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
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8389
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post21 Feb 2019, 18:02

Again, let's stop saying "they want to buy" as it's not the USAF that is pushing this but "other" personnel in the DoD.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5646
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post28 Feb 2019, 01:29

I've said all along the USAF would never get the F-15X......... :doh:



WASHINGTON — Lockheed Martin and U.S. Air Force officials may be downplaying the prospect of an upcoming budget battle surrounding the F-15X and the F-35 fighter jets, but influential F-35 supporters in Congress and around the Capital Beltway are mounting an offensive against Boeing’s new F-15 variant.


All signs point to the Air Force unveiling its plan to buy a new version of the F-15 in its fiscal 2020 budget proposal, tentatively scheduled for release in mid-March. Though numbers have fluctuated, a Feb. 19 report from Bloomberg says the service plans to purchase eight F-15X planes in FY20, with an expected total buy of about 80 jets.



That number is a far cry from the rate of 80 F-35As per year that the Air Force originally believed it could start procuring in 2014. Even the goal of 60 "A" models per year seems increasingly out of reach in the near term.


The result is that the Air Force’s F-15X procurement is starting to face pushback, particularly from F-35 supporters in the think tank world and stakeholders in Congress............


Meanwhile, F-35 purchases will remain stagnant, with 84 jets set to be requested in FY20, and 48 of that sum for the Air Force’s F-35A conventional variant, Bloomberg said.


https://www.defensenews.com/digital-sho ... t-threats/
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1657
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post28 Feb 2019, 01:42

Best explanation I've seen on the subject. Provides a clear analysis and indication from the USAF perspective on the F-15C that they are not prepared to extend C life into 2030s. A-10s will.

https://www.defensenews.com/interviews/ ... ht-attack/
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5646
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post28 Feb 2019, 02:23

Confusing to say the least.....So, is he saying the F-15X will be cheaper than the F-16??? Which, we can sell to Allies that can't afford or have access to the F-35???


We learned in the past that if it’s good enough for us to buy, it tends to be good enough for our allies and partners. And many of the international air chiefs, tell me: “Hey, Dave, I got this going on in my country, I’ve got to deal with it; I want to join you in a fight, but I can’t afford F-16s, I’m never going to get F-35 and I need something else because my weapon systems I’ve got right now are getting older. What do you have to offer me?”



Nonetheless, this is hardly a good case for buying F-15X's. Plus, I don't see how they could possibly get the F-15X below $100 Million let alone $80 Million. Plus, according to the above quote the countries in question can't even afford F-16's! Honestly, this doesn't make sense at all.....
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 775
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post28 Feb 2019, 02:24

weasel1962 wrote:Best explanation I've seen on the subject. Provides a clear analysis and indication from the USAF perspective on the F-15C that they are not prepared to extend C life into 2030s. A-10s will.

https://www.defensenews.com/interviews/ ... ht-attack/


It's devoid of any real analysis.

No one suggested the F-15C was going to make it into the 2030s without something happening.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5646
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post28 Feb 2019, 02:58

marauder2048 wrote:
weasel1962 wrote:Best explanation I've seen on the subject. Provides a clear analysis and indication from the USAF perspective on the F-15C that they are not prepared to extend C life into 2030s. A-10s will.

https://www.defensenews.com/interviews/ ... ht-attack/


It's devoid of any real analysis.

No one suggested the F-15C was going to make it into the 2030s without something happening.



Yes, I found the case for more F-15X's near nonexistent???

Honestly, you could make a better case for upgrading existing F-15C's. Than buying new F-15X's. As both will be obsolete in the coming decade....
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 775
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post28 Feb 2019, 03:38

Here's a decent argument that they could be making but are not:

Our experiments have shown that fast jets are the most survivable gateway we've
found to enable communication across the joint force but gateway pods are prohibitively
expensive, limited in capability and degrade the performance of the host aircraft.

Consequently, TTNT/MADL/SADL/WDL/IFDL antennas must be directly integrated into a fast jet
platform and the only suitable platform we have that can meet the
power generation and other requirements in the near term is the F-15.

This integration cannot be done as a retrofit so new builds are required and
Boeing is able to deliver them within the year under a firm fixed-price contract.
Online

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8389
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post28 Feb 2019, 03:39

There was already a study that said that current F-15Cs can make it into the 2030s with just a < $1Mil SLEP.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 775
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post28 Feb 2019, 03:43

SpudmanWP wrote:There was already a study that said that current F-15Cs can make it into the 2030s with just a < $1Mil SLEP.


Right. That and all of the detailed analysis on various SLEPs and other mods (like the industry day for E-winging
the F-15C/Ds because the USG actually owns the data rights to the F-15E wing) has gone all F-15 Silent Eagle.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5646
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post28 Feb 2019, 03:54

Problem is you can't make a case for buying New F-15X's over F-35A's by the numbers. In addition we need to order as many F-35's as production allows. As this drives down the unit price of the F-35. While, making it even more attractive for export. Lastly, this put's China and Russia in a poor position. As they have to spend more and more tax dollars just trying to keep up....


Honestly, you can slice it a hundred different ways. Yet, it never comes in favor of the F-15X..... :shock:
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1657
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore

Unread post28 Feb 2019, 07:29

marauder2048 wrote:
SpudmanWP wrote:There was already a study that said that current F-15Cs can make it into the 2030s with just a < $1Mil SLEP.


Right. That and all of the detailed analysis on various SLEPs and other mods (like the industry day for E-winging
the F-15C/Ds because the USG actually owns the data rights to the F-15E wing) has gone all F-15 Silent Eagle.


You got to take it context. Clearly the USAF as highlighted has done service life studies which basically states the F-15C can't go past 2030. When the chief says I'm going to ignore what Boeing says about SLEP extension, what do you think he means?

He can't say the F-35 is a bloody lousy plane compared to the F-15 even if its true because that would really mean he shouldn't be "chief". What he's signalling is that he'd rather have new planes than an SLEP. He pitches more F-35, he may not get it. He pitches more F-15s, maybe he gets F-35. That to me is how he's pitching it.

If he can't get the budget, you can be sure the SLEP goes back on the table. If he pitches both new planes & SLEP, they'd do a comparison and guess what, SLEP wins because of the costs savings. Need to study game theory. You don't see the analysis, I see helluva thought going into how to pitch this.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5646
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post28 Feb 2019, 11:32

Sens. Cruz, Cornyn, Collins, Rubio, Murkowski Pen Letter Urging the President to Fully Support F-35 Funding

‘The F-35 is the most affordable, lethal, and survivable air dominance fighter, and now is the time to double down on the program’

February 15, 2019

202-228-7561


WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and John Cornyn (R-Texas), along with Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) today sent a letter to President Trump urging him to support the current funding schedule for the F-35 as opposed to investing in the outdated, fourth-generation F-15X.

“We are extremely concerned that, over the last few years, the DoD has underfunded the F-35 Program and relied on Congress to fund increases in production, sustainment, and modernization. In order to meet the overmatch and lethality goals laid out in the National Security Strategy, the DoD needs to make these investments in the F-35 to affordably deliver and operate this fifth-generation fighter fleet. The F-35 is the most affordable, lethal, and survivable air dominance fighter, and now is the time to double down on the program,” the senators wrote...............


https://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=4327
Offline

quicksilver

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2629
  • Joined: 16 Feb 2011, 01:30
  • Warnings: 1
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3363
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 2

Unread post28 Feb 2019, 17:47

Quite ironic that the biggest threat to the F-35 is not the SU-57, J-20 or other near peer adversary. It's the F-15X and politics!

I love the F-15, always have. It's served the nation and our allies exceedingly well. You couldn't ask for a more dominant air to air platform. But its best days have passed, and the competition is way, way too close. Double up the F-35 buy to replenish our air wings, including the F-15's (strictly) air to air mission.

It's cheaper. It's infinitely more capable. And our servicemen deserve the best...
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 775
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post28 Feb 2019, 20:01

weasel1962 wrote:
marauder2048 wrote:
You got to take it context. Clearly the USAF as highlighted has done service life studies which basically states the F-15C can't go past 2030. When the chief says I'm going to ignore what Boeing says about SLEP extension, what do you think he means?


If he can't get the budget, you can be sure the SLEP goes back on the table. If he pitches both new planes & SLEP, they'd do a comparison and guess what, SLEP wins because of the costs savings. Need to study game theory. You don't see the analysis, I see helluva thought going into how to pitch this.


The Chief means the F-15X was imposed on them from without and that he's doing his best to present
the flimsy arguments given to him by OSD as he is ethically and legally bound to do. There's no
real analysis because there really wasn't any.

He is signaling that they don't have control over this current FYDP. Actual game theory gets reserved
for formal, sworn testimony to Congress when you present AFCAA's analysis which implies that the
request is unsound. Then CAPE gets subpoenaed.
Attachments
f-15x-imposed-trimble-tweet.png
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], popcorn and 10 guests