F-35 versus F-15EX

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

jessmo112

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 379
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2020, 02:09

Unread post15 Sep 2020, 19:58

https://www.realcleardefense.com/articl ... 77300.html

Heritage Foundation, noted in his story for Defense News, the DoD has been able to leverage its buying power and that has driven down the cost of each F-35A to around $80 million a full year earlier than planned. That means the fifth-generation F-35 now costs less than the F-15EX, a less capable but still significantly updated fourth-generation aircraft, which costs around $88 million each.

Moreover, the aircraft’s maker, Lockheed Martin, has also done its part to bring the sustainability cost per flying hour down by some 40 percent—meaning that the F-35 costs less to fly per hour, which is notable as the hours flown each year are set to increase.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 25457
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post15 Sep 2020, 22:14

Not certain this story is legit - for a start it originally appeared in THE NATIONAL INTEREST at:
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... 5ex-168848
where a link claims the UK 'MAY' cut its F-35B order in half where as the author SUCIU says it WILL do such a thing. All very suspicious dredging up claims about costs overall. The last paragraph is a classic FUD and of no known link to headline:
"...Yet, it isn't all good news for the F-35 and Lockheed Martin. Last month the UK announced that it could reduce its order of the advanced stealth aircraft by half. The aircraft has also become a sticking point in the Middle East peace process as Israel has expressed concerns over the United Arab Emirates plans to acquire the F-35."
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7153
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post16 Sep 2020, 04:18

As Cuts Loom, 386 Combat Squadrons—in the USAF and USSF—is Still the Goal


Sept. 15, 2020 | By John A. Tirpak

The Air Force’s 2018-set goal of building toward 386 combat squadrons is still its objective, but how long it will take to get there is anyone’s guess, senior service leaders told reporters Sept. 15.

The benchmark of 386 squadrons—a 25 percent increase over the current size of the Air Force—“remains our aspiration,” Air Force Secretary Barbara A. Barrett said in a press conference at AFA’s virtual Air, Space & Cyber Conference.

“Our mission is to achieve those capabilities. And 386 squadrons, at that time, when that question was asked [by Congress], that was the right answer. We still are looking to build to that capability,” Barrett said. The Senate, in its version of the National Defense Authorization bill, said it wants the Air Force to structure now for 386 combat squadrons, even though it doesn’t yet have the people or equipment to flesh them out.

Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. said he’s working to achieve “as much capability of 386 as we can. We have to do that in collaboration with the Congress, because it wasn’t about how much you can afford, it’s how much do you require. So here’s the requirement.”

Brown said there will be meetings in a few weeks to hash out what capabilities the Air Force will keep and which to let go of as he gathers resources to apply to “higher priorities” spelled out in the National Defense Strategy, which also dates to early 2018.

He said it may be possible to achieve the same capability as 386 squadrons represented in 2018 with increased capability among perhaps fewer units.

“We actually move ourselves closer to 386 not only in number but also in capability,” he said.

The issue is one “I probably need to work … with Congress” and in the budget topline handed over by the Defense Department, Brown said. There will be feedback with Congress on “where we are and where we still need to go. So, it’ll be constant dialogue.” However, he said he could not predict when that size or capability will be achieved.

Barrett also noted that the 386 figure “was … established prior to the existence of a Space Force. Now, with the separation … that has some impact on the count.”

Chief of Space Operations Gen. John Raymond noted that Space Force is still in the midst of its organization, and he’s working to flatten the organization and eliminate “two layers” of command, which could free up people for other activities.


https://www.airforcemag.com/as-cuts-loo ... -the-goal/
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7153
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post16 Sep 2020, 06:20

No mention of New F-15's.... :|


Israel Seeks $8B Arms Deal At White House: F-35s, V-22s, KC-46s


TEL AVIV: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu asked President Donald Trump today for 12 Boeing V-22s, another squadron of F-35s to bring the total to 75, and the very early delivery of two Boeing KC-46As at the White House today.

The request was made during a day of extraordinary meetings as President Trump, the Prime Minister of Israel and the Foreign Ministers of Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates were to sign what are being called the Abraham Accords, meant to normalize relations between the Arab states and Israel.

The new weapons are meant to keep Israel’s qualitative edge after the U.S agreed to sell the F-35 to the UAE and Teheran rattles its homemade swords, furious about the new era between Israel and some Gulf states.

Hours before hosting the signing of historic peace agreements between Israel and the UAE and Bahrain, President Trump doubled down on the idea of selling F-35s to the UAE.

“I personally would have no problem with it,” the president told Fox and Friends this morning, “I would have no problem in selling them the F-35.”

The Israelis, who understand the US political system well, are likely to press Trump to put the new sales in motion before the November elections to minimize the chances they might fall victim to a change in power in Washington.

“The Israeli request will be based on an accelerated process aimed at getting all the approvals before the November presidential elections” one Israeli source told BD.

The request is also likely to include a replacement for Israeli Apache AH-64A combat helicopters that are planned to go out of service in 2025. Israel, one source says, will also ask for “increased numbers” of bunker buster bombs, usually thought to be designed to strike Iranian nuclear sites.

On top of all that, the Israelis may seek an advanced communication satellite, a source told Breaking D.

The request for a new weapons package would be in addition to the existing Foreign Military Financing agreement with the US. The current agreement, signed in 2016, increased US assistance from $ 34 billion in the decade to $38 billion between 2019 and 2028.

Why is Israeli seeking so much new gear? It’s not, Israeli sources explain, because of the prospective sale of F-35s to the UAE, but because they believe this deal will open a new arms race in the region and they want to stay head of it. Israel is also concerned about the possibility of leadership changes in some Gulf countries

The assessments for what’s needed were drawn up when the IDF formed a special team headed by Maj. General Tomer Bar, the IDF’s head of its planning and force building department. This team is reviewing the operational demands of some of the IDF ground forces units.

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/09/isr ... 2s-kc-46s/
Offline
User avatar

doge

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 594
  • Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 16:07

Unread post23 Jan 2021, 15:49

Opinion of retired USMC EA-6B pilot. 8)
https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/com ... t-to-come/
The US must invest and prepare for the threat of what is yet to come
By: Scott Cooper 2021/01/22
On Jan. 1, Congress overrode then-President Donald Trump’s veto of the fiscal 2021 National Defense Authorization Act. Much of the news was about the vote itself, but another important story is the 93 F-35 fighter jets that were included in the bill — 14 more than the Pentagon requested in its budget.
Congress recognizes that the F-35 is the cornerstone of deterrence in the great power competition that we face as a country. The 2018 National Defense Strategy acknowledged that “inter-state strategic competition, not terrorism, is now the primary concern in U.S. national security. ... Long- term strategic competitions with China and Russia are the principal priorities for the [Defense] Department, and require both increased and sustained investment, because of the magnitude of the threats they pose to U.S. security and prosperity today, and the potential for those threats to increase in the future.”
One of the top three defense objectives is “deterring adversaries from aggression against our enemies.” The F-35 is the linchpin deterrent capability. Since the first two hours of Operation Desert Storm, we have enjoyed the luxury of maintaining air superiority, if not air supremacy. That will not be the case in any conflict with Russia or China. In fact, it would not even be the case in a conflict with Syria with the S-400 air defense capabilities.

It is easy to forget: there is no guarantee we will continue to enjoy the luxury of operating in a permissive environment as we have throughout the last 20 years. We should not forget the costs we endure without it. In Vietnam 2,561 fixed-wing aircraft were lost. In the most recent conflict with contested airspace, Operation Allied Force in Kosovo in 1999, the only aircraft permitted to fly deeply into Serbia were B-2s and F-117s supported by American EA-6B Prowlers and F-16CJ suppression-of-air-defense aircraft. I remember because I flew in that conflict, and I have vivid memories of the night an F-117 was shot down by Serbian air defenses.
Today, only 17 percent of the U.S. Air Force’s bomber and fighter inventory consists of stealth aircraft that are capable of maneuvering freely in contested areas created by modern surface-to-air and air-to-air threats. The Navy has only one operational F-35C squadron, and the Marine Corps has five operational F-35 squadrons (four which fly the F-35B and one which flies the F-35C). The Air Force has five operational F-35A squadrons. This is but a modest deterrent capability.
As Dr. Thomas Schelling noted in his seminal work, “Arms and Influence,” “the power to hurt is bargaining power. To exploit it is diplomacy, vicious diplomacy, but diplomacy.”
Deterrence relies on the credibility of your threat. Today we do not possess the robust capability that our adversaries know would be able to impose massive damage on the first day of a conflict and then generate sorties at a rate to continue that effort. We can make our threats sincerely, but without a capability to back them up, they’re not credible.

Beyond the need for stealth aircraft to operate in a contested environment, the services are struggling to maintain the readiness of an aging fleet of aircraft. A Government Accountability Office report published in November 2020 examined 46 different types of aircraft in the inventory and found that only three met their annual mission-capable goals in the majority of years from 2011 through 2019, and 24 did not meet their annual mission-capable goals in any fiscal year.
On top of these readiness challenges, we are still faced with a capacity shortfall. We have gone from an Air Force that in 1987 had 4,468 fighter aircraft and 331 bomber aircraft to one that has 1,481 fighter aircraft and 122 bomber aircraft. Part of the solution to that is the acquisition of the F-15EX, an advanced version of the F-15E. Current plans call for acquiring 144 aircraft at a cost of $87.7 million per jet. But that is an expensive Band-Aid, particularly when one must factor in that it actually sacrifices capability: The F-15EX cannot survive in an integrated, anti-access environment.
The challenge is to get enough F-35 shadows on the flight lines to have an operational capability that is a credible deterrent. Congress and the new administration should consider accelerating production, even if it means doing less in other areas of military spending — yes, including counterterrorism.
We must do more than pay lip service to the stated priority of restoring our competitive edge by blocking Russia and China from challenging us and our allies. In the 1980s, we stationed more than 350,000 American troops in Europe as a capable and effective deterrent. Fortunately, none of those troops saw combat. They didn’t because of Dr. Schelling’s point that “coercion depends more on the threat of what is yet to come than on damage already done.” We should invest and prepare for the threat of what is yet to come.
    Scott Cooper is a retired U.S. Marine Corps officer who flew the EA-6B Prowler. He co-authored “No Fly Zones and International Security: Politics and Strategy.”
Offline

juretrn

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 445
  • Joined: 31 Jul 2016, 01:09
  • Location: Slovenia

Unread post03 Feb 2021, 19:14

F110-129 powers the F-15EX!!

https://www.geaviation.com/press-releas ... ing-f-15ex

Two F110-GE-129 engines powered the first flight of the Boeing F-15EX fighter on Feb. 2.
...
The F110-GE-129 engine is the only engine tested, integrated and certified for the fly-by-wire F-15EX.
...
GE Aviation delivered the first shipset of F110 engines to the Air Force in early September and will provide a total of 19 engines to the service branch by 2022.
Russia stronk
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7153
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post04 Feb 2021, 01:55

juretrn wrote:F110-129 powers the F-15EX!!

https://www.geaviation.com/press-releas ... ing-f-15ex

Two F110-GE-129 engines powered the first flight of the Boeing F-15EX fighter on Feb. 2.
...
The F110-GE-129 engine is the only engine tested, integrated and certified for the fly-by-wire F-15EX.
...
GE Aviation delivered the first shipset of F110 engines to the Air Force in early September and will provide a total of 19 engines to the service branch by 2022.



Yet, I don't believe the decision has been made. On which engine (P&W F100 or GE F110) will power production standard F-15EX's. Unless somebody has heard otherwise........
Offline
User avatar

jetblast16

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 749
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2004, 00:12
  • Location: USA

Unread post04 Feb 2021, 02:30

Have F110, Block 70, will travel
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2492
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post04 Feb 2021, 04:13

Shouldn't read too much into the engine selection. The engine compete was only mandated from lot 2 onwards so that lot 1 could be delivered quickly (and also to facilitate testing).
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4292
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post12 Feb 2021, 15:21

Either new engine should deliver 29,000+lbs in re-heat, which vs. the F-15C is a good 10-12,000lbs more thrust. That's a hell of a lot. Is the EX slated to grow that much in weight?

Because if it isn't the acceleration, re-gaining of energy etc is going to really be something.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5036
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Nashua NH USA

Unread post12 Feb 2021, 16:19

mixelflick wrote:Either new engine should deliver 29,000+lbs in re-heat, which vs. the F-15C is a good 10-12,000lbs more thrust. That's a hell of a lot. Is the EX slated to grow that much in weight?

Because if it isn't the acceleration, re-gaining of energy etc is going to really be something.


The EX is an E, so it will weigh ~37,000lb. The GE motor gives a bit more oompf than the PW at high speed in the F-16 and I would expect that to hold true in the F-15 as well. Look at the -229 powered E-1 to see what the ballpark performance would be.
"Spurts"

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

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 945
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post12 Feb 2021, 16:27

From F-15E-GE129 test report:

This beast can hold 6G turn without slowing down in just military power at M0.8, 10000 feet. By comparison, a clean Mig-29A (with only 1500 kg fuel) can do that below 3300 feet only.

Also the 129 powered F-15E can do supercruising, confirmed by test pilot and this has been verified at 20000 ft and at 30000 ft.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5036
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Nashua NH USA

Unread post12 Feb 2021, 19:58

When not armed.
"Spurts"

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

gta4

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 945
  • Joined: 17 Oct 2010, 19:10

Unread post16 Feb 2021, 03:49

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:When not armed.


Right. So I was also citing the "clean" configuration performance from Mig-29's manual.
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2618
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post16 Feb 2021, 04:34

Israel has specified the P&W -229 for it's new F-15EX (cum IA or whatever), no?
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests