USAF to Reactivate 495th Fighter Squadron as F-35 Unit

[ricnunes]

I think we should be accelerating the F35 buy, but can also understand not wanting to overly rely on one aircraft (cough, Navy/Super Hornet, cough). What IF for example the Chinese figure out a way to fry/jam the F-35's electronics? Or they capture/otherwise procure an example? Not only will that have implications for the US, but all of our allies that fly the F-35.

If the 'enemy' figures a way to effectively fight against a F-35 then guess what?? The F-15EX simply won't stand a minimal chance against the same 'enemy'!
For example if the 'enemy' figures out a way to fry/jam the F-35's electronics it would means that most likely it already found a way to also fry/jam the F-15EX's electronics as well

Besides a considerable number of US allied countries operates a single fighter aircraft fleet and this never compromised these countries security or ability to effectively operate their single fighter aircraft fleet.

The way its being sold, it isnt' as far fetched as many would think. Iranian Tomcats come to mind, and for many years the Navy scrambled to ensure its own F-14's/Phoenix missiles had an edge in the event of F-14 on F-14 violence, LOL. What wasn't funny however, was the kind of $ the Navy must have spent doing so. Hell, 40 years later we're still going to great lengths to make sure no F-14 parts wind up in Iran.

Sure but the fact that an Islamic Iran ended up having F-14s didn't stop the US Navy to continue to effectively operate its F-14 fleet and the US Navy didn't feel the need to replace their F-14s or purchase a more modern/advanced fighter aircraft because of the Iranian Tomcat threat.
The US Navy did end up buying a more modern/advanced fighter aircraft - the F/A-18 Hornet - but again this had absolutely nothing to do with the Iranian Tomcat threat.

Yes, the US spent some considerable efforts to deny Iran any F-14 spare parts but then again such efforts against Iran are far from being the only type of such efforts. This is probably among the easiest things that the USA can do against Iran.

The anti-F35 lobby was handed much ammunition when the F-15EX buy went through, and recent comments about a "5th gen minus" F-16 replacement have only made things worse..

The fact is the above isn't restricted to the F-35. Everytime that a ground breaking fighter aircraft/tecnology emerges the same type of discussion happens all over again. For example the F-14 that you mentioned above was highly scrutinized by the media and by politicians due to it's development and initial problems (having an underpowered engine was one of the issues that was only solved more than a decade later after entering in service, cost overuns and being too expensive, etc...)

When the final chapter of the F-35 is written however, I'm betting it surpasses the F-16 in both sales and performance. No small feat..

Here, I fully agree with you.

[ricnunes]

F-15 might be able to carry some larger weapons, but then again there are B-1B, B-2, B-52 and even B-21 to carry those around the world. B-2 and B-21 can even do so in highly contested airspace.

Exactly. Which again proves that the F-15EX is redundant.

The above also 'proves' my theory that the F-15EX is only so satisfy Boeing and to keep its fighter production line opened.
For instance of all those aircraft that you mentioned above (B-1B, B-2, B-52 and B-21), only one - the B-21 - will be built while all others aren't built anymore (their production lines are already closed). And who will build the B-21? Northrop Grumman.

If the B-21 was to be built by Boeing and in the same fighter aircraft production line that the F-15's are being build then we wouldn't be talking about the F-15EX.

[wrightwing]

That will be an interesting pairing, having a couple of F-35 squadrons and a couple of F-15E Strike Eagle squadrons operating under the same wing. It almost makes me wish Lakenheath gets the F-15EX to replace the E models just to increase the level of badassery. Imagine a unit with 48 F-35s and 48 advanced Eagles operating together. That is more capability at a single base than many countries can muster with their entire air force!

Why not just have 96 F-35A's. Which, would be far more capable and even cheaper long-term....

There's plenty of room for both. I think the two compliment each other quite well. Any particular area that might be considered a weakness for one of the two types is largely covered by the other one. Being able to work closely together actually makes each of the two aircraft types more lethal, more versatile. The F-35 is a lethal, high awareness, stealthy QB. It is methodical, highly cerebral, very calculating. The F-15 is a pissed off blue collar 250 pound fullback just looking to plow through someone for fun. They are very different types of players, but they both have a critical role in the offense. I wouldn't build a football team with nothing but quarterbacks, nor would I build an air force with only one type of combat aircraft. This isn't an either/or thing here. We can have both.

The F-35 makes the F-15 more lethal/survivable, but the F-15 doesn't help the F-35. 96 F-35s is far more lethal and survivable, than 48 of each.

[wrightwing]

I think we should be accelerating the F35 buy, but can also understand not wanting to overly rely on one aircraft (cough, Navy/Super Hornet, cough). What IF for example the Chinese figure out a way to fry/jam the F-35's electronics? Or they capture/otherwise procure an example? Not only will that have implications for the US, but all of our allies that fly the F-35.

The way its being sold, it isnt' as far fetched as many would think. Iranian Tomcats come to mind, and for many years the Navy scrambled to ensure its own F-14's/Phoenix missiles had an edge in the event of F-14 on F-14 violence, LOL. What wasn't funny however, was the kind of $ the Navy must have spent doing so. Hell, 40 years later we're still going to great lengths to make sure no F-14 parts wind up in Iran.

So I can see both sides of the arguement. I just hope any cuts to the F-35 aren't too deep, because sadly I think that's really going to happen. The anti-F35 lobby was handed much ammunition when the F-15EX buy went through, and recent comments about a "5th gen minus" F-16 replacement have only made things worse..

When the final chapter of the F-35 is written however, I'm betting it surpasses the F-16 in both sales and performance. No small feat..

If the Chinese figure out how to do all of that to an F-35, then an F-15 is really F'd.

[XanderCrews]

There's plenty of room for both. I think the two compliment each other quite well. Any particular area that might be considered a weakness for one of the two types is largely covered by the other one. Being able to work closely together actually makes each of the two aircraft types more lethal, more versatile. The F-35 is a lethal, high awareness, stealthy QB. It is methodical, highly cerebral, very calculating. The F-15 is a pissed off blue collar 250 pound fullback just looking to plow through someone for fun. They are very different types of players, but they both have a critical role in the offense. I wouldn't build a football team with nothing but quarterbacks, nor would I build an air force with only one type of combat aircraft. This isn't an either/or thing here. We can have both.

Even Iraqis have bagged strike eagles.

And the football analogy doesn't work. most players in the NFL don't even last 3 years. they're used and abused and tossed aside for the next guy. pure attrition

Moreover, There's no one advocating for a team of nothing but QBs or some other either approximation (we can have "both" implies theres only a binary choice) What is being advocated for on my end is a receiver that can catch, a blocker that can block, a QB that can throw on gameday. If you can't make the gameday cut, you shouldn't be on the team period. If Iraq was bagging F-15Es in 1991, then I don't want to know what happens in 2025. If F-15E is going to be Tarzan in the "weightroom" and Jane on gameday, I don't want it especially when it costs me more tarzans.

My goal would be to put the best 11 guys on the field I can, i don't want to have to "hide" and "mask" faults if I don't have to. its a 53 man roster, plus a salary cap. No room for charity or specialists outside of special teams.

Also I hate sports analogies, maybe even more than car analogies, especially because sports analogies don't necessarily translate internationally. If some Aussie starts telling me how something is like a "flanker" I have no idea what the hell he is talking about because no one here really plays rugby. And Americans especially are victims to sports analogies.

Some officer starts trying to make some point about how something is going to be like a "hard nose striker thats going to act like flanker while scoring 15 touchball goals like a grandslam homerun pinch hitter on the 3rd period of the 5th down, nothing but net" and all I do is just try and understand he's excited about something and failing to connect on anything tangible to his audience. If you don't follow sports, or follow different sports the analogy is a disaster.

"Please sir, whatever you do, don't talk about sports."

The Sir: our program is like a Quarterback!

[ricnunes]

Also I hate sports analogies, maybe even more than car analogies, especially because sports analogies don't necessarily translate internationally.

Well from now on, me too! (hate sports analogies)

When I read 'blue color', I though that Fox1 was talking about workers (as 'blue color' versus 'white color') and I didn't figure out that he was talking about (American) Football!

[spazsinbad]

UNcanny!

[Corsair1963]

There's plenty of room for both. I think the two compliment each other quite well. Any particular area that might be considered a weakness for one of the two types is largely covered by the other one. Being able to work closely together actually makes each of the two aircraft types more lethal, more versatile. The F-35 is a lethal, high awareness, stealthy QB. It is methodical, highly cerebral, very calculating. The F-15 is a pissed off blue collar 250 pound fullback just looking to plow through someone for fun. They are very different types of players, but they both have a critical role in the offense. I wouldn't build a football team with nothing but quarterbacks, nor would I build an air force with only one type of combat aircraft. This isn't an either/or thing here. We can have both.

There isn't plenty of money...... Which, means we can't really afford both.

[Corsair1963]

I could see a point for F-15EX if it was also stealth aircraft to work alongside F-35 in contested airspace or if it was significantly cheaper to buy and operate (to work outside contested airspace). It's really neither and it also doesn't have huge advantage in payload/range department either. F-15 might be able to carry some larger weapons, but then again there are B-1B, B-2, B-52 and even B-21 to carry those around the world. B-2 and B-21 can even do so in highly contested airspace.

QUOTE: Although it is not expected to be survivable against modern air defenses by 2028, the F-15EX could perform homeland and airbase defense, no-fly zone enforcement against limited or no air defense systems, and deploying standoff munitions.

https://militaryleak.com/2021/04/08/pra ... hzdlHmEtcU

Hardly a ringing endorsement.............

[hornetfinn]

QUOTE: Although it is not expected to be survivable against modern air defenses by 2028, the F-15EX could perform homeland and airbase defense, no-fly zone enforcement against limited or no air defense systems, and deploying standoff munitions.

https://militaryleak.com/2021/04/08/pra ... hzdlHmEtcU

Hardly a ringing endorsement.............

Yeah, sounds like a really expensive way to do those things. F-35 could do all those things at least as well and also go against the most lethal integrated air defence systems and combat forces in the future when needed. An all F-35 force would be a lot more flexible force overall as it can do so many things really well.

[Corsair1963]

QUOTE: Although it is not expected to be survivable against modern air defenses by 2028, the F-15EX could perform homeland and airbase defense, no-fly zone enforcement against limited or no air defense systems, and deploying standoff munitions.

https://militaryleak.com/2021/04/08/pra ... hzdlHmEtcU

Hardly a ringing endorsement.............

Yeah, sounds like a really expensive way to do those things. F-35 could do all those things at least as well and also go against the most lethal integrated air defence systems and combat forces in the future when needed. An all F-35 force would be a lot more flexible force overall as it can do so many things really well.

Seems even the ANG is having second thoughts too. As the Florida ANG are replacing their F-15C's with new F-35A's not F-15EX's. With rumor other ANG Units my follow.....

So, what are the reason we're buying the F-15EX again???

[ricnunes]

So, what are the reason we're buying the F-15EX again???

Boeing, cough..., Boeing

[steve2267]

Boing, cough..., Boing

FIFY

[outlaw162]

Seems even the ANG is having second thoughts too.

Unless something has changed drastically, the ANG isn't (edit) allowed 'second' thoughts about their force structure. That's a good way for a fighter unit to end up in airlift or (gasp) drones.

A past example of this was when the 179th in F-100s at Mansfield turned down A-7s and said they'd wait for F-105s. The F-105s ended up looking exactly like C-130s.

[basher54321]