USAF Actually Buying F-15Xs?

originally posted by: anzha
a reply to: Zaphod58

What are we betting gets cut for this stupidity?

If this **** gets anywhere and they recap most of the F-15 fleet, it would certainly push back PCA.

a reply to: thebozeian

It very much will depend upon where, and why, the shooting starts--assuming it does, which I just can't see, as all sides have far too much to lose.

South Korea will. Japan will. Everyone else? God alone knows.

a reply to: seagull

www.newsweek.com...

I'd say Shanahan has decided the guard dogs are all away...

a reply to: anzha

Well, it certainly does cast a shadow on things, doesn't it?? Since the F15 is a product of his "former" company...((sigh)).

I wonder what's really behind the early ouster of Mad Dog? But that's a topic for another day, or thread, anyway.

F-15 and Su-27 have a flip up brake. Su-35 does not have that kind of brake. I wonder if F-15X retains that brake or if it has a new brake?

qph.fs.quoracdn.net...

qph.fs.quoracdn.net...

a reply to: zukli

It's the same basic design with improved architecture and a new wing.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: zukli

It's the same basic design with improved architecture and a new wing.

Yeah. I wonder if F-15X does away with the 45 years old flip up brake and have a new brake like the one Su-35 has. Su-35 is also a redesign of an old design.

Shanahan is the one pushing for F-15X because he is a former Boeing exec. But it is unlikely USAF will end up buying F-15X because the design is too old dating back to 1970. To put it in perspective, F-15 entered service in 1976. Superman movie came out in 1978. The next defense secretary will likely cancel the order and come 2020 election Trump will likely lose election and the new Democratic defense minister will take office in 2021 and I'm sure you all know this means F-15X being so expensive will not make it.

a reply to: zukli

No. It's exactly the same externality, which was my point. One of the ideas behind it is that you don't have to pay extra for all new parts and flight testing, which you'd have to do if they made a major change like that. It works just fine as is.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: zukli

No. It's exactly the same externality, which was my point. One of the ideas behind it is that you don't have to pay extra for all new parts and flight testing, which you'd have to do if they made a major change like that. It works just fine as is.

Correct. F-15X reminds me of another useless thing in the Russia air force. Su-34. Insufficient as a bomb truck. Insufficient as a fighter. F-15X is just that. Insufficient as a bomb truck. Insufficient as a fighter. USAF should concentrate on 6th generation instead of bringing back 1960s and 1970s planes like F-4 and F-15.

Moreover, F-15X is single seat only, which makes it even less capable as an attack plane compared to Su-34 which has side by side twin seats.

China, Russia, EU are all slated to have 6th gen first flights by mid 2020s. America is already lagging behind in hypersonic technology and now also in 6th gen development. Bringing back legacy planes won't help America being competitive with China, Russia, EU.

a reply to: zukli

China, Russia, EU are all slated to have 6th gen first flights by mid 2020s

Exactly where do you get your information from? NO European 6th Gen effort will be anywhere near ready by the mid 2020's and that most definitely includes Russia who cant even get serious production started on its 5th Gen product. It has been very publicly stated that the Franco/German effort wont see first flight until probably the mid 2030's at best. Even Britain cannot realistically do much before then regardless of who they partner with. I'm not even convinced that China or the US will get a 6th Gen program flying in even the earliest stages by the mid 2020 time frame.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: tadaman

The problem is that spending $65-100M on an airframe that won't be relevant in 10-12 years means that we ARE ignoring other capabilities. That money is coming from somewhere, so where do we pull it from? We currently need a new system to replace the E-8C, to put new engines on the B-52, to buy the B-21, buy the JSF, spending for the T-X buy, development of the PCA, pretty soon a new E-3 platform, the KC-46 buy, two new tanker programs.... So what do we cut to buy an airframe that we'll be getting rid of in less than 20 years?

The F-15 is a bad platform for the Pacific. You need something with a lot of range, that can minimize support needs. That's one reason PCA is looking at being something closer to B-58 size and less of a fighter platform. You want something that can be a persistent presence in the target area, and less of an in and out drag your tanker with you platform.

This statement confuses when against your other statements. So buying more F-35's is your answer to this Asia/Pacific problem? If my memory serves me correct, the primary purpose of the F-35 was to replace the F-16 and A-10's. It seems that it is answer for the F-16, not sure about the A-10. The F-22 was supposed to replace all of the F-15 C/D's and a neocon sabotaged that. So we are left with F-15's that cannot be replaced by F-22's. It seems to me that no one is considering that argument. Also, there is the fact that Israel, which has already used the F-35 in limited conflict, has decided to go ahead and augment it's F-15 fleet as well.

I mean until we see China pumping out hundreds of stealth fighters, I am not sure where the concern over stealth is anymore. As for Russian SAM's, they claim they have the answer to stealth now as well. And maybe they do, and maybe we do as well. Maybe that is where the pressure is. Someone has seen that stealth is about to be a non-issue because of newer technology and figures we may as well go cheaper and better to maintain than stealth.

Stealth technology is definitely over 20 years old now. I am sure some players have figured out how to detect it.

I also find it humorous that our only Russian Air Force troll somehow hates the idea of the F-15X.

a reply to: Fools

No, my other statements match up. I don't want to see us spending money on programs that aren't going to advance our tech lead. The F-15X uses some new tech, but isn't truly useful in the early stages of a peer or near peer war. And it's taking money from other programs that we need that are more vital.

Stealth technology is definitely over 20 years old now. I am sure some players have figured out how to detect it.

You really think that stealth today is the same as it was 20 years ago? Just like any other technology it advances. Stealth on the F-35 is significantly more advanced than stealth on the first gen F-22.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Fools

No, my other statements match up. I don't want to see us spending money on programs that aren't going to advance our tech lead. The F-15X uses some new tech, but isn't truly useful in the early stages of a peer or near peer war. And it's taking money from other programs that we need that are more vital.

Stealth technology is definitely over 20 years old now. I am sure some players have figured out how to detect it.

You really think that stealth today is the same as it was 20 years ago? Just like any other technology it advances. Stealth on the F-35 is significantly more advanced than stealth on the first gen F-22.

I really don't know what to think. I suspect that we are years ahead of anyone else. At least in regard to aircraft dominance. However, I do not believe the F-35 is a can do all aircraft as it as being sold. I do like it, actually even love it. But I have always been a person that believes the "don't put all your eggs in one basket" is a very meaningful allegory.

And, I really don't see how an f-35 could ever fill the shoes of an F-15 for what it was originally designed to do.

a reply to: Fools

The F-35 wasn't designed to do what the F-15 was so it won't do it as well. The F-35 and pretty much every one of our F platforms are at a major disadvantage in the Pacific due to the ranges involved. That's one big reason that a limited air to air was talked about for the Raider.

originally posted by: Fools
This statement confuses when against your other statements. So buying more F-35's is your answer to this Asia/Pacific problem? If my memory serves me correct, the primary purpose of the F-35 was to replace the F-16 and A-10's. It seems that it is answer for the F-16, not sure about the A-10. The F-22 was supposed to replace all of the F-15 C/D's and a neocon sabotaged that. So we are left with F-15's that cannot be replaced by F-22's. It seems to me that no one is considering that argument. Also, there is the fact that Israel, which has already used the F-35 in limited conflict, has decided to go ahead and augment it's F-15 fleet as well.

As Zaphod said, the money has to come from somewhere. Buying those F-15X does not necessarily mean buying less F-35s. It's unlikley the Air Force will touch the JSF program. I barely is on track now and needs to move to full rate production very soon or the entire thing will fall apart. They MIGHT slightly reduce the F-35A procurement numbers is they get some additional customers eager to buy aircrafts as soon as possible, but the bulk of the money has come from somewhere else.
Especially if we are not talking about half a squadron but the replacement of the entire remaining F-15C fleet.
So what do you want to cut for a 4.5 Gen Legacy Jet primarily used for home defense?
The Air Force has not many programs on the books it can afford to do without if they dont want to shoot themselves in the foot vs China.

A war against a near peer in the Pacific if not comparable to playing Cold War in Europe. Fighter Jets are the wrong tool for the job, they simply lack the necessary range. Especially when the bases are gone. Legacy platform will be next to unusable inside the Chinese A2AD zones. And so on.
To fight and defeat the Chinese the Air Force needs an entirely different toolbox. They are on the right track in some areas, but the last thing they need right now is being forced to purchase unsuited equipment.

I do understand that the F-15X looks appealing. Its a great airplane, no doubt about it. And indeed, for many nations it would be a great choice. But it is not what the US needs. Yes, the F-22 was supposed to replace the entire F-15C fleet and because of stupid politics that didnt happen.
The answer to this however is not to chase a dream gone by but focus on what is at hand.
Today the F-15Cs are almost exclusively used in Homeland Air Defense. There are three Air Force squadrons flying F-15C abroad. Two at Kadena AB which are dead within minutes of a full blown confrontation against China. And one in Europe at RAF Lakenheath, flying in a mixed Wing with F-15E. The solution here is obvious, switch out the European Squadron with F-15Es from the States and close down Kadena. The rest of the F-15C fleet is distributed across various Air Guard units all over the States. They are used for Air policing Mission or *intercepting* the occasional Tu-95 over the Atlantic.
And thats it.

The reality here is that those units can be retired today. The air policing mission - while important - can be covered by any other Air Force or Air Guard unit flying whichever fighter. You dont need a freaking F-15 to intercept some airliner. And you sure as hell dont need brand new F-15X to do this job. IF absolutely necessary just have them fly second hand F-16s. Plenty of them around.

Anyway, since you mention the Israelis. Entirely different circumstances. They wont procure F-15X but a more advanced version of the F-15SA which is based on the F-15E. IE strike platform, not glorified Legacy Air Superiority Fighter the Air Force will be forced to buy and use.
The Israelis don’t use their F-15 fleets for Home Air Defense anyway. They have extensively modified them and employ them as strike platforms and communication hubs. And they face different foes with next to no NextGen Air Defense Systems. The US is facing a foe happily building up the craziest Anti Access/Area Denial zone the world has ever seen, specifically designed to keep the US out.
So while the Israelis were forced to buy F-15s in a now or never kind of deal (before this craziness the line was about to close) to keep using their F-15 fleet for as long as possible, the US faces an entirely different reality.
In which legacy jets, no matter how great they are on paper, have no place anymore.

I mean until we see China pumping out hundreds of stealth fighters, I am not sure where the concern over stealth is anymore. As for Russian SAM's, they claim they have the answer to stealth now as well. And maybe they do, and maybe we do as well. Maybe that is where the pressure is. Someone has seen that stealth is about to be a non-issue because of newer technology and figures we may as well go cheaper and better to maintain than stealth.
Stealth technology is definitely over 20 years old now. I am sure some players have figured out how to detect it.

It’s less about whether or not China is pumping out hundreds of stealth fighters. Its about which tools are necessary to be able to operate inside their A2/AD zone. How do you think the F-15X will be able to operate inside the engagement envelop of an S400? Ever looked at what the Israelis have to do to keep the ancient S200s in check since they cant outright kill them?

So which tools do you need? No jets period. Not 4th, not 5th not even 6th gen. The Air Force needs platforms with a combat radius up to 2000nm to operate in the Pacific ten or twenty years from now. China is already able to take out most US and allied bases near their operating theater.
Those few bases in the Pacific which are still outside their striking range are not able to host hundreds of fighter jets. Plus support assets, IE tankers and AEW aircraft. Hence the US would either need to build airbases on every freaking island between the Chinese Cost and Hawaii or they need platforms which can operate interpedently of support over extreme distances.
The F-15X cant do that. Neither can the F-35 or the F-22 for that matter. Which is why they should push PCA like there is no tomorrow and not be forced to purchase the greatest plane for the last Cold War.

And as for Stealth being a non issue down the line – same as with aircraft carriers. If you opponent is doing the best they can to catch up to you it wont be outdated anytime soon.
Also to expand a bit further, detection is not detection. Yes, there might be some crazy Chinese long range passive radars installed at certain bases at their coastline. Its also very likely you could track a hot stealth jet with a modern IRST on fighter jet over ranges greater than visual range.
But this hardly negates stealth in an actual conflict. Certain major Chinese radar stations would be among the first targets in every shooting war. Might even use very special assets for such high value targets. Next on the list is any infrastructure they need to close the kill chain. War is not a game in which everyone on one side has the entire picture. An awful lot of things need to be happen until you get a interceptor in a position to even think about using IRST to find and track something. And the stealth platform will always be able to dictate the terms of such an engagement, IE win or disengage.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Fools

That's one big reason that a limited air to air was talked about for the Raider.

You think nothing came of it?