Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

Last edited by geogen on Oct 20, 2011 - 02:32 AM; edited 1 time in total

wrightwing wrote:

geogen wrote:

The modern-derived -42 LW IRST is a superior Long range IR Search/tracking system, especially so in cloudy conditions, compared to a MW sensor system. A derivative of this -42 IRST (not a Sniper ATP pod) was used to track missiles 100s of Km away during the ABL testing and used to accurately cue a modified Lantirn pod to make the active range-finding at the time.

You've got it backwards. The LW IRST offers some range benefits, but is far more persnickety to weather conditions. In otherwords, in perfect weather, you might notice some advantages.

WW - I actually don't think that's the case, sorry.

LWIR by definition tends to absorb less atmosphere by nature, hence better tuned for long range readings. LW is apparently also better for sunny day conditions too where noise can be slightly more disruptive apparently in mwir at longer range. LW can apparently cut through fog in certain conditions also like it's not even there - if for whatever reason there was a need to be looking down towards the ocean e.g. searching for something flying under the fog, etc. Apparently one of the most superior and relevant attributes of the LW though, is the superior capacity to detect lower photon differentials, e.g. low-illuminating heat sources against a low contrasting background - another key for long-range search of things such as.. smaller objects and non-burning objects.

Absolutely though, all indications point to the next evolution, which apparently include higher pixel count resolution and dual-band QWIP type MW/LR FPA arrays. Public docs found on the net apparently indicate some dev work in such dualband tech specifically was done to enhance the actual aas-42 derived LW IRST in discussion, albeit for the ABL test program. It doesn't seem clear as to what the results were or conclusion of the R&D though, as for one thing the ABL program ended.

Perhaps in the mid-term at least, a not bad poor-mans attempt at dual band FPA could in fact include something along the lines of say... a dedicated LWIR aperture IRST, operating with and cued with a 1k FLIR, HDTV Sniper pod?? Hmm, it would seem plausible.

And WW, I know you're trying to make good discussions always, but sometimes the discussion goes in circles. When you said you wan't 'proof' a couple posts up, it's not sure first of all what you're looking for or asking about, so I really can't give it a good shot. I'm assuming you're talking about two different sub-topics on this subject of future F-15 developments?

Either way, yes, there would be mature, off-the-shelf, very modern/superior F-15E+ variants reportedly available for ordering in FY13-FY14 (w/ all the optional high-end systems, sensors, eo/ir warning, and pods found on game-changing units rolling off the line today).. If that's your question?

And entirely different... yes, there are advertised plans at least for continued mid-term development of further enhanced and evolved F-15E derivatives, which would conceivably be some variation of the advertised F-15SE. However, such a follow-on block of F-15E++ with that gargantuan cockpit display et al would obviously be down the road a few years, perhaps 2016 as being implied. Shrug

F-16.net Sponsor

Looks like Boeing will be showing off the SE at the Seoul Air Show to include the new advanced cockpit. Can't wait for the juicy details!

http://www.f-15e.info/joomla/en/strike- ... l-air-show

And... with F-22 grounded again... I would now publicly propose and advocate an FY13 F-15E+ interim air-superiority stopgap procurement, maybe under a 5yr MYB contract. Price? Less than an FY13 LRIP F-35A.

Such an Off the shelf system of systems procurement made possible by intra-DoD budget transfers, and incorporating latest APG-82, IRST, latest computer, latest EW suite and off the shelf self-protection MAWS/MLD sys, would be highly worth the strategic consideration to supplement current TACAIR recapitalization plans in the immediate term. imho

God speed

What do you mean "now publicly propose"? When have you ever not?

So you would rather spend BILLIONS in procuring fighters that are already outclassed by the F-35 instead of finding and fixing the F-22's problem?

A fix might not be fully guaranteed nor immediately fixable, Spud. Something to calculate in the interim when taking into account mid-term Tacair requirements and unexpected gaps accordingly. Always smart to have contingencies in place if and when needed. To not have any credible Plan B contingency leaves unacceptable risks for a potential hollow force resulting insufficient deterrence. That's all.

Any F-15E+s that are ordered would not arrive until 2014 (or 2015 if they cannot get them in the 2012 budget). I am sure that they will find the issue of the F-22s long before 2014. A shorter term plan B would be to make more Golden Eagles as it would only take a year or two (instead of 3 or 4) and cost a lot less. I would also throw continuing IRST for the Golden Eagles.

SpudmanWP wrote:

So you would rather spend BILLIONS in procuring fighters that are already outclassed by the F-35 instead of finding and fixing the F-22's problem?

Haven't you heard? There's a new bug in the latest version of Windows so we're all switching back to DOS tommorow.

Last edited by geogen on Oct 23, 2011 - 05:54 AM; edited 1 time in total

Retire the ancient, expensive to maintain, nearing obsolete F-15C/D over the next 8 yrs, imho (those which were supposed to be replaced by additional numbers of F-22)... A full Golden Eagle upgrade and SLEP will cost a lot more then folks think (especially if replacing engines) and will still be a question mark and a risky TACAIR recapitalization project during the critical and uncertain times ahead. Replace with supplemental buys of new build F-15E+ instead, under a multi-year financed deal. imho. Would be a much more modern and capable system of systems in addition to being far more reliable over the next 10-20 yrs as part of the mix.

SpudmanWP wrote:

Any F-15E+s that are ordered would not arrive until 2014 (or 2015 if they cannot get them in the 2012 budget). I am sure that they will find the issue of the F-22s long before 2014. A shorter term plan B would be to make more Golden Eagles as it would only take a year or two (instead of 3 or 4) and cost a lot less. I would also throw continuing IRST for the Golden Eagles.

This whole F-15SE idea is a lousy half measure. Either stick with the F-35 as planned, or (if cost and recapitalization-speed are the only concerns) cancel the F-35 altogether and force the USAF to start taking delivery of the SH as their F-16 replacement (maybe throwing in 200 more F-22s to assuage their pride). Commonality and cost-effectiveness with one stone.

The F-15SE's price is too high for a fighter with such limited LO capability, the Navy can't use it, and it won't be ready any sooner than the JSF.

1st503rd,

You can't THROW IN 200 or more F-22 bro. That's the point. I'm not sure what analysis you are using to make such a ridiculous proposal.

And sure, stick with the SDD phase F-35 Program over the next 6-7 yrs, I don't object to that... just LEASE or long-term finance said LRIP jets while under concurrency.

But the USAF actually could justify acquiring actual operational next-gen stopgap units in the interim. Yes, those would include perhaps 8-10 F-15E+ per year, financed perhaps, as well as something like 12 or so F-16+ units per year, financed.

To propose a 'wait and see' approach and gamble over the next 3-5 yrs with respect o USAF recapitalization is both unacceptable and unprecedented in risk taking. To merely continue the 'stay the course' mindset based on pre-2010 data and politics should raise some serious alarm bells. There needs to be an emergency inter-agency and dept meeting on this subject imho.

p.s. an FY13 F-15E+ would be MORE AFFORDABLE than an FY13 F-35A and actually be an operational platform. something to ponder.

geogen wrote:

1st503rd,

You can't THROW IN 200 or more F-22 bro. That's the point. I'm not sure what analysis you are using to make such a ridiculous proposal.

Jeez, who said you got to write all the rules for making a "ridiculous proposal." Tough talk from someone who wants to put 3 engines on an F-35.

I don't think you read the post carefully anyways. I said "SH," not SE... as in using the F/A-18E/F (already in production) to still have a joint-service platform as opposed to Boeing's vaporware marketing gimmick. As for the "200 more F-22s" remark (roughly what they wanted), it's not outside the realm of possibility in my scenario, especially if one wants to make the USAF start using a Navy plane (carrot and stick is how these things have to work sometimes).

Quote:

I don't think you read the post carefully anyways. I said "SH," not SE... as in using the F/A-18E/F (already in production) to still have a joint-service platform as opposed to Boeing's vaporware marketing gimmick. As for the "200 more F-22s" remark (roughly what they wanted), it's not outside the realm of possibility in my scenario, especially if one wants to make the USAF start using a Navy plane (carrot and stick is how these things have to work sometimes).

Hell, it worked with the Phantom didn't it? I know the various models had their differences, but I bet they still had a lot in common.

1st503rdsgt wrote:

Jeez, who said you got to write all the rules for making a "ridiculous proposal." Tough talk from someone who wants to put 3 engines on an F-35.

God damn it man, I was enjoying some lovely marmalade on toast until I read that, now i've got marmalade all over the place and i'm still trying to clear my throat. I publiclly propose that you warn us next time you write something that funny.

I think this thead is my favourite thread now.

shep1978 wrote:

1st503rdsgt wrote:

Jeez, who said you got to write all the rules for making a "ridiculous proposal." Tough talk from someone who wants to put 3 engines on an F-35.

God damn it man, I was enjoying some lovely marmalade on toast until I read that, now i've got marmalade all over the place and i'm still trying to clear my throat. I publiclly propose that you warn us next time you write something that funny.

I think this thead is my favourite thread now.

You're welcome. Just out of curiosity though, do you think my SH idea makes any more sense than what Geogen wants? Personally, I think all our options suck right now, but going with an all-SH force seemed like the cheapest option that would still improve capability and provide commonality. I dunno, Geogen must have an MBA or something because his ideas are too complicated for me (or the average congressman) to understand. All I know is that when I hear the word "lease" mentioned, my mind goes back to Boeing's attempt to rip us off on a KC-135 replacement in 2002. It all sounds like so much "creative accounting" to me.

Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

F-15SE transition: Now or never?