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
User avatar

jetblast16

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 684
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2004, 00:12
  • Location: USA

Unread post20 May 2020, 19:07

Fine, re-equip F-15EX with F119...


THAT would be interesting..
Have F110, Block 70, will travel
Online

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3563
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post20 May 2020, 19:23

131stfwfan wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:US Air Force cancels GE Aviation sole-source for F-15EX engine, asks for competitive bids

By Garrett Reim|19 May 2020

F-15EX Boeing

The US Air Force is asking for engine proposals for its Boeing F-15EX programme, just a few months after it said it would grant a sole source award to GE Aviation for 480 of the company’s F110 jet turbines.


https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing ... 46.article


The USAF has 239 F-15C/Ds in operation, according to Cirium fleets data. The service has talked about ordering 144 F-15EX aircraft, although the request for 461 engines may mean the scope of the programme has been enlarged


Rumor around industry is the C/D's will be replaced first, and then the Strike Eagles after. Modifications look slim to none.

I don't see replacing F-15Es with EXs. The Es still have plenty of airframe life, and are getting the new gee whiz avionics/sensors/EW/cockpit displays. I could see re-engining -220 jets, though.
Online

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3563
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post20 May 2020, 19:37

madrat wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Not sure how good this is..
,
You've got two engine manufacturers working on yesterday's engines, to power yesterday's fighters. I'd much prefer them spending time on the F-119/135 upgrades, and whatever's next for PCA..

Money and resources aren't infinite, and we need the best minds working on our best engines..


Fine, re-equip F-15EX with F119...

They wouldn't fit, or that would be a consideration. Both P&W and GE have shown that their F-100/110 engines are capable of significant thrust growth (i.e. they've demonstrated 37,000lbs of thrust.) Even with the-132/-232 trim, the EXs would be rockets.
Offline

marauder2048

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1105
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post20 May 2020, 19:48

131stfwfan wrote:
The USAF has 239 F-15C/Ds in operation, according to Cirium fleets data. The service has talked about ordering 144 F-15EX aircraft, although the request for 461 engines may mean the scope of the programme has been enlarged



They are asking for fewer engines this time around than the previous solicitation.
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2688
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post20 May 2020, 20:16

wrightwing wrote:
madrat wrote:
mixelflick wrote:Not sure how good this is..
,
You've got two engine manufacturers working on yesterday's engines, to power yesterday's fighters. I'd much prefer them spending time on the F-119/135 upgrades, and whatever's next for PCA..

Money and resources aren't infinite, and we need the best minds working on our best engines..


Fine, re-equip F-15EX with F119...

They wouldn't fit, or that would be a consideration. Both P&W and GE have shown that their F-100/110 engines are capable of significant thrust growth (i.e. they've demonstrated 37,000lbs of thrust.) Even with the-132/-232 trim, the EXs would be rockets.


The problem isn't the engine, it is the airframe. It was engineered for engines that require extending or restarting old designs.
Online

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3563
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post20 May 2020, 20:49

madrat wrote:



The problem isn't the engine, it is the airframe. It was engineered for engines that require extending or restarting old designs.


Bottom line, F-119s won't fit into an F-15s airframe. They're longer, and have a larger diameter.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5582
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post20 May 2020, 23:59

madrat wrote:The problem isn't the engine, it is the airframe. It was engineered for engines that require extending or restarting old designs.


If you want F-15s that's the trade off.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6706
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post21 May 2020, 03:54

131stfwfan wrote:
Rumor around industry is the C/D's will be replaced first, and then the Strike Eagles after. Modifications look slim to none.


The plan was for the F-15EX's to replace the F-15C's. Yet, that is still very questionable with the current Cov-19 Crisis and future projected Defense Budgets. Also, states like Florida have been pushing the USAF to replace their ANG F-15C's not with F-15EX's but F-35A's!


As for the F-15E it's highly unlikely they would ever buy enough new F-15EX's to replace both the F-15C and F-15E. Yet, older F-15EX's in the future could be passed on to existing F-15E Units. As their aircraft retire.....
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6706
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post21 May 2020, 04:02

wrightwing wrote:
madrat wrote:



The problem isn't the engine, it is the airframe. It was engineered for engines that require extending or restarting old designs.


Bottom line, F-119s won't fit into an F-15s airframe. They're longer, and have a larger diameter.


Even "if" the F119's would fit. It would never happen as it would take to long and cost to much to incorporate them in the F-15EX. Such a proposal is a non-starter from the get go......
Offline

zero-one

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2342
  • Joined: 23 Jul 2013, 16:19
  • Location: New Jersey

Unread post21 May 2020, 09:46

I think the EX will replace Guard units and free up the 119th F-22's and replace them with F-15s
This may bring back all Raptors to front line squadrons bringing the total to 6 active.

Curious, is it possible, no matter how expensive to bring all 180 Raptors to combat ready status and maybe activate 10 combat ready front line squadrons which was the original plan for the F-22.
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2688
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post21 May 2020, 12:41

sferrin wrote:
madrat wrote:The problem isn't the engine, it is the airframe. It was engineered for engines that require extending or restarting old designs.


If you want F-15s that's the trade off.


Exactly. Not everyone caught on that point from the get-go. I was just saying it tongue in cheek. Sarcasm and sardonic humor goes right over peoples heads at times.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2335
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post22 May 2020, 01:38

zero-one wrote:I think the EX will replace Guard units and free up the 119th F-22's and replace them with F-15s
This may bring back all Raptors to front line squadrons bringing the total to 6 active.

Curious, is it possible, no matter how expensive to bring all 180 Raptors to combat ready status and maybe activate 10 combat ready front line squadrons which was the original plan for the F-22.


The whole point of getting the F-15EX is to leverage on the similarity to F-15C, minimizing equipment and re-training. It would be strange to u-turn and not utilize this having put this as a primary driver for the business case.

Per CRS, although the buy was for 187, 195 got built. Almost all of them are blk 10 and above which means they are air combat capable. There needs to be WPS, training sqns in peacetime. Its pretty basic. Doesn't mean instructors or test pilots don't get sent into combat or planes in those sqns can't be deployed....if the need arises or if volunteer. Consider that only the best pilots become instructors...not sure if they rotate instructors to units?

I hope some of our more esteemed posters who were instructors can share how that volunteer/deployment process works.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4828
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post22 May 2020, 03:17

weasel1962 wrote:The whole point of getting the F-15EX is to leverage on the similarity to F-15C, minimizing equipment and re-training. It would be strange to u-turn and not utilize this having put this as a primary driver for the business case.


Which I always found hilarious because there is not a single system more than skin deep other than the ejector seat that is the same. The structure is that of the E, not the C, and all the engines and avionics are 100% new to F-15C squadrons.
"Spurts"

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

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2335
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post22 May 2020, 06:06

Probably referring to things as simple as a 209, rather than buying a new 235A. The loaders, test support and other depot maintenance probably share some commonalities.

Don't think anyone thinks its completely the same. The EX probably has quite a few more fancy gadgets.
Offline

marauder2048

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1105
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post22 May 2020, 08:10

weasel1962 wrote:The whole point of getting the F-15EX is to leverage on the similarity to F-15C, minimizing equipment and re-training. It would be strange to u-turn and not utilize this having put this as a primary driver for the business case.


The Air Force just abandoned the Mattis-era readiness goals that were rather central to the putative business case.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: wrightwing and 33 guests