Meet the Proposed F-15X, carrier of 24 AAM or SDB

a reply to: anzha

That was 6 years ago. Think about just phone technology since then. Go back and read my article from 2018. They are looking at MRM's now, which means they already have them aboard somewhere.

a reply to: lakenheath24

And you think an F-4 can't down a Reaper? Having other aircraft in the area ties up other assets that could be used elsewhere.

Uhm, I've never once said UAVs WEREN'T the future. So nice try there.

But hey, again, what do I know about a good force mix. Just go with all stealth and UAVs. That'll work great.

High tech rah rah! It's awesome!

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: lakenheath24

And you think an F-4 can't down a Reaper? Having other aircraft in the area ties up other assets that could be used elsewhere.

Uhm, I've never once said UAVs WEREN'T the future. So nice try there.

But hey, again, what do I know about a good force mix. Just go with all stealth and UAVs. That'll work great.

High tech rah rah! It's awesome!

The length of operational time for this new version sounds impressive. An aircraft is only good as long as it's up and running and flying. Will it fare well against 5th gen? Not great probably. It will mop up all the rest though.

a reply to: lakenheath24

It was actually far, far further back than that! Iraq hasn't been shooting at American Predators for more than 6 years.

Drone/UA/UCAV tech most definitely has improved and immensely.

However, I have yet to see anything in the public domain that suggests the US is moving to fully unmanned fighters. If anything, the US has been resisting air to air combat by UAVs and even in some areas strike UAVs: look at what happened with the UCLASS.

The Kratos Valkyrie might a way forward with this, but we will see.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I like how you skirt answering ANY of my points. That's ok though Ego is important to you..I get it....Mod and all gotta be correct about everything. Nothing about last date of an Eagle A/A fight? Future of Dogfight doctrine? A/A equipped Reaper controlled by F-35's? Etc, Etc.

Just drivel about a 1960's Iraqi F-4...with no spares and a penchant for Korean era tech gonna harass an F-15. As if. A good force mix? Like what? Throw in a couple P-51's with some GPS?


The OP was about the F-15X. What role will it fill? Current platforms, combined with drone tech will saturate an AOR with the tactics I linked to. No need to go all 60's with "new" F-15's, although I love em.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: RadioRobert

Because you don't need an all stealth air force. But hey, what do I know. High tech rules.

You absolutely don't. But the reasons to recap with an F-15X instead of increasing the F-35 buy would all be $$$, and the numbers don't look very promising.

Made up requirements: you want to retire extra airframes and replace 400 older legacy airframes as it an interim for PCA.

Options: Buy 400 new Eagles? Or for the same money, you can expand your F-35-buy by 325 (or more with economies of scale) airframes?

$65M x 400= $80M x 325

And when you can cut the entire F-15C/D/X lines from maintenance, training, spares, supplies and replace them with more F-35's and streamline, you see even bigger savings (or alternatively, even more F-35's for the same money).


If you could rehab and refit old Eagles for $30-40M, that numbers look a lot better for that option because you are right, you absolutely don't need an F-35 for many missions. You just need a truck. But Boeing is trying to keep the lines open on legacy projects because they don't have much in the hopper for future production so they aren't pitching that. Once the lines close, they won't come back. Even limited runs to keep them open leave a chance for follow-on orders. So it's all about the keeping them open at any cost right now.

Unfortunately for Boeing, right now the maths suck. I don't think you can squeeze the cost of even a 400-unit run on a big twin-engine fighter enough to make the numbers work in it's favour.

a reply to: anzha

I think it's inevitable. As stated earlier, last year 60% of USAF missions were drones. That is because the area was uncontested though. Most importantly is Russia/China's 6th gen production and if it's any good, and can our frontline fighters defeat them. Not just stealth mind you, but weapons, tactics, etc. it's not like they participate in dissimilar air training! That's why you get so many "incursions" into others airspace. Gotta test those defences ya know.

a reply to: lakenheath24

The UAVs of today are built around the idea they are to be used in a permissive environment against combatants that are not our peers. That's why they are able to do most of the leg work.

Inevitable or not, the move to a UCAV force for higher end combat, near peer confrontations is not happening now. I would even speculate it will not happen for another 10 years at least. There are vast amounts of command and control issues for UCAVs in a EW contested environment. if there's ever a hot war, those sat links are toast unless we get seriously armored sats or huge swarms of them that can be readily resupplied in a very quick manner.

Loyal Wingman and Kratos' Valkyrie as encouraging for their potential. However, until they become programs of record, I'm not holding my breath.

I can't speak to a personal knowledge of such things, but the Janes links plus the -16 guys chat, and other, lends credence to the theory that drones are A/A capable. And we are talking 9/120's now. These could easily carry the software to be integrated into other AF/NATO platforms. I can see the future being an AWACS controlling 2-300 drones with 4x missiles each. Way cheaper and you still have human control, or autonomous control depending on the theater.

www.f-16.net...

a reply to: lakenheath24

You can be sure the Ruskies wont be far behind...

nationalinterest.org...

The way I read this is that the F-15x would be basically a missile truck. The F-35 and F-22 could "kick in the door" so to speak and then relay target info to the F-15x which would be hanging back waiting to fire. Almost like a smaller version of the "B1-R" concept.

a reply to: lakenheath24

I am 100% certain there have been exciting tech demos, probably even inclusive of very advanced UCAVs. However, there are a lot of programs that go through and do various tech demos, but never make it to a program of record. the transition is even called the valley of death for a reason.

The Russians are NOT going to be the ones close behind. Russian unmanned tech needs...vast improvement. The Chinese are far, far ahead of the Russians in UCAV technology. They may even have a fighter UCAV like you describe, but its not entirely certain. Dark Sword was discussed here already. Shadow Star has been mentioned and flies next year, though its likely an attack bird.

Barring the Chinese being successful with the Dark Sword, I'd bet the fighter UCAV has another human generation to go before it gets to be a thing in the USAF. For better or worse.

a reply to: lakenheath24

I didn't bother answering any of your points because I don't see the point of arguing while I'm having fun on vacation.

I didn't say they were going to harass an F-15, I said they were going to harass UAVs, but again, nice try.

Rog. Gotcha. So why bother replying at all? Better slather on that SPF 100 pretty thick. a reply to: Zaphod58

a reply to: lakenheath24

Something to do between aircraft arrivals.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Zaph I know we could use more 15's to replace the one's that are a little long in the tooth, but does it not make sense at this point to field more F35's until PCA/6th gen comes online considering the future life expectancy of any 4th gen fighters?

a reply to: Bfirez

Eggs meet basket. Would you use F-35s in Afghanistan? Because we're heading that way. The Chinese have the right idea. Build an effective really long range missile, and sling it on your less survivable platforms and let them stay back out of range. Send your more effective platforms forward and hunt.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I mean at that point why not go with something like an a-29? You thinking more a pacific style fight where we need the deep magazines?

a reply to: Bfirez

We're going to need something with range, and deep magazines. You don't want to tie up bombers, because you get into all kinds of interesting things with weight and numbers. So you need something smaller.

I can just imagine.....you drag the family to visit the boneyard every year? Lol


a reply to: Zaphod58