Why would they?
Why would they?
It would be a pointless redesign of a tertiary system for what is supposed to be an off the shelf buy. The whole advantage of buying the EX is that it is essentially a QA/SA with all of the development work done and paid for by other countries.
Well yes, but the F15 is NOT a future plane. Putting the Gau22 in would require quite a lot of work, since it and it's ammo system are NOT the same size as that of the m61, nor is it's recoil impulse the same. Putting it in will require quite a bit of structural work for little gain, and a complete recertification as well, since the recoil impulse will ALSO play merry havoc with the electronics, which will all have to be tested for shock damage.
It's not just a simple take one out, put another in swap.
dark sidius
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 1 August 2008
- Messages
- 865
- Reaction score
- 623
Realy having the same F-15 of Qatar and Saudi is realy a step back for USAF capacity its a waste of money this program putting Billions on old platform instead of new one is a fatal strategic error the same of stopping the F-22 line. Building new with old stay old.
@dark sidius : Soon a thousand of F-35 and you worry of lagging capacities for a handful of F-15?
We're going to sell AGM-183As to the Saudis and Qataris?
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,889
- Reaction score
- 10,949
How did you get that from his comment?
Sarcasm aimed at the F-15EX haters. The F-15EX is going to fill a much different role for the USAF.
dark sidius
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 1 August 2008
- Messages
- 865
- Reaction score
- 623
What is the top speed of a F-15 EX with full air-air 2 tanks and 12 aim-120 capacity ?
An american Eagle or an arabian swallow... sorry, Eagle ? (runs for cover... couldn't resist).
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 21,147
- Reaction score
- 12,247
Hey, that's my bomb shelter!
- Joined
- 2 August 2006
- Messages
- 3,206
- Reaction score
- 1,316
I think the B-2 already took care of that.
If the F-15EX is used to replace C's as planned, they probably just leave the seat empty. If those squadrons get converted to an attack role, or the EXs end up replacing the Echos as they time out, then they will get a back seater. I suspect that while the new F-15s will start our as air superiority replacements, they will eventually transition to other uses that take advantage of the large size and variety of its external stores load.
(Yasotay, Archibald and Gray Havoc are vaporized by a 40 000 pounds bunker-buster bomb dropped from a B-2)
D
Deleted member 18851
Guest
Could have interesting implications for F-15EX use.
www.thedrive.com
F-15 Eagle Seen Loaded With Loyal Wingman Drone For Previously Unknown Tests
F-15s carrying loyal wingmen into the fight is a fascinating proposition, but what these tests could be for beyond that is even more intriguing.
www.thedrive.com
- Joined
- 9 October 2009
- Messages
- 21,147
- Reaction score
- 12,247
Oy! What about my Invul save?!
Maybe if they built the original 132. The point being in a few years here there will be a lot of experienced aircrew with lot of years left to go who'd rather be flying than driving a desk, if the pilot mafia will consent...
Notice that Kratos mentioned air launch capability early. Also in the video with the Harrier, the drones are presented canted on each side of the aircraft what seemed odd at the time. I guess now we know why: loading geometry.Could have interesting implications for F-15EX use.
F-15 Eagle Seen Loaded With Loyal Wingman Drone For Previously Unknown Tests
F-15s carrying loyal wingmen into the fight is a fascinating proposition, but what these tests could be for beyond that is even more intriguing.
How Much Does An F-15EX Cost? Boeing And The Air Force Don’t Agree.
An Air Force order for up to 200 of Boeing’s new version of the F-15 came after a lengthy debate over whether to buy more copies of the less expensive 4.5th generation fighter or fewer copies of a more expensive, more advanced F-35. But it's not clear the F-15EX will actually be cheaper.
www.forbes.com
marauder2048
"I should really just relax"
- Joined
- 19 November 2013
- Messages
- 3,157
- Reaction score
- 911
The argument is that the $7 - $10 million acquisition premium for the F-15EX over the F-35 is offset by the lower O&S.
Except no one knows what the O&S is for the F-15EX because it doesn't exist. There are some guesses.
But those guesses come from the same office that instigated this buy.
The Air Force isn't buying the quad packs so it's what 8 missiles on the F-15EX vs. 6 on the F-35 Block 4 in combat trim?
And the Air Force estimates that the F-15EX won't be able to operate "close" to contested air space after 2028 at the absolute latest.
Meanwhile, IOC is 2023. You do the math.
It's up to 16 missiles without the amber racks.
12 missiles with underwing fuel tanks.
8 F-15Xs For USAF And 22 F-5s For Navy In 2020 Budget Request
The F-15X is officially real and the Navy and Marines are set to get a fresh influx of badly needed aggressor airframes.
www.thedrive.com
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,889
- Reaction score
- 10,949
Geez, new F-15 and new F-5E ? this is 1972 all over again ! no kidding, first F-15 and first F-5E flew only days apart in the summer of 1972.
48 years ago !
marauder2048
"I should really just relax"
- Joined
- 19 November 2013
- Messages
- 3,157
- Reaction score
- 911
It's up to 16 missiles without the amber racks.
12 missiles with underwing fuel tanks.
8 F-15Xs For USAF And 22 F-5s For Navy In 2020 Budget Request
The F-15X is officially real and the Navy and Marines are set to get a fresh influx of badly needed aggressor airframes.
And when the Air Force ANG units actually fly regularly with that configuration let me know.
D
Deleted member 18851
Guest
Do F-35s fly with 6 regularly? Need dictates load out. The distinction here is the F-35 couldn’t carry 12 even if it needed to.
It's up to 16 missiles without the amber racks.
12 missiles with underwing fuel tanks.
8 F-15Xs For USAF And 22 F-5s For Navy In 2020 Budget Request
The F-15X is officially real and the Navy and Marines are set to get a fresh influx of badly needed aggressor airframes.
And when the Air Force ANG units actually fly regularly with that configuration let me know.
marauder2048
"I should really just relax"
- Joined
- 19 November 2013
- Messages
- 3,157
- Reaction score
- 911
Do F-35s fly with 6 regularly? Need dictates load out. The distinction here is the F-35 couldn’t carry 12 even if it needed to.
It's up to 16 missiles without the amber racks.
12 missiles with underwing fuel tanks.
8 F-15Xs For USAF And 22 F-5s For Navy In 2020 Budget Request
The F-15X is officially real and the Navy and Marines are set to get a fresh influx of badly needed aggressor airframes.
And when the Air Force ANG units actually fly regularly with that configuration let me know.
Need dictates load out: the F-15EX needs to survive in a high-end threat environment. It can't. It's a big, high-contrast corner reflector.
If you are talking about something other than the high-end threat environment say cruise missile defense or airbase defense
then it's an entirely different comparison and what the F-35 can carry externally would come into play.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 18851
Guest
Any comparison of these aircraft is apples and oranges, different use doctrines entirely. If you really want to go stat to stat, of course the 35 is more survivable in a high threat environment, but at the sacrifice of comparatively poor range and payload. These arguments are bull, the best plane is the one that fits the needs of the moment.Do F-35s fly with 6 regularly? Need dictates load out. The distinction here is the F-35 couldn’t carry 12 even if it needed to.
It's up to 16 missiles without the amber racks.
12 missiles with underwing fuel tanks.
8 F-15Xs For USAF And 22 F-5s For Navy In 2020 Budget Request
The F-15X is officially real and the Navy and Marines are set to get a fresh influx of badly needed aggressor airframes.
And when the Air Force ANG units actually fly regularly with that configuration let me know.
Need dictates load out: the F-15EX needs to survive in a high-end threat environment. It can't. It's a big, high-contrast corner reflector. View attachment 638335
If you are talking about something other than the high-end threat environment say cruise missile defense or airbase defense
then it's an entirely different comparison and what the F-35 can carry externally would come into play.
marauder2048
"I should really just relax"
- Joined
- 19 November 2013
- Messages
- 3,157
- Reaction score
- 911
Which is irrelevant since the AF assessment is that the F-15EX won't be able to operate close to contested airspace no later that 2028.
Last edited:
marauder2048
"I should really just relax"
- Joined
- 19 November 2013
- Messages
- 3,157
- Reaction score
- 911
Which is irrelevant because those aren't the arguments put forth under oath. The arguments presented to Congress came down to:
a. Acquisition cost relative to the F-35
b. O&S cost relative to the F-35
c. cost of transitioning F-15 squadrons to any other type
d. speed of F-15 recapitalization which was influenced by (c)
e. readiness, based on a Mattis-era directive now since rescinded.
Can I have the pdf for that image pleaseDo F-35s fly with 6 regularly? Need dictates load out. The distinction here is the F-35 couldn’t carry 12 even if it needed to.
It's up to 16 missiles without the amber racks.
12 missiles with underwing fuel tanks.
8 F-15Xs For USAF And 22 F-5s For Navy In 2020 Budget Request
The F-15X is officially real and the Navy and Marines are set to get a fresh influx of badly needed aggressor airframes.
And when the Air Force ANG units actually fly regularly with that configuration let me know.
Need dictates load out: the F-15EX needs to survive in a high-end threat environment. It can't. It's a big, high-contrast corner reflector. View attachment 638335
If you are talking about something other than the high-end threat environment say cruise missile defense or airbase defense
then it's an entirely different comparison and what the F-35 can carry externally would come into play.
Bhurki
ACCESS: Secret
- Joined
- 16 July 2020
- Messages
- 345
- Reaction score
- 380
F15EX carries 23,000 lbs of fuel (including cft which have a higher drag profile as compared to bags which eat up hardpoints for A-g ordnance) and burns it through 2 engines.
F35 carries 19,000 lbs of fuel and burns it through a single more efficient engine.
I don't see how you made that comparison.
marauder2048
"I should really just relax"
- Joined
- 19 November 2013
- Messages
- 3,157
- Reaction score
- 911
Enjoy.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 3 June 2011
- Messages
- 17,889
- Reaction score
- 10,949
I'll bet they do that sooner than F-35s will fly with 6 AIM-120s internally.
It's up to 16 missiles without the amber racks.
12 missiles with underwing fuel tanks.
8 F-15Xs For USAF And 22 F-5s For Navy In 2020 Budget Request
The F-15X is officially real and the Navy and Marines are set to get a fresh influx of badly needed aggressor airframes.
And when the Air Force ANG units actually fly regularly with that configuration let me know.
- Joined
- 29 November 2010
- Messages
- 1,734
- Reaction score
- 3,362
Question about aggressor squadrons in the US
since the US has the money and network to acquire actual Soviet/Russian types, maybe even Chinese types
could they build an aggressor squadron using actual aggressor aircraft?
since the US has the money and network to acquire actual Soviet/Russian types, maybe even Chinese types
could they build an aggressor squadron using actual aggressor aircraft?
Similar threads
-
-
J
-
-
-
Poland Attack Helicopter competition between Bell and Boeing- Started by RavenOne
- Replies: 19