F-15X: USAF Seems Interested

John Venable at Heritage, on the F-15X idea. You may recall his survey a couple years ago of F-35 pilots who came from other aircraft types.

https://www.heritage.org/defense/commen ... ge-mistake

That article is a pathetic joke for a variety of reasons.

Well, enlighten us...

I thought the article was well written/reasoned, but fell apart towards the end..

Not survivable in the current IADS environment? OK. First few days of war maybe. But when those IADS are brought down by F-35's and other aircraft? Once that airspace is secured and IADS laid to waste, somebody's going to have to fly CAPs. Is it going to be cheaper to buy and operate vs. F-35's? Logic tells us the F-35 will be cheaper and more capable. But this will largely be in Congress's hands, and they're anything but logical.

The air force needs 72 airframes a year to modernize the force? Then why not give them the $ to buy them? Otherwise, make due with 60 (or whatever) you're funded for. The fact is we're in this current pickle because of a number of USAF leadership mistakes, and nobody's been held accountable. That's the underlying reason for everything from obsolete airframes to the current pilot shortage...

Not survivable in the current IADS environment? OK. First few days of war maybe. But when those IADS are brought down by F-35's and other aircraft?

Depends on how the enemy employs their IADS; they could elect to be highly selective in
choosing engagements, minimize their exposure and feign incapacity in order to draw out
your less survivable fighters.

The air defense vignettes that RAND did for Taiwan were really instructive in how a
well led, well equipped IADS force could stymie a PRC air campaign.

The achilles heel of the F-15

F-15 intake.JPG

They need to buy some Sukhoi magic blockers.

(and invisible to the naked-eye too)

The achilles heel of the F-15

F-15 intake.JPG

They need to buy some Sukhoi magic blockers.

(and invisible to the naked-eye too)

I guess you are all unfamiliar with plasma stealth? Remember the effort to reduce Oxcart's signature with plasma? Plenty of room in the cfts for a plasma generator to hide the fan blades.

I thought e1l was talking about horsepower. ATF class thrust would ensure the X was faster than the F-35A even with cfts and external missiles.

I can't believe this is the reality. Buying 12 eagles in place of 12 lightning? To save a few tens of millions?

Who cares?????
Let us assume a modern war between 2 Countries.

"Game starts" the day BEFORE the conflict.

With a satellite you follow all their aircraft and where they land and park.

Game day : (can be the middle of the night, who cares.)

B2 bombers, F-22, F-35, and you bomb each and every aircraft shelter than contains an enemy plane.
Tomahawks can take out all their fixed radars and command and comms.

You send in some "visible aircraft" to trigger their AAA and SAM's, and let the B-1 take care of those.

By noon on the FIRST day one of the conflict, you can fly around in your bathing suit with whatever pink or orange colored airframe you prefer.

Game day : (can be the middle of the night, who cares.)

So what happens when USA/NATO isn't the one who's starting that first game day thingy?

It can be handy to use simplifications when possible, but make sure they will not become absurd when you compare them to reality.

Game day : (can be the middle of the night, who cares.)

So what happens when USA/NATO isn't the one who's starting that first game day thingy?

It can be handy to use simplifications when possible, but make sure they will not become absurd when you compare them to reality.

a) Fire the Intel officer. => he should have seen it coming.
b) A bomb (or Tomahawk) should fall on their A/C shelters within 15 minutes of their aircraft landing/parking.

The USAF and NAVY combined have enough "knock-over" power to basically destroy ANY enemy's Air Force within the first 4 hrs of conflict but don't do it like Desert storm and go in like waterdrops on a hot plate but basically flood the airspace with all you'v got the first 4 hrs, and get them while on the ground re-arming re-fuel.

None of them should be able to restart, even less get airborne for a second try.

b) A bomb (or Tomahawk) should fall on their A/C shelters within 15 minutes of their aircraft landing/parking.

The angle of obliquity requirements for a penetrator result in fairly predictable terminal trajectories
which makes these weapons vulnerable to terminal defenses.

And ultra high performance concrete while relatively expensive is still cheap enough to allow
for the proliferation of hardened aircraft shelters.

So the prevailing view is that air bases featuring modern construction, repair capabilities and defenses
are going to be a really tough nut to crack.

And ultra high performance concrete while relatively expensive is still cheap enough to allow
for the proliferation of hardened aircraft shelters. So the prevailing view is that air bases featuring modern construction, repair capabilities and defenses are going to be a really tough nut to crack.

I can't see that being a stumbling block with the right weapon mix, even heavy air defenses won't last against a flight of 4 x F-35 with EA and JSM. Then a flight of 4 x F-35 with SDB next to go after hard surfaces and fuel. With the area suppressed 8 x F-35 enter with 4 x BLU109-JDAM each for the shelters and bunkers.

One squadron level raid and a sub-squadron level raid the next day, to scrap the rest of the critical infrastructure.

Otherwise two F-35 squadron-level attacks inside the first hour to get the lot immediately.

Re the external BLU delivery, ESM + fusion and reference to MDF data will provide the capacity to skirt and fly outside engagement envelopes of anything still up, plus RAAF developed a JDAM-ER kit for BLU109 standoff delivery, if that were desired to make it harder for air defenses that were playing possum.

http://www.deagel.com/library1/medium/2 ... 800027.jpg
http://www.deagel.com/library1/medium/2 ... 800026.jpg

(those are not Australian uniforms in the background in the second image)

b) A bomb (or Tomahawk) should fall on their A/C shelters within 15 minutes of their aircraft landing/parking.

The angle of obliquity requirements for a penetrator result in fairly predictable terminal trajectories
which makes these weapons vulnerable to terminal defenses.

And ultra high performance concrete while relatively expensive is still cheap enough to allow
for the proliferation of hardened aircraft shelters.

So the prevailing view is that air bases featuring modern construction, repair capabilities and defenses
are going to be a really tough nut to crack.

Agree. Runways can be repaired quickly. The Russians build tough equipment for austere deployment. You gotta kill the people and the equipment. You gotta keep them too afraid to take to the air. The way the latter is done is with 5th gen LO aircraft they can't see pounding the bandits with amraam before they know they are in a fight. Highly visible F-15X will not accomplish this. They will be busy trying not to get tagged with a SAM. They will need jammers for protection or 5th gen providing SEAD. Love the eagles, but inadequate and obsolete by modern standards. We tried to go to an all stealth force so we didn't need such big strike packages - one reason at least - and so we could do more with less. Or at least I read that in a brochure

Game day : (can be the middle of the night, who cares.)

So what happens when USA/NATO isn't the one who's starting that first game day thingy?

It can be handy to use simplifications when possible, but make sure they will not become absurd when you compare them to reality.

Great point...

I often wondered if I was Saddam (prior to GWII), why sit back and wait for it? He and the rest of the world should have known what was coming. The best defense is a good offense, and he would have been wise to get as many SU-24, 25 and Fitters into the air covered by Mig-23, 25's and 29's as possible to strike coalition targets. I'm not saying they wouldn't take losses (probably massive ones), but it beats hiding in shelters that are going to get pulverized or burying your most capable aircraft in the sand. I know Russian birds are built rugged, but geez...

I often wondered if I was Saddam (prior to GWII), why sit back and wait for it? He and the rest of the world should have known what was coming. The best defense is a good offense, and he would have been wise to get as many SU-24, 25 and Fitters into the air covered by Mig-23, 25's and 29's as possible to strike coalition targets. I'm not saying they wouldn't take losses (probably massive ones), but it beats hiding in shelters that are going to get pulverized or burying your most capable aircraft in the sand. I know Russian birds are built rugged, but geez...

During Desert Storm they thought they were safe. They had a LOT of HASs. The US was taking them out left and right, then for a period of time ran out of BLU-109s. Some of the shelters were VERY hard, and the available LGBs couldn't do much more than clear the weeds off them. "Disturb the rose bushes", as one officer at the time put it at the time. Iraq quickly stuffed as many aircraft as possible into them. Then we got more BLU-109s in theater.

That's why Iraq started flying it's aircraft to Iran. It thought they'd be safe and they'd be able to get them back after the war. When Iran said, "thanks!", Iraq started burying them in the sand. Probably my favorite shot from that time:

IIRC SDB was designed to have as much penetration capability as BLU-109 albeit with less *BOOM* once it got where it was going. (Though once you're inside the shelter it doesn't take much to screw up an airplane.

I thought the article was well written/reasoned, but fell apart towards the end..

Not survivable in the current IADS environment? OK. First few days of war maybe. But when those IADS are brought down by F-35's and other aircraft? Once that airspace is secured and IADS laid to waste, somebody's going to have to fly CAPs. Is it going to be cheaper to buy and operate vs. F-35's? Logic tells us the F-35 will be cheaper and more capable. But this will largely be in Congress's hands, and they're anything but logical.

The air force needs 72 airframes a year to modernize the force? Then why not give them the $ to buy them? Otherwise, make due with 60 (or whatever) you're funded for. The fact is we're in this current pickle because of a number of USAF leadership mistakes, and nobody's been held accountable. That's the underlying reason for everything from obsolete airframes to the current pilot shortage...

The article is spot on in my opinion. As you just "can't" make a good case for buying the F-15X.

Al-Jaber-DF-SD-03-16337-1S.jpg

IIRC SDB was designed to have as much penetration capability as BLU-109 albeit with less *BOOM* once it got where it was going. (Though once you're inside the shelter it doesn't take much to screw up an airplane.

GBU-39-B-SDB-I-Drop-2.jpg

That image of the F-117A in front of the wrecked shelter is downright cheeky!

Good point regarding the SDB. RAAF recently ordered 2,950 x GBU-39/B SDB (plus 3,900 x GBU-53B SDBII), so a BLU109 JDAM-ER can be conserved for other targets (frankly, not sure if RAAF ordered JDAM-ER kits for 109s yet).

Too bad MOAB is too bulky. Maybe the US should consider investing in a new generation of thermobaric weapons, should do. good job messing up anything not in a HAS.