F-15X: USAF Seems Interested

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5230
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 13:39

marsavian wrote:
Plus, this doesn't touch on the vast capability difference between to the two.


Because it doesn't exist. Their actual capability is pretty similar, the big difference is one can sneak in while the other will have to fight its way in and out.


Why would an Eagle need to fight its way in when it's got a nice big stand-off weapon? The whole point of stand-off weapons is so you don't need to fight your way in.
"There I was. . ."
Online

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1148
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 15:52

In the general purpose role compared to F-35.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5230
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 16:00

marsavian wrote:In the general purpose role compared to F-35.


Except this entire discussion for the last several pages has been about the specialist mission of employing hypersonic standoff weapons. I don't think anybody thinks an F-15 is better than an F-35 at dropping JDAMs in defended airspace.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

crosshairs

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 103
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2018, 19:03
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 17:41

Bones, Buffs, Spirits and Raiders will make hypersonic missile carriers. Longer ranged. Not as reliant on tanker support. In the case of the 2 and the 21, they are stealthy platforms requiring less supporting players in the strike group.

There is no need to build new F-15s to carry mach 6 missiles. We already have hundreds of Es with a lot of life left in the airframes even if it were true that's what the USAF wants to do with Eagles and turn them into hypersonic missile carries.

But it makes zero logic. Bones, Buffs, Spirits, and raiders can hit anywhere on the planet in hours. Oh how that isn't the case with F-15s.
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 683
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 17:56

weasel1962 wrote:Some of you guys are looking at the flyaway cost. USAF is looking at the total cost.


Which is why the F-15 C/D SLEP was in the budget last year but vanished this year.
It's impossible to argue for new builds over SLEPs when the known costs of the SLEP are one
quarter to one third of the new build cost. And given the delivery timeline for the F-15EX could actually be here sooner.

weasel1962 wrote:What the average joe doesn't realise but the USAF has to take into account is that if the production line stops, annual maintenance cost of the remaining F-15s are going to go up significantly.


What the average joe doesn't realize is that the government would then own all the tooling and
in some very important cases the government owns the data rights to the F-15 so it's open
for competitive bid a la the re-wining of the F-15C where the USG owns the data rights for the F-15E wing.

Plus Boeing had announced that it was repositioning itself as a aircraft upgrader/sustainer so there
was zero concern in the Air Force about maintenance cost due to the line shutting down.

weasel1962 wrote:However the reality, regardless of what some ignorant people think or if the F-15EX gets shot down, is that USAF F-15s are going to be around past 2040.


They aren't survivable either and I'm sure the Air Force would retire them too if it could.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5230
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 18:47

crosshairs wrote:But it makes zero logic. Bones, Buffs, Spirits, and raiders can hit anywhere on the planet in hours. Oh how that isn't the case with F-15s.


The same could be said of any air-dropped mission. Yet we still have F-15s, F-16s and Super Hornets dropping bombs. Funny that. Also, Bones can't carry them. (It's limited to weapons under 15 feet or so. For reference the X-51/ATACMs stack was about 25 feet long.)
"There I was. . ."
Offline

vilters

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1033
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 22:30

Come on guys.

LM is building F-35 as fast as it can, but . . . .

When your day to day flight operations are consuming more available airframe flight hrs then the new F-35 can bring into the system, you need other manufactures with other airplanes to step in.

Currently the USA is consuming more flight hrs then new airframes are adding into the system.
Something has to be done. Be it with extra newly build F-16 or F-15.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4183
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 22:50

vilters wrote:Come on guys.

LM is building F-35 as fast as it can, but . . . .

But it isn't. It is building them as fast as Congress is buying them.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

vilters

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1033
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 23:15

And? it will take 18 months to replace Turkey in the F-35 supply chain if the time comes.

You need more baskets with different colored eggs if you want the Easter Bells to continue to fly. LOL.

Pretty simple actually, ever airframe hr flown needs to be replaced.
Offline
User avatar

count_to_10

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3281
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2012, 15:38

Unread post19 Mar 2019, 23:47

sferrin wrote:
crosshairs wrote:But it makes zero logic. Bones, Buffs, Spirits, and raiders can hit anywhere on the planet in hours. Oh how that isn't the case with F-15s.


The same could be said of any air-dropped mission. Yet we still have F-15s, F-16s and Super Hornets dropping bombs. Funny that. Also, Bones can't carry them. (It's limited to weapons under 15 feet or so. For reference the X-51/ATACMs stack was about 25 feet long.)

I’m going to have to be shocked that those huge bomb bays are only 15 ft long.
Einstein got it backward: one cannot prevent a war without preparing for it.

Uncertainty: Learn it, love it, live it.
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2521
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30

Unread post20 Mar 2019, 00:51

https://news.yahoo.com/boeings-f-15ex-a ... NlYwNzYw--

Now it’s 144?

See pages 69-70 and thereabouts. Initial spares not included in the total.

https://www.saffm.hq.af.mil/Portals/84/ ... 152821-713
Last edited by quicksilver on 20 Mar 2019, 01:00, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5230
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post20 Mar 2019, 00:58

count_to_10 wrote:
sferrin wrote:
crosshairs wrote:But it makes zero logic. Bones, Buffs, Spirits, and raiders can hit anywhere on the planet in hours. Oh how that isn't the case with F-15s.


The same could be said of any air-dropped mission. Yet we still have F-15s, F-16s and Super Hornets dropping bombs. Funny that. Also, Bones can't carry them. (It's limited to weapons under 15 feet or so. For reference the X-51/ATACMs stack was about 25 feet long.)

I’m going to have to be shocked that those huge bomb bays are only 15 ft long.


There they be:
636617775158210323-0513AirShow018.jpg


Consider that the main weapons designed for it (not necessarily produced), or used were all 15 or less. AGM-86A, SRAM, SRAM 2, ASALM, JASSM. If it weren't constrained by Treaty, they could remove the bulkhead between bays 1 and 2 and have a single big bay up front. I don't know what that would cost though, or if the bulkhead was made permanent.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1515
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post20 Mar 2019, 01:31

Interesting to consider. B-1 upgrade already planned out and B-21 identified as the replacement. Ironically, that may help if the B-21 bay is too small to carry such weapons, then B-1 can gain a life extension by being the principle hypersonic missile carrier, assuming such mods are technically feasible.
Online

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1148
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post20 Mar 2019, 01:43

Now it’s 144?


Long term apparently. So F-15EX will probably still be flying in 2050+. I don't believe this will seriously affect F35 long term buy but it will probably cut the future PCA numbers down if F-15E replacement is not so critical then. PCA will probably end up as limited edition as F-22 with only 1-2 a month being made.
Online

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1148
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post20 Mar 2019, 01:56

marauder2048 wrote:
weasel1962 wrote:Some of you guys are looking at the flyaway cost. USAF is looking at the total cost.


Which is why the F-15 C/D SLEP was in the budget last year but vanished this year.
It's impossible to argue for new builds over SLEPs when the known costs of the SLEP are one
quarter to one third of the new build cost. And given the delivery timeline for the F-15EX could actually be here sooner.


The cheap Longeron SLEP is still there though.

F-15: The FY20 funds are required to reimburse the Working Capital Fund (WCF) for initial spares procured in prior years with WCF funding. Initial Spares are required to support newly fielded F-15 modifications. The program office must procure sufficient quantity cover the demand period and fill the spares pipeline until transitioned to sustainment. The programs requiring funding in FY20 are F-15C/D IRST, F-15 C/E ADCP II, F-15 C/D SLEP Longerons, F-15 C/D/E Mode 5, F-15 C/D/E MIDS-JTRS, and F-15E APG-82(V)1.
Last edited by marsavian on 20 Mar 2019, 01:57, edited 1 time in total.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: mtoner and 19 guests