F-15EX

zero-one · by **zero-one** » 15 Feb 2021, 15:02

basher54321 wrote:
zero-one wrote: Where is all this praise for the EX's performance coming from?

People have to sell the concept thus some will be putting out positive information to make it sound good

So basically, he's describing the F-15E's performance which has been constantly described as subpar compared to the C model.
Maybe the Flybywire will offer some difference but

so it looks like the ACM hierarchy for the USAF will still be as follows
F-22
F-35A
F-16C
F-15C
F-15EX
F-15E

jetblast16 · by **jetblast16** » 15 Feb 2021, 16:03

May I ask those "experts" who continue to disparage the F-15EX, to please go to another thread. I was hoping we could have a thread about the jet, without politics and how well it compares to the "perfect" F-35. I would like to post pictures and videos of the plane as it evolves. What its future is, is unknown. But I am interested to see what happens with it...if the USAF potentially replaces its F-15Es with the new Eagle.

jetblast16 · by **jetblast16** » 15 Feb 2021, 16:09

Remember, the title of this thread is: F-15EX. It is not: The F-35 is Better Than the F-15EX; The F-15EX is a Waste; The F-15EX is Unnecessary and Inferior to the F-35, etc. If you feel that way, why don't you start a thread such as these? Take some initiative; don't pollute this one.

Thanks!

jetblast16

zero-one · by **zero-one** » 15 Feb 2021, 16:13

jetblast16 wrote:Remember, the title of this thread is: F-15EX. It is not: The F-35 is Better Than the F-15EX;

Sorry my bad, thats not what I intended to convey with my comments, I was hoping that the F-15EX would be, at least in performance and air to air situational awareness terms, 2nd only to the F-22. Kind of an F-22 if it wasn't stealth kind of plane.

But from what I've been gathering, it looks like its not, I'm hoping I'm wrong

jetblast16 · by **jetblast16** » 15 Feb 2021, 16:19

No worries. You were asking valid questions. We'll see what the latest iteration of the Eagle can do. From what I've been reading it is quite capable in the high alpha regime, and without CFTs, could present a strong opponent in the WVR fight.

charlielima223 · by **charlielima223** » 15 Feb 2021, 17:21

@ jetblast16

I agree, as I stated earlier this thread has become more like "I hate F-15EX because F-35".

Getting back to the F-15EX.
IMO I agree with some of the opinions here that the EX is more of a replacement for the Strike Eagle rather than the Eagle. Re-listening to TFPP Strike Eagle ep, the F-15E while kenimatically competent as an air-to-air, lags behind the single seat F-15C in almost every area.

I would make a SWAG and say that compared to the current Strike Eagle, the new fly-by-wire would give the EX better handling characteristics. The more modern avionics would greatly enhance the capability of the pilot and WSO. Personally I would like them to make a "CX"; a new build F-15C with all the benefits of the EX.

basher54321 · by **basher54321** » 15 Feb 2021, 17:43

The SA and QA line was developed from the E which was a much stronger structure than the F-15C and had a much higher 9G design weight as the manuals show.

The FBW and flight testing was integrated and paid for during the SA/QA development however making an assumption as some are that this somehow turns it into a super fighter is just an assumption without some concrete information on what was actually changed. When a pilot flying the QA states it was harder to spin then that is a long standing benefit of FBW - but significantly changing the flight handling without physical changes there is only so much you can do.

Putting a single seat CX into production even if it is just a single seat QA was no doubt out of the picture due to cost which is why it had to be the current production QA.

The E is probably the best baseline - the EX might be lighter or it might be heavier - it might have more thrust if they go with GE-129s or it might not.

wrightwing · by **wrightwing** » 15 Feb 2021, 17:45

zero-one wrote:
basher54321 wrote:
The F-15QA was apparently the most advanced F-15E up to this point with FBW and extra wing pylons. F-15QA performance would be closest to F-15E with PW-229 maybe.

Yeah thats my other question, the GE-129 and PW-129 have roughly the same ballpark performance with one engine having marginal advantages and disadvantages in certain parts of the envelope, but basically the same.

So since the E has been flying with 229s since the beginning and since the QA is basically an E model with advanced avionics and the EX is basically a QA with 5% difference, then the F-15EX should fly just like an F-15E. Same airfoil, same thrust, comparable weight. Where is all this praise for the EX's performance coming from?

An E model without A2G ordnance, pods, etc....is a beast. The EX with FBW is even more of a beast, as it has carefree handling vs hydraulic controls.

milosh · by **milosh** » 15 Feb 2021, 19:31

Corsair1963 wrote:The F-15EX doesn't fly at Mach 2 clean let alone under a load. (see TEG remarks)

What load exactly? I mean it is very strange if F-15E with only four AIM-120 can reach Mach 2

Corsair1963 · by **Corsair1963** » 16 Feb 2021, 02:54

milosh wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:The F-15EX doesn't fly at Mach 2 clean let alone under a load. (see TEG remarks)

What load exactly? I mean it is very strange if F-15E with only four AIM-120 can reach Mach 2

With CFT's it would be limited to Mach 1.4

Which, the F-15EX will always carry!

Plus, anything over Mach 1 is nothing short of a gas guzzler. Which, is why F-15's even with CFT's also carry external tanks! (most of the time) :shock:

sprstdlyscottsmn · by **sprstdlyscottsmn** » 16 Feb 2021, 03:33

1.4 is with CFT mounted weapons. And yes, historical evidence says all combat ops, even air to air, are done with wing mounted drop tanks and targeting pods.

zero-one · by **zero-one** » 16 Feb 2021, 07:30

charlielima223 wrote: Personally I would like them to make a "CX"; a new build F-15C with all the benefits of the EX.

Me too, an air to air optimized EX, no pound for air to ground, with all the eye watering benefits of a PW-229 or GE-129, all the latest avionics and S.A. you could ask for.

But I said, wait that airplane already exist, its called the F-22, basically the USAF wants a missile truck to target everything the F-22 and F-35 is aiming at. I remember in the last episode of "Dogfights" they were playing with an idea of a B-1R that will act as an arsenal plane to take care of all the BVR shooting while the missiles in the F-22 will be reserved for, defensive purposes or WVR shooting.

I think the F-15EX fits that role better. Having a B-1 in contested air space with fighters is a little risky, if the bandits manage to sneak past, the B-1 is meat on the table, the F-15EX has more of a fighting chance. Never say, "that can't happen"

Corsair1963 · by **Corsair1963** » 16 Feb 2021, 07:39

zero-one wrote:
charlielima223 wrote: Personally I would like them to make a "CX"; a new build F-15C with all the benefits of the EX.

Me too, an air to air optimized EX, no pound for air to ground, with all the eye watering benefits of a PW-229 or GE-129, all the latest avionics and S.A. you could ask for.

But I said, wait that airplane already exist, its called the F-22, basically the USAF wants a missile truck to target everything the F-22 and F-35 is aiming at. I remember in the last episode of "Dogfights" they were playing with an idea of a B-1R that will act as an arsenal plane to take care of all the BVR shooting while the missiles in the F-22 will be reserved for, defensive purposes or WVR shooting.

I think the F-15EX fits that role better. Having a B-1 in contested air space with fighters is a little risky, if the bandits manage to sneak past, the B-1 is meat on the table, the F-15EX has more of a fighting chance. Never say, "that can't happen"

The USAF doesn't want it at all and the use of Missile Truck is nothing but PR. It hopes of attracting more 4th Generation Fighters sales. Honestly, doubt we will will ever operate any fighter with 12+ Air to Air Missiles. (or even 10 for that matter)

zero-one · by **zero-one** » 16 Feb 2021, 08:57

Corsair1963 wrote:The USAF doesn't want it at all and the use of Missile Truck is nothing but PR.

Well we both know the USAF does not think collectively, I'm pretty sure there are pro F-15EX proponents out there. It does have some benefits, on the top of my head.

1. You can save your precious F-22/35 service life for when crap hits the fan moments. Your typical Bear intercepts over Alaska and super bowl fly overs can be done by F-15s well into the 2040s.

2. No flyzone over Afghanistan or a country that barely has an airforce, why use F-35s for that?

3. In 2035 a rich country who you don't want to sell stealth fighters to wants to buy 40 fighters, if only we had a competitive non stealth....oh wait a minute

Corsair1963 · by **Corsair1963** » 16 Feb 2021, 09:06

zero-one wrote:
Corsair1963 wrote:The USAF doesn't want it at all and the use of Missile Truck is nothing but PR.

Well we both know the USAF does not think collectively, I'm pretty sure there are pro F-15EX proponents out there. It does have some benefits, on the top of my head.

1. You can save your precious F-22/35 service life for when crap hits the fan moments. Your typical Bear intercepts over Alaska and super bowl fly overs can be done by F-15s well into the 2040s.

2. No flyzone over Afghanistan or a country that barely has an airforce, why use F-35s for that?

3. In 2035 a rich country who you don't want to sell stealth fighters to wants to buy 40 fighters, if only we had a competitive non stealth....oh wait a minute

5th & 6th Generation Fighters either in service or under development.....

South Korea - KFX
Turkey - TFX
China J-20, J-31, and J-35
Russia Su-57
India - AMCA
etc.

6th Generation

US NGAD & F/A-XX
China (unknown name)
France, Germany, Spain - FCAS
UK, Italy, Sweden - Tempest
Japan - F-X
etc.etc.etc.