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

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3491
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post01 Nov 2019, 14:50

The number of enemy aircraft a single F-35 can destroy is only going up. Today it's 5. In the near future, that goes up to 7 or more with 6 internal AMRAAM's (using your 100% PK example). Make that 12 for Perigrine, and up to 2/3x more if external carriage is allowed.

For me though, the "unnerving" factor for bad guys is the big one. Is there an F-35 in the area? More than 1? None? They really won't know until it's too late, and organizing a counter-attack is going to be difficult when you/your wingmen are falling out of the sky. Phantom blips would be even worse, because even IF you get your missiles off YOUR PK is going to be mighty low.

If Iraqi aircraft in DSII didn't come up to fight against perfectly visible F-15's, how many are going to fly vs. an invisible enemy?
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3309
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post01 Nov 2019, 21:52

Why are we assuming only 1 kill with the cannon? The F-35 won't be firing all 180rds at one target. Against unsuspecting targets, that's enough ammo for 4 to 6 kills, and probably 2 to 3 kills for targets that are aware.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5812
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post04 Nov 2019, 04:24

marsavian wrote:
1) Not if those targets are drones, missiles, bombers etc. Even if it was a top notch fighter the most F-35 could kill in a single sortie assuming a very optimistic amraam pK of 1 would be say 5 including one for cannon. The F-15 generally kicks other 4th gen fighters using its kinematics and big radar so you would assume it could kill at least one if not two in a sortie. Against a J-20 it might be outclassed but that rubber hasn't hit the road yet and we don't know how well DEWS would work defensively against a J-20 and how well an APG-82 could detect it.


Absurd the F-35 is vastly superior over the F-15 in Flight Performance, Stealth, and Sensor Fusion. Hell, it's not even a contest.....

2) Not in a single sortie.


Ever heard " FIRST LOOK FIRST SHOT FIRST KILL"... :wink:

3) Actually JASSM are being bought for these F-15 so you may have your intercept strike roles reversed.


The F-35 has nothing to worry from the F-15 either clean (stealthy) or dirty (external stores).
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5812
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post04 Nov 2019, 04:26

wrightwing wrote:Why are we assuming only 1 kill with the cannon? The F-35 won't be firing all 180rds at one target. Against unsuspecting targets, that's enough ammo for 4 to 6 kills, and probably 2 to 3 kills for targets that are aware.



I believe it's about 50 rounds per gun kill. So, three to four tops....(i.e. F-35A)
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5812
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post11 Nov 2019, 02:47

Fewer airmen, fewer bombs and delayed F-15s: Goldfein outlines effects of continuing resolution

By: Stephen Losey  


With Congress flailing in its attempt to pass a budget and the prospect of a lengthy continuing resolution growing, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein on Wednesday outlined how bad that would be.


A year-long CR, funding the Air Force at fiscal 2019 levels, would cost the service the $11.8 billion increase called for in President Trump’s proposed fiscal 2020 budget, Goldfein said at a breakfast hosted by the Air Force Association in Washington.


“It’s truly damaging for all the services, and certainly the United States Air Force,” Goldfein said.


Even if a CR only lasts for six months, the effects would be significant, he said. The Air Force would lose $1.1 billion that would go to Boeing’s development and production of new F-15EX fighters, postponing their acquisition and driving up prices, according to a fact sheet Goldfein distributed. It would also force the Air Force to keep flying F-15Cs for longer than it expected, resulting in further cost increases due to the extensive maintenance needed to keep the aging fighters, plagued by structural health issues, in the air.


And that CR would cost the Air Force $188 million intended for improvements to almost one-third of its F-35 fleet.


But a year-long CR would be even worse, Goldfein said, hitting airmen directly and limiting the planned 3.1 percent pay raise for troops.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your ... esolution/
Offline

milosh

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 836
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2008, 23:40
  • Location: Serbia, Belgrade

Unread post11 Nov 2019, 12:20

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:Sorry fellas. Afaik there won't be an F-15CX ever. The cost of recertification is too high. Also, there is no production line or tooling for the lightweight C. Only E have been built since the 80s


Wouldn't be huge problem to done something like this:
https://www.ainonline.com/sites/default ... k=56pA6v0_

That way you get single seater from two seater and more fuel. I really don't get why such variant of F-15E wasn't design ideal for intercetpor role.
Last edited by milosh on 11 Nov 2019, 16:05, edited 1 time in total.
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5443
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post11 Nov 2019, 15:33

Corsair1963 wrote:Fewer airmen, fewer bombs and delayed F-15s: Goldfein outlines effects of continuing resolution

By: Stephen Losey  


With Congress flailing in its attempt to pass a budget and the prospect of a lengthy continuing resolution growing, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein on Wednesday outlined how bad that would be.


A year-long CR, funding the Air Force at fiscal 2019 levels, would cost the service the $11.8 billion increase called for in President Trump’s proposed fiscal 2020 budget, Goldfein said at a breakfast hosted by the Air Force Association in Washington.


“It’s truly damaging for all the services, and certainly the United States Air Force,” Goldfein said.


Even if a CR only lasts for six months, the effects would be significant, he said. The Air Force would lose $1.1 billion that would go to Boeing’s development and production of new F-15EX fighters, postponing their acquisition and driving up prices, according to a fact sheet Goldfein distributed. It would also force the Air Force to keep flying F-15Cs for longer than it expected, resulting in further cost increases due to the extensive maintenance needed to keep the aging fighters, plagued by structural health issues, in the air.


And that CR would cost the Air Force $188 million intended for improvements to almost one-third of its F-35 fleet.


But a year-long CR would be even worse, Goldfein said, hitting airmen directly and limiting the planned 3.1 percent pay raise for troops.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your ... esolution/


Gotta love Democrats. They try to f--k the military whenever possible.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2334
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post11 Nov 2019, 15:55

Is this an attack on the military or an attack on Republicans? The Republicans are far more vulnerable to the fallout of continuing resolutions than the Democrats with their zombie-like automatic increases built in under Obama. The democrats are also the prime domestic benefactors of the belt & road policies being used to encircle the United States. All these politics directed against Trump materialized when he pissed off Xi. But you do not have to be a rocket scientist to see the link between deals with Xi and the ebb and flow of attacks on Trump. This whole impeachment scandal coincided with the breakdown of trade talks between the U.S. and China. This is a message that China is the puppetmaster within congress.
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3309
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post11 Nov 2019, 16:03

sferrin wrote:

Gotta love Democrats. They try to f--k the military whenever possible.

Yep. They never let a crisis go to waste.
Offline
User avatar

rowbeartoe

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 27
  • Joined: 30 Nov 2016, 06:30

Unread post11 Nov 2019, 19:45

Not sure why this is turning into a Dem or Rep thing? Arguments could be made for and against both sides.

That said, back on point, what is the update on the F-15X, F-15EX, or whatever it may or may not be called? The F-35a cost cuts seems to make the modern F-15 a harder sale recently. Of course as a fan of the F-16 and F-15 I would love to see new production 4th generation Jets. Obviously, the future should be focused on getting an F-22 replacement, and the F-15, and I would argue the F-35 isn't the solution in regards to "replacing" the F-22.
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5812
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 02:09

rowbeartoe wrote:Not sure why this is turning into a Dem or Rep thing? Arguments could be made for and against both sides.

That said, back on point, what is the update on the F-15X, F-15EX, or whatever it may or may not be called? The F-35a cost cuts seems to make the modern F-15 a harder sale recently. Of course as a fan of the F-16 and F-15 I would love to see new production 4th generation Jets. Obviously, the future should be focused on getting an F-22 replacement, and the F-15, and I would argue the F-35 isn't the solution in regards to "replacing" the F-22.



Point here is the Democrats don't want Trump to build his wall with Defense Funding. So, they will block the current Defense Budget as "ransom". Which, is not to say the Republicans are any different. As they use the same tactics when it's to their advantage.

In short "politics"....(sadly)


As for the F-15EX it's pretty much on hold at the moment. Honestly, with declining future defense budgets. It's time to cancel the Eagle and just order additional F-35A's. Which, is what should have happen from the start.

"IMHO"
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5812
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 06:00

Could he be referring to the F-15EX and other legacy programs like the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet??? If, not what else is likely to be trimmed or even cut???

SecDef: Expect ‘Trimming, Reducing, Some Eliminations’ in 2021 Budget.

Esper touts "good progress" in high-level review intended to cut fat and find funds for projects to counter China and Russia.


NEW YORK — Pentagon officials are “making good progress” in their review of bureaucracy intended to cut fat and shift funds to high-priority efforts to counter Chinese and Russian military advancements, Defense Secretary Mark Esper said Monday.

“There’s a lot of trimming, reducing, some eliminations and we’ll go through that,” Esper said Monday on a flight from Washington to New York where he met with business leaders.

The savings are expected to be revealed in the Pentagon’s next budget request, which is typically sent to Congress in February.

As Army Secretary, Esper was known for his “Night Court” review, credited with freeing up $25 billion over five years for higher-priority efforts. Just last week, Gen. Dave Goldfein, Air Force chief of staff, said his service has undertaken a similar review that would shift $30 billion between fiscal years 2021 and 2025.


“All the services need to go through this so we can focus on the National Defense Strategy and…get rid of legacy programs and activities and pivot toward the future,” Esper said. That strategy called for the U.S. to prioritize great power competition.

Esper’s latest review is targeting the Pentagon’s bureaucratic functions, known as the “fourth estate.”

“There are a lot of parts of the fourth estate that are in law,” Esper said. “We will probably have recommendations for the Congress to consider as again ways to find efficiency to help us pivot toward the National Defense Strategy.”

Esper said he spent six hours working on the review last week.

“Come January, we’re going to start a different approach where we kind of do much more of a blank sheet approach,” he said, hinting that the process could become an annual exercise.

https://www.defenseone.com/politics/201 ... et/161229/
Offline
User avatar

sferrin

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 5443
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2005, 03:23

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 14:45

rowbeartoe wrote:Not sure why this is turning into a Dem or Rep thing? Arguments could be made for and against both sides.


Because 99% of the time there's an effort to cut the military the perpetrators have a "D" next to their name. They're a bigger threat to the US than either Russia or China. Pay attention.
"There I was. . ."
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3491
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 15:05

Any F-15EX "postponment" is only going to make the F-35 more attractive. The F-15EX will get more expensive, and the F-35 less expensive. As everyone from laymen to Congressional lawmakers learn more about the F-35's capabilities, that too will favor the F-35 (rather dramatically IMO).

I love the F-15, it was my favorite plane growing up as a kid. But no amount of modifications is going to result in capability even approaching the F-35, nevermind putting it on par with it. We don't need more 4+++ gen aircraft, we need more 5th gen. Let Russia and other nations pursue 4+++ gen, while building fewer 5th gen birds. I'd much rather see Russia crank out up-rated Flankers and Fulcrums of all kinds vs. SU-57's. Every Fulcrum or Flanker that rolls off the production line results in them being further behind, and every F-35 that rolls off the line results in us being further ahead. It really is as simple as that..

And quite unlike the F-117, the F-35's stealth revolution has spread to many of our allies. The enemy now has to contend not with 59 F-117A's, but thousands of F-35's flying from every corner of the globe (including at forward operating bases and more than a few aircraft carriers). I can't even imagine if the situation was reversed: Thousands of SU-57's flying in every major combat theater, while we continue to produce.... up-rated F-15's, 16 and 18's and only a thimble full of F-22's. Not a good situation to be in, not at all...
Offline

zhangmdev

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 97
  • Joined: 01 May 2017, 09:07

Unread post12 Nov 2019, 16:18

Boeing clings to F-15 like it holds on to 747 and 737. Rehash a half-century-old design and give it a catching name. But nobody wants 747-8-because-Chinese-like-that-number, and 737 Max is now treated by the media and public like some kind of plague. I think they will completely bungle this project too.
PreviousNext

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: hythelday and 18 guests