Air Force looking at buying 72 4th Gen fighters

The Air Force has asked for pricing information for up to 72 F-15 and/or F-16 airframes. The F-18 was also mentioned, but that won't happen, as it would introduce too much of a new requirement for parts and training.

They're also looking at buying more F-15Es to use in a Wild Weasel type role with the Next Generation Jammer once it is operational.

They are currently struggling to fund up to 48 F-35s a year for the first few years, and are looking at the current legacy fleet flying into 2045.

aviationweek.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58

This smacks of epic fail on the Air Force leadership. gah.

this sounds retarded.

a reply to: anzha

If you've read just about any of my threads for the last six or seven years, you'll notice a less than shocking trend on the part of the leadership. They're all complete idiots who can't find their ass with both hands, a map and one of their aides helping.

a reply to: Zaphod58

You may know something different but the last I heard about the Gee Whiz F-35 helmet is the cost, presently for ONE custom helmet, that is supposed to work, is around 400,000$ a pop !

The cost of the F-35 program and for each aircraft will end up like the F-22 being cancelled far short of the initial stated requirements.. just my opinion but I will bet anyone that will be the case.

Edit to add: S&F for the info.. I never have understood why people do not star and flag news worthy stuff that people take the time to post...

a reply to: 727Sky

They've tweaked the numbers some, but only by about 20-30 aircraft. Unlike the F-22 there's no choice with this airframe. Before 2030 the F-15 and F-16 won't be able to penetrate first world defenses, even with Weasel help. They're going to have to have an F-35 type platform to open the door for the legacy aircraft.

a reply to: Zaphod58

48 F-35? Thats less than the RAF getting I thought?

Yikes the people up top screwed up.

In other words,"aaahhh boss,some of our toys are too broken...can we have some new ones?"

a reply to: crazyewok

That's 48 a year for the first three years or so, so actually 144 aircraft.

a reply to: Blackfinger

Something like that, yes.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: crazyewok

That's 48 a year for the first three years or so, so actually 144 aircraft.

Ahhh ok makes abit more sense.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I've gone back to read a number. Only been around here since September and someone linked from here to my blog.

I have to admit I'm not really thrilled with the naval leadership either. Or Army for that matter.

There seems to be the grasp for greatness without planning sickness. Just saying you want something is not going to give it to you.

Alternately, there's this we're too scared to do something the way we ought, so we'll just drag it out and claim its hard attitude, too.

a reply to: crazyewok

The RAF has only ordered 14 to date. 4 you have. 10 are on order. The rest are planned but in the future.

a reply to: anzha

I wrote a thread around 2008 highlighting how old our air fleets were. In the 90s the Air Force, over a couple of years, bought 0 aircraft, waiting for the F-22, instead of starting replacement/upgrades of existing aircraft. Then Rumsfeld decided he didn't like the F-22 and killed it where it is now, and no one said a word.

Now, we're looking at funding the KC-46, KC-Y, KC-Z, T-X, $3B each for F-15 and B-1 upgrades, F-35, LRS-B, E-8 replacement, and within 6 years starting on the E-3 replacement.

How much does it cost to get a brand new f15/16 with all the toys built versus fixing up a 20 year old body?

a reply to: Maxatoria

They're more like 30 years old, and it would be $3B totalfor the best of them, although they didn't say how many that would be. The C model cost about $28M in 1998. A new aircraft today, with AESA, digital EW and architecture, IRST, etc would look at over $100M, but would out perform the rebuilt aircraft by a wide margin.

This entire mess is a direct result of no one but the fighter guys being appointed to the CSAF position. In the last 40 years there have been less than 5 people in that position that came up through something other than fighters.

This has led directly to a fighter first mentality that has been in place for so long that at this point the only way to break it is to strip the Air Force of ANY ability to procure so much as a car for the ramp, and tell them what their priorities are.

a reply to: Zaphod58

With the screw ups of late (including the LRS) there's a chance that might happen.

a reply to: Sammamishman

I have never prayed it would happen until now. I am so beyond pissed at what they've done to the force in the last 20 years it's not even funny.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: anzha

I wrote a thread around 2008 highlighting how old our air fleets were. In the 90s the Air Force, over a couple of years, bought 0 aircraft, waiting for the F-22, instead of starting replacement/upgrades of existing aircraft. Then Rumsfeld decided he didn't like the F-22 and killed it where it is now, and no one said a word.

Now, we're looking at funding the KC-46, KC-Y, KC-Z, T-X, $3B each for F-15 and B-1 upgrades, F-35, LRS-B, E-8 replacement, and within 6 years starting on the E-3 replacement.

Isnt this the case when it comes to US air to air missiles as well?

The US didnt put effort or priority into developing New generation missiles do to much larger priority on New airframes (stealth).