Jump to content

Best replacement for an F-15 is... an F-15


Recommended Posts

Very interesting article about an advanced version of the F-15.   Not so much about the aircraft itself, that info has been in the press for a while.   The interesting part is (if you believe the article), that the USAF has recently been pushing for this aircraft.  Previously, I just figured it was a longshot sales pitch by BA to keep their F-15 production line staggering on for a few more years. 

 

It's an intriguing idea.  The F-15 would be more than a missile truck for use by F-22's and F-35's, it's got some pretty impressive capabilities of it's own.  And best of all (from the USAF's standpoint), it shouldn't be seen as a threat to their continuing purchases of more F-35's.

 

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/22372/exclusive-unmasking-the-f-15x-boeings-f-15c-d-eagle-replacement-fighter

 

Sounds like there is actually a chance that this could happen...

Edited by 11bee
Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading that and have been keeping up with the news regarding the F-15X program and idea. It makes a lot of sense from differing perspectives, especially since the Air Force can never seem to make up it's mind on what it wants to do. I did like the line about "continuing having to rely on 4th gen aircraft to ensure maximum mission capabilities" or something like that. Reminds me of going back to the whole A-10 subject.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Mizar said:

hope is not going to be a twoseater cause I'm tired of them

Nope, single seat.    I wonder if I that means the D models will stick around longer or if they’ll eventually also lurches new two seaters?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope Boeing gets their hopes up and then gets the rug pulled out from under them. A good airframe that has modern upgrades that will keep it relevant plus save money. Hmmm, where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, it's when Grumman offered an improved version of the Tomcat that would have modernized that airframe, filled the long range strike mission, and saved money. But Boeing got the Super Hornet through instead. Karma would be great in this case! 😊 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Darren Roberts said:

I hope Boeing gets their hopes up and then gets the rug pulled out from under them. A good airframe that has modern upgrades that will keep it relevant plus save money. Hmmm, where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, it's when Grumman offered an improved version of the Tomcat that would have modernized that airframe, filled the long range strike mission, and saved money. But Boeing got the Super Hornet through instead. Karma would be great in this case! 😊 

but they could get more beer cans out of the Tom cat frame! Face it the F15 was always a better air frame, and will be till they make beer cans out of them.

gary

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ChesshireCat said:

but they could get more beer cans out of the Tom cat frame! Face it the F15 was always a better air frame, and will be till they make beer cans out of them.

gary

I'd drink that beer... bet it tastes like freedom.

 

-Ryan

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Air Force seems really ambivalent about the F-15. First they were going to upgrade 179 to Golden Eagles, then around 2014 they started deactivating units and getting rid of them, then they were going to keep them until 2040, now they don't know - they might just keep the F-16. This seems like the best plan, supplement the F-35 without relying on its unknown factors, while upgrading a proven air-frame that can handle almost anything. I don't get the 22 missile configuration though, I can see 20 or 24, so I'm not sure of that is a misprint.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, camus27 said:

 I don't get the 22 missile configuration though, I can see 20 or 24, so I'm not sure of that is a misprint.

Based on the same setup on stations 1/9 as 2/8, I get 24...which is a helluva lot of missiles! I have long stated the USAF needs to build more F-15's. I hope they go with this program. I don't know why they would go with single seaters though...They have not built an F-15C since the early 2000's (I think?) and I'm not sure the tooling is still around. I would think since they are still turning out F-15SA's, it would be easier to just build two-seaters. And, an WSO would never hurt with situational awareness, and would allow for multi-mission capability to be kept. 

 

Aaron 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Highly unlikely.  Given current acquisition timelines, costs, and associated sustainment cost, the air superiority Eagles days are numbered.  Given the current math, the discussion works out something like this:  F-15C, A-10, and F-16 — pick 2, cuz one’s gotta go.  We cannot afford all these 4th Gen platforms while continuing to modernize.  Of those three, one is politically untouchable, and one is in such huge numbers with a massive spares supply line, it’s almost unthinkable to remove it from the inventory.  Oh, and it’s multirole...

 

That leaves...

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/22372/exclusive-unmasking-the-f-15x-boeings-f-15c-d-eagle-replacement-fighter

 

i think it’s a good idea.  There isn’t enough F-22’s to go around and even though the F-35 is here it’s not cheap to operate.  Combine that and given the fact that the C/D’s we have now need to have costly upgrades at some point in the near future (rewinding) I think it would make sense to just buy new with all the upgrades and then some.  This could be why the Air Force cancelled EPAWS on the fighter eagle fleet but kept it on the strike eagle fleet because they were thinking about doing this for a while now. There’s lots of pluses I think to buying the F-15X.  Many of them mentioned in the article I linked above. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Geez, what a great idea! Something I was thinking and advocating with my friends for years now. The best example of why is the F-22. So expensive we only made less than 200. We need far more than what was produced. Look at what the Russians do. The SU-27 is almost as old as the F-15 yet the Russians continuously update, upgrade it, change it around. They give it different numbers but it is basically the same aircraft from the mid 70's. Everyone looks at it like it is a new aircraft but it is still a 40 year old airframe and not nearly as good as the F-15. I was wondering why we didn't do the same with the best fighter ever designed since it was still in production?  I know everyone likes new and shiny but this only makes so much sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you add the electronic gobble de goop to an F-15 air frame why is it's proven

capability less than an unproven F-22 or F-35. Just curious what are the kill ratios

for the F-22 and F-35. Are they proven better? Can they walk the walk or just talk

the talk?---John

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Waco said:

Highly unlikely.  Given current acquisition timelines, costs, and associated sustainment cost, the air superiority Eagles days are numbered.  Given the current math, the discussion works out something like this:  F-15C, A-10, and F-16 — pick 2, cuz one’s gotta go.  We cannot afford all these 4th Gen platforms while continuing to modernize.  Of those three, one is politically untouchable, and one is in such huge numbers with a massive spares supply line, it’s almost unthinkable to remove it from the inventory.  Oh, and it’s multirole...

 

That leaves...

Then bring in more F-16 Block 70's then. But I don't see that happening either. Honestly, as much as I would LOVE to see more F-15's built, I agree with you. I don't think new F-15's are going to happen.  OR F-16's for that matter. Or new F-22's as some have suggested elsewhere. I think that we've put all our eggs in the F-35 basket. 

 

Aaron 

Edited by strikeeagle801
Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they proven better?”

 

Yes.

 

“Can they walk the walk or just talk

the talk?”

 

Proven more effective, survivable, lethal, many times over.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Waco said:

These new build F-15s have been been proven to cost as much as or more than late lot F-22s and current production F-35s for significantly less capability.

Boeing has touted a guaranteed fly away price of the F-15X as $95M/copy. They also say they would eat any cost overruns.  A restarted F-22 prod line would cost tens of billions of dollars. I'd certainly like to see it reopened but man that is a lot of scratch and with the recent 1.5 trillion dollar tax cut the F-15X looks like a far more financially doable alternative. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The "financially doable alternative" is to retire them.  E

 

very other alternative costs money, and apparently that money belongs to the F-35 and Shall Not Be Touched.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Given that the military is spending like drunken sailors these days (no offense to my brothers in the Navy), I see no reason why the USAF can't have their cake and eat it too.  Plus, unless the gist of the article is wrong, this push is coming from the USAF.  It's not a BA sales campaign.   If true and the USAF really wants to go this route, I see no reason why it can't happen.     

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...