The Advanced F-15: Ready for the Fight

:thumbup:

https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2019/03/12/air-force-asks-4400-more-airmen-new-f-15ex-fighter-budget-request.html

Well, its actually happening, new F-15EX are coming along to replace the C models. Planned total of 144. First F-15 for USAF since what 2003?

https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2019/03/12/air-force-asks-4400-more-airmen-new-f-15ex-fighter-budget-request.html

 

Well, its actually happening, new F-15EX are coming along to replace the C models. Planned total of 144. First F-15 for USAF since what 2003?

Um...

No.

They're only buying 8, and there's no stated plans for 144 more.

8 F-15X's won't do anything.

waste of money, boeing lobbyists strike again

waste of money, boeing lobbyists strike again

Of the available options to the usaf to replace the aging F-15C airframes this is hands down the best choice IMO

F-16 can’t do the job. It’s to slow, can’t fly high enough, and has very poor range.

F-35 can’t do it for many of the same reasons. It’s just not designed as an air sovereignty fighter.

F-22 is way to expensive to get in the numbers needed, and it’s likely overqualified until 2040.

So why not just fix the problem with itself. The F-15 is still very relevant as a fighter and will be for some time, especially in the defensive role. (F-15C needs to replaced because their airframes are reaching the end of their service lives, NOT because they’re outdated) The support system is already in place, pilots are trained, RD work on the jet is done.

It’s the most cost effective and least risky solution.

I feel nauseated every time I see an F-15 with two seats.... Just not right!!! :)

Of the available options to the usaf to replace the aging F-15C airframes this is hands down the best choice IMO

 

F-16 can’t do the job. It’s to slow, can’t fly high enough, and has very poor range.

F-35 can’t do it for many of the same reasons. It’s just not designed as an air sovereignty fighter.

F-22 is way to expensive to get in the numbers needed, and it’s likely overqualified until 2040.

 

So why not just fix the problem with itself. The F-15 is still very relevant as a fighter and will be for some time, especially in the defensive role. (F-15C needs to replaced because their airframes are reaching the end of their service lives, NOT because they’re outdated) The support system is already in place, pilots are trained, RD work on the jet is done.

 

It’s the most cost effective and least risky solution.

This is simply a problem that should never have existed. The only reason the F-22 is 'too expensive' is because they never built enough of them. It was designed to replace the F-15 and replace the F-15 is what it should have done. If you spent £Xbn on R&D and then divide that cost by Y/4 instead of Y, you end up with a figure equal to 4X/Y instead of X/Y. It's 25 years of sitting on hands that has caused this farce.

Yeah, kinda. The F-22 was prematurely shelved due to politics, which caused the low production and high unit cost. It was SUPPOSED to have been the replacement.

If politicians weren't so flakey by this point, the F-15, 16, 18, A-10, and Harrier would be in the mid to late stages of phase out... instead we have a rapidly increasing variety of airframes in service with a growing number of 'inter rim' solutions almost entirely because they won't commit to a single course of action.

It's almost like governmental inefficiency writ large, eh?

Even commiting to Super Hornets and Advanced Eagles (Super Eagles anybody?) would make more sense than this piecemeal approach they're taking.

This is simply a problem that should never have existed. The only reason the F-22 is 'too expensive' is because they never built enough of them. It was designed to replace the F-15 and replace the F-15 is what it should have done. If you spent £Xbn on R&D and then divide that cost by Y/4 instead of Y, you end up with a figure equal to 4X/Y instead of X/Y. It's 25 years of sitting on hands that has caused this farce.

Absolutely, but since the production line is done there's no going back on that decision short of something really big happening like, say, the F22 being cleared for export.

Considering that that is unlikely to happen in the near future if ever, an updated Eagle is the best thing the USAF can get.

Um...

 

No.

 

They're only buying 8, and there's no stated plans for 144 more.

 

8 F-15X's won't do anything.

Umn yes they are, read it in another article. Why would they ever buy just 8? What about the rest of the C model fleet???? Which is the whole point of this jet

They have planned 144 by a certain year if all goes well, but next years budget only has 8. Aircraft procurement is a funny business

Absolutely, but since the production line is done there's no going back on that decision short of something really big happening like, say, the F22 being cleared for export.

 

Considering that that is unlikely to happen in the near future if ever, an updated Eagle is the best thing the USAF can get.

I would frankly build the other 570 F-22s, and make a note of the extra expense and to never do anything as stupid as cancelling a successful aircraft at 1/4 production numbers ever again.

I would frankly build the other 570 F-22s, and make a note of the extra expense and to never do anything as stupid as cancelling a successful aircraft at 1/4 production numbers ever again.

They can't because all the production equipment is gone.

Umn yes they are, read it in another article. Why would they ever buy just 8? What about the rest of the C model fleet???? Which is the whole point of this jet

Why 8, well as an initial order for test and eval.

But yeah, operationally you'd need way more.

They can't because all the production equipment is gone.

They did look at the cost of restarting, and it was about $100 million to get the line rebuilt and ready to produce.

Emmm... I don't know enough to dispute, but that seems extremely low, even just to replace the tooling that was lost. The act of rebuilding the necessary supply lines would take many years and much more money. I too have heard estimates before, and it was considerably more involved than $100 mil. That's less than the cost of a single plane. Ergo, if it was that simple, it wouldn't be the hot topic, so sorry, I'm going to strongly suggest your presented number is politely put ''incorrect''.

USAF released an F-22A production restart assessment report from Feb 2017 for FY $16

Cost of 194 aircraft = $40.5 billion

Non recurring Restart costs = $9.9 Billion

So the US taxpayer could have to fork out for yesterdays news - the F-15X an aircraft that can't even play on the same field as F-22/35.

Considering the USAF point blank did not want these the change of tune is likely politics related although David Goldfein was quoted as saying:

He added that Air Force needs to buy 72 fighters a year to get to the amount they need in the future — and to drive average aircraft age down from 28 years to 15 years. And while Goldfein might want all 72 to be fifth generation F-35s, budgetary concerns likely won’t let that happen. “If we had the money, those would be 72 F-35s. But we’ve gotta look at this from a cost/business case.” he explained. “An F-15 will never be an F-35. Never. But I need capacity.”

I would frankly build the other 570 F-22s, and make a note of the extra expense and to never do anything as stupid as cancelling a successful aircraft at 1/4 production numbers ever again.

They did a lot of stupid things in the early 2000s :) I completely agree, the more raptors the better. But at some point you need to strike a balance between capability and capacity. Money has a huge influence on force balancing.

Can’t just buy the best of everything because then you wont ever have enough. And they can’t do anything about past raptor decisions. The upside is it turns out it’s gonna be a while before someone else gets enough 5th gen fighters to really make the F-15 obsolete. By then 6th gen fighters should be in production. So in the mean time F-15 still provides an adequate force of cheap flexible homeland defense fighters, to supplement the small but unbeatable raptor fleet.

They can't because all the production equipment is gone.

I read that they kept the production tooling.

They did a lot of stupid things in the early 2000s :) I completely agree, the more raptors the better. But at some point you need to strike a balance between capability and capacity. Money has a huge influence on force balancing.

 

Can’t just buy the best of everything because then you wont ever have enough. And they can’t do anything about past raptor decisions. The upside is it turns out it’s gonna be a while before someone else gets enough 5th gen fighters to really make the F-15 obsolete. By then 6th gen fighters should be in production. So in the mean time F-15 still provides an adequate force of cheap flexible homeland defense fighters, to supplement the small but unbeatable raptor fleet.

I wish I could be sure that was the case. J-20s are multiplying at an alarming rate.

I read that they kept the production tooling.

One of the things that makes the F-22 so contentious is back when they first started talking about restarting production, they went to check on the tooling and it was all gone, nobody knows exactly what happened to it apparently. It WAS kept, but at some point got scrapped, thrown away, or otherwise lost (stolen? Sold? Who tf knows)

One of the things that makes the F-22 so contentious is back when they first started talking about restarting production, they went to check on the tooling and it was all gone, nobody knows exactly what happened to it apparently. It WAS kept, but at some point got scrapped, thrown away, or otherwise lost (stolen? Sold? Who tf knows)

So much for accountability and asset management.:huh:

Hopefully the same guys aren't in charge of the nuclear stockpile.

Hopefully the same guys aren't in charge of the nuclear stockpile.

I hate to be such a bearer of bad news......

https://amp.thenational.ae/world/us-nuclear-weapons-scandal-34-officers-accused-of-cheating-tests-1.575469

....but it's really hard to find good help these days...

All the other stuff aside (criticism, worthiness, business, budget, etc), I do like the modernization of old proven stuff, just because it's old it doesn't mean it's wrong, plus it also expands the legacy and morale of the ex pilots and retirees and one day you might be playing an upgraded as well as the older F-15 in DCS. The only bad thing I think it does it that it extends the classification and probably it would be easier and more feature-complete in DCS if an airplane would be retired before development.

I really really hope super warthog happens and only then A-10C could be retired.