rate being so high it probably wasn't an issue like you inferred. Even with Strike Eagles, it's something ~ 3.5-4K PPM.

Similar to your point with the Hun, I've got some Tornado pics on the basket at night, burning away, and they definitely seemed to take forever.

I can't seem to embed these images, but the links work.

https://ibb.co/DfhMzY4

https://ibb.co/27zwxn7

spudh wrote:

I think it was more prevalent with the F-14 B's and D's as they could trust their GE engines. I'm sure it was tested in the A's but was quickly ruled out in the squadrons when flame outs became such an issue. I would have thought that the F15 would not have gained a lot of extra yaw but then, if it mattered, it mattered!

Sounds about right. When I think of how bad procurement is nowadays, I think back to the F-14A/TF-30 and remember it could always be much, much worse!

LyleLanley wrote:

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

Were either type actually “gaining” fuel or just sending out the exhaust. We rarely did it in Hun because you weren’t taking on fuel, just burning it. True it was on the drogue.

I'd assume so. I mean, I know the SR-71 guys were (understandably) paranoid about getting their gas, but with the boom's offload rate being so high it probably wasn't an issue like you inferred. Even with Strike Eagles, it's something ~ 3.5-4K PPM.

Similar to your point with the Hun, I've got some Tornado pics on the basket at night, burning away, and they definitely seemed to take forever.

I can't seem to embed these images, but the links work.

https://ibb.co/DfhMzY4

https://ibb.co/27zwxn7

On the SR-71 this procedure was used to give the plane adequate power to fly with the tanker once the SR-71 started to get heavy with fuel. One afterburner was lit in minimum level, then the position of the plane adjusted with the other engine in dry power (so it didn’t go racing into the back of the tanker). I understand if both engines were in minimum afterburner level, this is too much power.

Obviously this procedure was rather impressive when it was done as the big black sled launched forwards and to one side somewhat before being reigned back in!

cpd wrote:

On the SR-71 this procedure was used to give the plane adequate power to fly with the tanker once the SR-71 started to get heavy with fuel. One afterburner was lit in minimum level, then the position of the plane adjusted with the engine in dry power (so it didn’t go racing into the back of the tanker). I understand if both engines were in minimum afterburner level, this is too much power.

You're pretty much spot on! For most missions you're absolutely right: one burner was sufficient. The exception I alluded to is that at high altitudes the SR-71 would have to light both burners. Especially if they were on a KC-10 and high up. I reference the Brian Shul book "The Untouchables" where Major Shul repeatedly mentions having to light both cans whilst refueling off of a KC-10 in the block 275-335.

A few of my instructors were Beale Bandits (the Q tanker crews that plugged SR-71s) and to a man they all said it was the high points of their careers.

LyleLanley wrote:

cpd wrote:

On the SR-71 this procedure was used to give the plane adequate power to fly with the tanker once the SR-71 started to get heavy with fuel. One afterburner was lit in minimum level, then the position of the plane adjusted with the engine in dry power (so it didn’t go racing into the back of the tanker). I understand if both engines were in minimum afterburner level, this is too much power.

You're pretty much spot on! For most missions you're absolutely right: one burner was sufficient. The exception I alluded to is that at high altitudes the SR-71 would have to light both burners. Especially if they were on a KC-10 and high up. I reference the Brian Shul book "The Untouchables" where Major Shul repeatedly mentions having to light both cans whilst refueling off of a KC-10 in the block 275-335.

A few of my instructors were Beale Bandits (the Q tanker crews that plugged SR-71s) and to a man they all said it was the high points of their careers.

I have The Untouchables and Sled Driver.

Sled Driver is signed by Walter Watson Jr, Brian Shul, Ed Yeilding and the late Bob Gilliland.

The Untouchables is signed by both Brian Shul and Walter Watson Jr. I treasure those books.

I met another SR-71 pilot a few years back as well, such a calm and quietly spoken guy who is obviously very, very talented and brilliantly persuasive. Just wonderful to hear some of the insights into the program, even from the wide eyed awe when he first saw he plane.

It seems like there were some incredibly good people in that program.

silly question, but the MP did it with one hand? I would image the levers would be pretty far apart, that and minding the stick and everything else...trying to create a mental picture of the the MP was doing...while dogfighting....

bhill wrote:

silly question, but the MP did it with one hand? I would image the levers would be pretty far apart, that and minding the stick and everything else...trying to create a mental picture of the the MP was doing...while dogfighting....

The F-15C is designed with HOTAS. You can see the below image, bottom left, the throttles are located together. I expect it would be rare for a pilot to do this specific maneuver with the F-15 but clearly possible.



If you listen to the most recent Fighter Pilot Podcast episode it talks about the F-15C cockpit including how much can be done from the HOTAS controls (and how long it takes to really learn this). They also discuss why the digital upgrade to the F-15 engines make this possible. Previous to that upgrade the F-15 wasn't great moving from mil to afterburner, it did not consistently light.

Ozair wrote:

If you listen to the most recent Fighter Pilot Podcast episode it talks about the F-15C cockpit including how much can be done from the HOTAS controls (and how long it takes to really learn this).

Huh, that’s interesting. Civvie pilots are taught a light variation of this, or at least I was taught to keep left hand on yoke and right hand on either throttle or prop controls (naturally depending on the nature of the aircraft). Mostly driving manual-shift cars I found it pretty easy.

As an F-15 FSE [1988-to-1998] this photo makes the hairs on my neck stiffen-up... all reasons cited...

Kind of late to this topic but:
Lighting one burner (usually miin burner) and controlling speed with the other throttle up to mil was a technique that we even used in F-4s. Usually done only when we were heavy and above the optimum refueling altitude for some reason. Lighting the one burner was always done prior to stabilizing in the contact position.

The accident report for the F-15 at Kadena is here:

https://media.defense.gov/2019/Apr/23/2 ... REPORT.PDF

HaveBlue wrote:

I read the USAF AIB (accident investigation board) reports regularly and have for a long time, and I have never heard of this tactic being used before. A Kadena based F-15C was performing ACM (dogfighting) with an F-22 back on June 11, 2018. Trying to do a reversal the F-15 pilot went from a left turn to a right turn but he did so using right rudder and differential afterburner use:

In all of my years invested into aviation I have never once heard of this being a 'thing', have you?

Go to the 4:52 minute mark of this vid to see exactly that happening: https://youtu.be/c1Whrle4I1w

ish2dachoppa wrote:

HaveBlue wrote:

I read the USAF AIB (accident investigation board) reports regularly and have for a long time, and I have never heard of this tactic being used before. A Kadena based F-15C was performing ACM (dogfighting) with an F-22 back on June 11, 2018. Trying to do a reversal the F-15 pilot went from a left turn to a right turn but he did so using right rudder and differential afterburner use:

In all of my years invested into aviation I have never once heard of this being a 'thing', have you?

Go to the 4:52 minute mark of this vid to see exactly that happening: https://youtu.be/c1Whrle4I1w

Excellent, showed the throttles being split from the inside and the exterior view from behind with one lit and the other not, thank you!

When you’re trying to make a few degrees in a scissors, you’ll try anything including undersigned thrust vectoring.