Boeing F-15EX / F-15QA and related variants

NMaude said:
An F-15 Wild Weasel variant I suspect wouldn't be difficult as most of the mission specific avionics I suppose could be packed into the F-15's two FAST-packs.
Click to expand...
The antennas would still need to be routed elsewhere, but yes, the FAST packs were definitely the primary volume people had in mind when that was being proposed.
 
Alex Hollings from Sandboxx has just put out this video about the latest Eagle variant after the Pentagon's director released its 2024 OT&E report:


Last month, the Pentagon’s Director of Operational Testing and Evaluation released its massive 2024 report — a nearly 500-page tome detailing the testing, performance, and results of dozens of Defense systems, including Boeing’s upgraded Eagle variant, the F-15EX.
Click to expand...

It would appear that it might be able to go toe-to-toe with the likes of the J-20.
 
Scott Kenny said:
The antennas would still need to be routed elsewhere, but yes, the FAST packs were definitely the primary volume people had in mind when that was being proposed.
Click to expand...

I'd have pulled the gun and used the ammo drum volume first.

We have talked about the F-15 WW proposal before. It got as far as some limited flight test, which revealed that the under-nose sensor fairing caused some directional instability at higher speeds. Probably could have been fixed but it certainly didn't help.

Post in thread 'McDonnell-Douglas F-15 Projects' https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/mcdonnell-douglas-f-15-projects.2/post-163769
 
NMaude said:
Alex Hollings from Sandboxx has just put out this video about the latest Eagle variant after the Pentagon's director released its 2024 OT&E report:




It would appear that it might be able to go toe-to-toe with the likes of the J-20.
Click to expand...
You know, I was just thinking about this the other day, so giving gen 4-4.5 fighters 5th gen capabilities... Have glass fared well, could the Raptor and Lightning II "mirror tiles" play a part in direct applique stealth?
 
FlyGuy369 said:
You know, I was just thinking about this the other day, so giving gen 4-4.5 fighters 5th gen capabilities... Have glass fared well, could the Raptor and Lightning II "mirror tiles" play a part in direct applique stealth?
Click to expand...

Within the context of NGAD, I've been thinking the same. If the Raptor is the unanswerable weapon of the skies (per DCS experts :)), why are we reinventing the wheel? Add those "stealth" fuel tanks and a one-time ECM for the real-deal... like everyone else. If it's expense to maintain, put NGAD-$$$ into making your logistics/servicing footprint better + cheaper. Yes, restarting the production line is expensive, but to the layman it would appear on paper to be much less expensive than starting from scratch.

It feels like they're "throwing the baby out with the bathwater." I mean, with all due respect to the F-15, She has never been shot down. Why is She obsolete again? We still use Viper-Cs in many capacities, etc. I would love for an expert to articulate for a layman why the F-22 is suddenly useless. Even if She isn't invincible like before (in theory*) is there really Zero confidence that the F-22 can be dominate in a competitive fight? Same goes for the F-15. The IDF still makes very effective use of the Ra'am.
 
Last edited:
VishnuOsiris said:
Within the context of NGAD, I've been thinking the same. If the Raptor is the unanswerable weapon of the skies (per DCS experts :)), why are we reinventing the wheel? Add those "stealth" fuel tanks and a one-time ECM for the real-deal... like everyone else. If it's expense to maintain, put NGAD-$$$ into making your logistics/servicing footprint better + cheaper. Yes, restarting the production line is expensive, but to the layman it would appear on paper to be much less expensive than starting from scratch.

It feels like they're "throwing the baby out with the bathwater." I mean, with all due respect to the F-15, She has never been shot down. Why is She obsolete again? We still use Viper-Cs in many capacities, etc. I would love for an expert to articulate for a layman why the F-22 is suddenly useless. Even if She isn't invincible like before (in theory*) is there really Zero confidence that the F-22 can be dominate in a competitive fight? Same goes for the F-15. The IDF still makes very effective use of the Ra'am.
Click to expand...
Insufficient range for the Pacific.

The F-22 was designed for fighting over Europe, basically flying from London to Berlin and back. As was the F-15 before it.

Not for flying from Hawaii or Midway or Alaska to Taiwan and back, which is what the current need is.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Insufficient range for the Pacific.

The F-22 was designed for fighting over Europe, basically flying from London to Berlin and back. As was the F-15 before it.

Not for flying from Hawaii or Midway or Alaska to Taiwan and back, which is what the current need is.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. But now I'm confused... I recall reading numerous commentaries over the years about how ending the F-22 line prematurely has led to terrible circumstances for Pacific Pivot capability sets. If I recall correctly, I've been reading that argument for the better part of a decade, and how ending production was a big mistake, etc. Is this talk nonsense?
 
VishnuOsiris said:
Fair enough. But now I'm confused... I recall reading numerous commentaries over the years about how ending the F-22 line prematurely has led to terrible circumstances for Pacific Pivot capability sets. If I recall correctly, I've been reading that argument for the better part of a decade, and how ending production was a big mistake, etc. Is this talk nonsense?
Click to expand...
I mean, F-22 has a longer range with full weapons load than an F-15, just because all the weapons are internal. So the F-22 is better than the F-15 by that measure.

But that's still not enough range.

Edit: F-22 combat range is only 850km, though that number does include 185km supercruising. If you don't supercruise, they can fly 1100km. With dual 600gal external tanks an F-22 can reach 1400km (with 185km supercruising), so could likely stretch that to 1650km subsonic.
 
Last edited:
The issue with the F-22 is primarily numbers and availability, with range being a weakness as well. It is still a world class aircraft and the USAF is heavily updating it to keep it relevant (IRST pods, wrap around EO/IR sensors, low drag/RCS tanks). But even if there were more of them or the endurance was drastically increased, it does represent an old design with very out of date avionics that are hard to replace. A newer generation offensive air system would still be necessary.

Current plan is to fly F-22 until whatever comes out of NGAD replaces it. If there is a major redesign/requirement change, that might be awhile.
 
VishnuOsiris said:
Fair enough. But now I'm confused... I recall reading numerous commentaries over the years about how ending the F-22 line prematurely has led to terrible circumstances for Pacific Pivot capability sets. If I recall correctly, I've been reading that argument for the better part of a decade, and how ending production was a big mistake, etc. Is this talk nonsense?
Click to expand...

Would the INDO PACOM and PACAF leaders want an additional 200 F-22A's now? Yes. Absolutely. Would they want to re-start F-22A production at the expense of the 'F-22 replacement' NGAD? I doubt it. NGAD will be more tailored to that theater and will hopefully be significantly better positioned to counter threats in the 2030-2050 timeframe than the F-22A raptor which became operational twenty years ago. It all boils down to time horizons. Had the F-22A restart decision happened a decade ago or even at the 2018 NDS we would be seeing a/c deliveries now. A decision now will essentially kill the 'early 2030s' NGAD and dramatically weaken capabilities in the 2030s and beyond.
 
Last edited:
Scott Kenny said:
The antennas would still need to be routed elsewhere, but yes, the FAST packs were definitely the primary volume people had in mind when that was being proposed.
Click to expand...
Out of curiosity, could an EX Eagle be made to carry HARMs?
 
732 said:
Out of curiosity, could an EX Eagle be made to carry HARMs?
Click to expand...
Probably. HARMs do need a dedicated guidance computer on the plane (see the F-4G and F-16CJ), but the airframe has volume available for it. Pretty sure they speak 1760 data bus just fine, but the Eagle in general is only carrying 2 HARMs. One under each wing. The CFTs would be carrying other stuff like JSOWs and SDBs.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Probably. HARMs do need a dedicated guidance computer on the plane (see the F-4G and F-16CJ), but the airframe has volume available for it. Pretty sure they speak 1760 data bus just fine, but the Eagle in general is only carrying 2 HARMs. One under each wing. The CFTs would be carrying other stuff like JSOWs and SDBs.
Click to expand...
I believe the outer wing pylons that the EX and the other latest models have can technically each carry one HARM as well. So in-theory an F-15EX could carry four.

A lot of aircraft can be made to carry and fire off HARMs but with less precision than you get with something with the specialized avionics for the job like the F-4G and F-16CJ. In this reduced capability I imagine it is more of something to be fired off in in the event of a surprise SAM launch.
 
Colonial-Marine said:
I believe the outer wing pylons that the EX and the other latest models have can technically each carry one HARM as well. So in-theory an F-15EX could carry four.
Click to expand...
I was honestly assuming that there'd be a pair of AMRAAMs on them, Sidewinders on the inner pylon shoulders, A2G on the CFTs.
 
Given the massive advances in avionics and related electronics since 1983 if the USAF decided to develop and F-15G Wild Weasel would it avoid the need to have an underslung nose-pod?
 
NMaude said:
Given the massive advances in avionics and related electronics since 1983 if the USAF decided to develop and F-15G Wild Weasel would it avoid the need to have an underslung nose-pod?
Click to expand...
They'd still have to either remove the gun (as happened with the F-4G) or stick all the Weasel bits into the FAST Packs.
 
Scott Kenny said:
They'd still have to either remove the gun (as happened with the F-4G) or stick all the Weasel bits into the FAST Packs.
Click to expand...
The F-15 has the gun in the wing root while the F-4E had the gun under the nose in the same spot that seemed to be ideal for the ESM gear the Wild Weasels had. So maybe the F-15 could keep it unless they needed that space in the wing root for something else.
 
Worth noting that the F-15SA, which the EX is based on, is capable of using HARM without as far as I can tell a dedicated system.
 
Ozair said:
Worth noting that the F-15SA, which the EX is based on, is capable of using HARM without as far as I can tell a dedicated system.
Click to expand...

There are of course several modes for HARM, and they could be using it in the Target-of-Opportunity, Self-Protection, or Preemptive modes, which don't require an advanced RHAWS. The more advanced modes require the more sophisticated sensors in Wild Weasel or equivalent aircraft.
 
Scott Kenny said:
but only the "full of fuel" versions got paid for.
Click to expand...

Unfortunate and shortsightedly but on the other hand didn't some years ago a South Korean outfit for the Silent Eagle programme develop a modified FAST-pack that instead carried AIM-120s internally in a sort of add-on weapons-bay?
 
Last edited:
NMaude said:
Unfortunate and shortsighted but on the other hand didn't some years ago a South Korean outfit for the Silent Eagle programme develop a modified FAST-pack that instead carried AIM-120s internally in a sort of add-on weapons-bay?
Click to expand...
To be honest, F-15 is big enough that its RCS is huge with or without AMRAAM, and it is so big that drag of AMRAAM is negligible. I see no point for internal carrier of AMRAAM on F-15
 
Colonial-Marine said:
The F-15 has the gun in the wing root while the F-4E had the gun under the nose in the same spot that seemed to be ideal for the ESM gear the Wild Weasels had. So maybe the F-15 could keep it unless they needed that space in the wing root for something else.
Click to expand...
Delicious space is arguably ammo drum, which is quite big.

As a mind exercise, I wonder if it's possible to make midband jamming/weapon bay(ARGM-sized) FAST packs, moving additional fuel mostly to the central drop tank.
It largely resolves the array obstruction issue, producing very clean escort/suppression aircraft.
 
Last edited:
Ainen said:
Delicious space is arguably ammo drum, which is quite big.

As a mind exercise, I wonder if it's possible to make midband jamming/weapon bay(ARGM-sized) FAST packs, moving additional fuel mostly to the central drop tank.
It largely resolves the array obstruction issue, producing very clean escort/suppression aircraft.
Click to expand...
Good point. The F-15E and the later generation of Eagles used a smaller ammo drum than the very generous 940 round drum of the original A-D variants, but I'm not actually sure what they did with the space gained from that change. Probably more avionics I'd guess.
 
Ainen said:
Delicious space is arguably ammo drum, which is quite big.

As a mind exercise, I wonder if it's possible to make midband jamming/weapon bay(ARGM-sized) FAST packs, moving additional fuel mostly to the central drop tank.
It largely resolves the array obstruction issue, producing very clean escort/suppression aircraft.
Click to expand...

F-15E and following have a much more compact ammo box though. 500 vs 940 rounds with parts of the reloading assembly or something even protruding in an underfuselage fairing.

I would put the jamming gear on the centerline. 360° coverage not blocked by underwing stores and no mods to CFTs required. Similar to the EF-111.

Colonial-Marine said:
Good point. The F-15E and the later generation of Eagles used a smaller ammo drum than the very generous 940 round drum of the original A-D variants, but I'm not actually sure what they did with the space gained from that change. Probably more avionics I'd guess.
Click to expand...

The space was needed for the internal ECM (ALQ-135). In the single seat A/C Eagles, this is installed in the bay behind the cockpit. B/D Eagles have the second seat there but no internal ECM.
 
3 different lots with 9 aircraft produced is not something anyone would be bragging of...
Tell me, it's about left and right hand side driving?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom