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

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2583
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3894
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post22 Mar 2020, 14:58

madrat wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPWREs8nN4I


Yeah, I saw this some time ago (but thank you anyway). I'm sure some folks here hadn't seen it yet.

The F-15SA in that video carries F-15E like CFT's, with 6 hardpoints apiece. So perhaps not representative of what USAF F-15EX's may carry. I still say the situation is awful confusing..

What I'd like to see is precisely how much F-15EX optimized CFT's degrade performance. With them, the F-15 carries almost as much gas as your typical Flanker on internal fuel. Assuming they're emptied first and the Eagle is left with its normal 13,500lbs or so of internal fuel, I'd love to know what it can do. Would a pilot of such aircraft be hesitant to enter a furball?

Given current trends in air combat, I'm sure pilots would prefer more fuel/lower drag the CFT's offer. They'll also allow for carriage of the quad pack AMRAAM launchers under the wings, although the EX could conceivably still carry 12 AMRAAM's/AAM's with no CFT's and two underwing tanks.

Regardless, the penultimate Eagle is coming. I just hope Boeing does justice to hands down, the most successful fighter ever! :)
Offline

eagle3000

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 59
  • Joined: 09 Apr 2016, 17:17

Unread post22 Mar 2020, 17:50

mixelflick wrote:The whole F-15C vs. E CFT issue is confusing as hell. Way back in 2017, USAF launched an experiment where National Guard F-15C's were fitted with CFT's under the, "persistent air dominance enabler" program. Well, were these F-15C CFT's? Because if they were, the pictured aircraft sure looks to be carrying the high drag/F-15E CFT's.


Those were F-15E CFTs.
Israel is the only user of F-15C CFTs. If you want to call them that, because they use them on A-D models. :wink:

mixelflick wrote:Nothing much has been said since?


I bet pilots were super enthusiastic. :mrgreen:

mixelflick wrote:Further, there are big discrepencies as to how much CFT's detract from performance. This article cites, "Conformal fuel tanks on the F-15C add nearly 12,000lbs of gas to the jets 13,850lbs of internal fuel with only slight performance penalties and are much more aerodynamically efficient than the 600 gallon drop tanks normally carried under the F-15C's wings and fuselage."

But it's also been mentioned they degrade performance significantly, and CFT's never caught on in CFT units because "unlike tanks, they couldn't be punched...".

So which is it?

I'd love to hear from an F-15C pilot who's flown with both (CFT's and tanks, which he prefers and why!)


USAF F-15C pilots who have flown CFT equipped light grey Eagles are probably quite hard to find. Usage was mostly limited to the 57th FIS at Kevlavik, flying C Eagles from 1985-1995.

I recommend this interview, they're talking about CFTs, tanks and performance from about 32min in:
Offline
User avatar

jetblast16

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 681
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2004, 00:12
  • Location: USA

Unread post22 Mar 2020, 18:03

It sounds like the F-15X or EX will be a new-build E model, probably with the same or similar weight that will be used, primarily, for air-defense duties..
Have F110, Block 70, will travel
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6571
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post23 Mar 2020, 01:34

Could this spell the end of the F-15EX before production ever starts???


130 House members want 24 percent more F-35s procured in FY21
By: Aaron Mehta


One hundred thirty members of the House of Representatives are asking key defense committees in Congress to increase the number of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters by 24 percent over the number requested by the Pentagon in fiscal 2021.[/b]


“Our adversaries continue to advance surface-to-air missile systems and develop their own stealth fighters,” read the letter, released Wednesday. “It is essential that we continue to increase production of our nation’s only 5th generation stealth fighter in order to ensure the United States maintains air dominance and to further reduce overall program costs.”


The letter, addressed to the chairs of the Senate and House Armed Services committees and Appropriations Defense subcommittees, is authored by Reps. John Larson, D-Conn.; Marc. Veasey, D-Texas; Martha Roby, R-Ala.; and Michael Turner, R-Ohio — the four leaders of the bipartisan F-35 caucus. Last year, the four also joined forces to write a similar request, which garnered 103 signatories.


The Defense Department’s budget request asks for 79 F-35s, including 48 of the F-35A model used by the Air Force, 10 F-35Bs used by the Marines and 21 F-35C models used by the Navy. In the letter, the congressmen note that number is 19 less jets than Congress appropriated in FY20.


However, that number creates “a capability gap that 4th Generation, or legacy, aircraft cannot fulfill,” the letter warned. “To reach the minimum 50% ratio of 5th Generation and 4th Generation fighters in the timeframe required to meet the threat, the U.S. must acquire F-35s in much larger quantities.”


Instead, the members want a 24 percent increase in fighters procurement, going up to 98 total, including 12 more F-35As, two more F-35Bs and 26 more F-35Cs. Those numbers match the fighter increase listed by the Air Force in its unfunded requirements document sent to Congress earlier this year; the Navy requested only five more F-35C variants, while the Marines did not request more.

https://www.defensenews.com/congress/20 ... zi0XVnOhg0
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5554
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post23 Mar 2020, 13:39

I'd prefer they spent the money to move PCA up and keep funding engine development. As it is they're about to lose what progress they've made with ADVENT/VAATE/AETP. :doh:
"There I was. . ."
Offline

131stfwfan

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 28
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2010, 23:41
  • Location: St. Louis

Unread post23 Mar 2020, 18:46

Corsair1963 wrote:Could this spell the end of the F-15EX before production ever starts???


130 House members want 24 percent more F-35s procured in FY21
By: Aaron Mehta


One hundred thirty members of the House of Representatives are asking key defense committees in Congress to increase the number of F-35 Joint Strike Fighters by 24 percent over the number requested by the Pentagon in fiscal 2021.[/b]


“Our adversaries continue to advance surface-to-air missile systems and develop their own stealth fighters,” read the letter, released Wednesday. “It is essential that we continue to increase production of our nation’s only 5th generation stealth fighter in order to ensure the United States maintains air dominance and to further reduce overall program costs.”


The letter, addressed to the chairs of the Senate and House Armed Services committees and Appropriations Defense subcommittees, is authored by Reps. John Larson, D-Conn.; Marc. Veasey, D-Texas; Martha Roby, R-Ala.; and Michael Turner, R-Ohio — the four leaders of the bipartisan F-35 caucus. Last year, the four also joined forces to write a similar request, which garnered 103 signatories.


The Defense Department’s budget request asks for 79 F-35s, including 48 of the F-35A model used by the Air Force, 10 F-35Bs used by the Marines and 21 F-35C models used by the Navy. In the letter, the congressmen note that number is 19 less jets than Congress appropriated in FY20.


However, that number creates “a capability gap that 4th Generation, or legacy, aircraft cannot fulfill,” the letter warned. “To reach the minimum 50% ratio of 5th Generation and 4th Generation fighters in the timeframe required to meet the threat, the U.S. must acquire F-35s in much larger quantities.”


Instead, the members want a 24 percent increase in fighters procurement, going up to 98 total, including 12 more F-35As, two more F-35Bs and 26 more F-35Cs. Those numbers match the fighter increase listed by the Air Force in its unfunded requirements document sent to Congress earlier this year; the Navy requested only five more F-35C variants, while the Marines did not request more.

https://www.defensenews.com/congress/20 ... zi0XVnOhg0



Nope, because the F-35 caucus is made up of senators primarily where a large chunk of manufacturing work is based. Soon, you will see another letter from those in Missouri, Oklahoma, and California for the Eagle saying the opposite. They sent a letter essentially saying the same thing last year, as this article so kindly stated. It's their JOB to advocate for more money in their states.

Thank's for posting, but keep trying.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6571
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post23 Mar 2020, 22:35

131stfwfan wrote:

Nope, because the F-35 caucus is made up of senators primarily where a large chunk of manufacturing work is based. Soon, you will see another letter from those in Missouri, Oklahoma, and California for the Eagle saying the opposite. They sent a letter essentially saying the same thing last year, as this article so kindly stated. It's their JOB to advocate for more money in their states.

Thank's for posting, but keep trying.


The US Debt like most countries is going to balloon in the coming months. (by TRILLIONS) So, you think that will have no effect on the 2021 Defense Budget??? In addition if cuts are made you think the USAF will buy the more expensive F-15EX over F-35A'?
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6571
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post23 Mar 2020, 22:37

sferrin wrote:I'd prefer they spent the money to move PCA up and keep funding engine development. As it is they're about to lose what progress they've made with ADVENT/VAATE/AETP. :doh:



Which, is the point why we can't afford to waste money on the F-15EX. Because it's better spent on additional F-35's and funding for the PCA....
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2182
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post24 Mar 2020, 01:42

Well, its $2b on the wall spending this year. I wonder how much will it be next year...

On the other hand, how much does congress values a jobs program? Cutting jobs in a recession? In a year where economic stimulus spending will run into trillions, the F-15EX will be fully funded in FY 2021, as will the wall.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6571
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post24 Mar 2020, 04:23

weasel1962 wrote:Well, its $2b on the wall spending this year. I wonder how much will it be next year...

On the other hand, how much does congress values a jobs program? Cutting jobs in a recession? In a year where economic stimulus spending will run into trillions, the F-15EX will be fully funded in FY 2021, as will the wall.



This years Defense Budget looked to be one drag down fight over the next several months and this was before the Coronavirus and tripling the US Debt.


In short you maybe right. Yet, I have my doubts.... :|


Respectfully :wink:
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3894
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post24 Mar 2020, 12:35

They're likely going to have to make a choice: F-15EX or F-35?

Let's hope USAF sticks to its guns about "not backing off the F-35 buy one bit...". Would make NO sense to buy a more expensive, less capable aircraft that'll be obsolete the second it rolls off the assembly line. Retire the F-15C NOW, and replenish those units with F-35's. If they're really so worried about it taking 18 months to 3 years to convert, they can ask the 900 strong F-16 community to step up and perform the homeland defense mission.

Hell, that's what they're there for! The ability to swing from air to ground to air to air is already there, and it wouldn't be forever. A couple of 3 years at most. By then the CPFH of the F-35 should have come down at least some...
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5554
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post24 Mar 2020, 12:53

Corsair1963 wrote:
sferrin wrote:I'd prefer they spent the money to move PCA up and keep funding engine development. As it is they're about to lose what progress they've made with ADVENT/VAATE/AETP. :doh:



Which, is the point why we can't afford to waste money on the F-15EX. Because it's better spent on additional F-35's and funding for the PCA....


My argument has never been whether we can afford it, or if there aren't better uses for the money.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6571
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post24 Mar 2020, 22:41

sferrin wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:
sferrin wrote:I'd prefer they spent the money to move PCA up and keep funding engine development. As it is they're about to lose what progress they've made with ADVENT/VAATE/AETP. :doh:



Which, is the point why we can't afford to waste money on the F-15EX. Because it's better spent on additional F-35's and funding for the PCA....


My argument has never been whether we can afford it, or if there aren't better uses for the money.



You care to enlighten us..... :|
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6571
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post24 Mar 2020, 22:45

mixelflick wrote:They're likely going to have to make a choice: F-15EX or F-35?

Let's hope USAF sticks to its guns about "not backing off the F-35 buy one bit...". Would make NO sense to buy a more expensive, less capable aircraft that'll be obsolete the second it rolls off the assembly line. Retire the F-15C NOW, and replenish those units with F-35's. If they're really so worried about it taking 18 months to 3 years to convert, they can ask the 900 strong F-16 community to step up and perform the homeland defense mission.

Hell, that's what they're there for! The ability to swing from air to ground to air to air is already there, and it wouldn't be forever. A couple of 3 years at most. By then the CPFH of the F-35 should have come down at least some...


The USAF is retiring large numbers of F-16's each year as the F-35 comes online. Plus, the existing infrastructure to support them is already in place and PAID FOR! These could easily replace the F-15C's until enough F-35's arrive..... :wink:
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests