Boeing F-15EX/QA and related variants

[RavenOne]

Well after 3 abortive attempts to cross the pond this week the first four QA delivery flight arrived in sunny Suffolk - RAF Mildenhall yesterday so here are my photos below.

Cheers

 

[Grey Havoc]

I am doubtful.

 

[bring_it_on]

Alternate Fighter Plan: Cut F-15EX, Extend F-22, Buy New Stealth Jets, More F-35s | Air & Space Forces Magazine

The Air Force should drop its “4+1” fighter plan, keep the F-22 longer, and add more F-35s, a new Mitchell Institute paper argues.

www.airforcemag.com

Can we assume this is what AFA thinks of F-15EX? since Mitchell Institute is an affiliate of AFA.

AFA as an organization? Mitchell Institute is their analytical side/think-tank so yes this is the view of their leadership. However, they seem to be making it out to be a much larger problem then it is. The AF is modernizing the ANG with 138 F-15EX's (remaining are test etc). The alternative would have been to just keep the F-15C's and have them limp to a slow death and be a readiness challenge well into the 2030s. There aren't 138 F-35A's sitting in the production plan for them to pluck and offload to the ANG, and the Block 4 is going to be delayed by at least a couple of years so there are limited options there.

That said their overall sentiments are understandable. If you have finite resources you really not ought to be buying F-15EX's but maximizing F-35A buys. But it isn't exactly as black and white. There is a limit to the F-35A's the AF can buy and absorb, there are delays to block 4 and tech refresh, and then there are industrial base concerns of being reliant on one supplier and getting it to perform. 138 F-15EX is a fairly small number so I'm not sure atacking such a purchase repeatedly serves AFA that much. Now if the Congress begins scaling back NGAD and ramping up F-15EX then that becomes a problem (it would go from a targeted turning over of the ANG F-15C fleet to a distraction). But so far, what I'm seeing from the House and the Senate is a realization that NGAD (AF) is important and must be funded (including adaptive engines and weapons). The USAF will continue to buy the F-35A at 48 a/c per year until it gets the full Blk 4 hardware that is tested and validated, at which time it may begin asking for 60 ac/year through close of its purchase plan.

 

[aonestudio]

WASHINGTON (AFNS) --
The United States Air Force awarded a $1,579,662,187 contract to General Electric, GE Edison Works, Cincinnati, Oct. 29, for the purchase of 29 engines — installs and spares — in support of the production of 12 F-15EX Eagle II aircraft.

Initial deliveries will begin in October 2023.

The contract includes seven additional options for the purchase of a most-probable quantity of 329 engines with the final delivery occurring in 2031.

Over the next 10 years, these projected deliveries will support the production of 136 F-15EX aircraft to meet the Air Force’s projected demand.

US Air Force awards F-15EX engine contract

The United States Air Force awarded a $1,579,662,187 contract to General Electric, GE Edison Works, Cincinnati, Oct. 29, for the purchase of 29 engines — installs and spares — in support of the

www.af.mil

 

[Deltafan]

 

[sferrin]

Not your father's but it is Singapore's, Saudi Arabia's, and Qatar's. Also, some of those number on the chart seem off. Ceiling wouldn't have changed. Not sure how they get to 6,500lbs more payload as those two extra pylons they activated are only good for about 1,000lbs each.

 

[Trident]

Yes, those and the service life improvement jumped out at me too. No idea why ceiling would change either, but there are reasons why the other figures could be correct. SL as I understand is mostly a certification matter, that is to say the airframe was basically always good for 20k hours (contingent on the corresponding usage assumptions), only it had not been proven and approved. A similar issue could be at play with the payload, you'll find on many combat aircraft that the maximum permitted load is lower than the sum of hardpoint capacities. It is possible that the F-15EX unlocks new payload combinations which were not certified previously (FBW could play a role here as well, if FCS issues used to preclude certain configurations).

 

[bring_it_on]

Also weird that they quote the F-15EX price in FY-18 dollars when the first aircraft wasn't purchased till FY-20. The EX is more expensive to buy than the F-35A and will remain so pretty much through the entire program.

 

[TomS]

Ceiling wouldn't have changed.

No idea why ceiling would change either

Service ceiling is defined as the altitude at which the aircraft can sustain a 500 ft per minute rate of climb. New engines could definitely change service ceiling.

 

[sferrin]

Ceiling wouldn't have changed.

No idea why ceiling would change either

Service ceiling is defined as the altitude at which the aircraft can sustain a 500 ft per minute rate of climb. New engines could definitely change service ceiling.

Many sources have said 65,000 feet for the Eagle since the 70s. I'd think the 50,000 limit is because of lack of pressure suits, which wouldn't change with new engines.

 

[bobbymike]

I wonder if service life is “what’s left” not from new for the E

 

[DrRansom]

The Mitchell Institute and the USAF both - weirdly - seem to ignore the combat radius demands of the Pacific. One could argue that the USAF needs a Tactical-Bomber more than any new fighter, something which can operate from airbases in southern Japan and reach the Taiwan Strait with a useful stand-off payload. A 3000lb payload 1250nm, something in that class.

Perhaps this is the fighter-mafia speaking, but the emphasis on more short-ranged stealth fighters appears detached from the geographic realities of the Pacific Theater.

 

[sferrin]

The Mitchell Institute and the USAF both - weirdly - seem to ignore the combat radius demands of the Pacific. One could argue that the USAF needs a Tactical-Bomber more than any new fighter, something which can operate from airbases in southern Japan and reach the Taiwan Strait with a useful stand-off payload. A 3000lb payload 1250nm, something in that class.

Perhaps this is the fighter-mafia speaking, but the emphasis on more short-ranged stealth fighters appears detached from the geographic realities of the Pacific Theater.

FB-111H or Backfire-C would be nice. (Since we aren't keeping the B-1Bs apparently.)

 

[DrRansom]

FB-111H or Backfire-C would be nice. (Since we aren't keeping the B-1Bs apparently.)

Something in the FB-111H class, small enough to operate from dispersed airfields with less than complete ground facilities, but big enough to carry a decent payload without relying on tanker support.

The bias of the whole report can be seen in the emphasis on Fighter, the USAF Fighter plan. The USAF needs attack and bomber aircraft, more so than fighters, especially fighters for long-range air superiority.

 

[JG87]

777F CMAC If they build 50 it would do many missions. Ultra long range and at maximum load could carry 40ish LRASMs or 36ish AGM-158Ds . I do not know if they fit in the common rotary launcher. 777f could hold 90ish AGM-158A's I just do not know the weight of the common rotary launcher. I would only run AGM-158BorD/LRASM/Hypersonic weapons if possible but at It would make sense to have one launcher that is constantly refilled as missiles launch or reloaded after a full salvo. Knowing the USAF they would have at least two launchers per plane to saturate enemy ship or ground based defenses. In groups of 5 or 10 aircraft that is a lot of incoming ordinance. If we can believe what has been guessed about the weight of the LRHW missile it could carry 12 of these speedy yet slowly developing missiles. Common Rotary Launcher is obviously out. They probably have plans on modifying all commercial airliners into weapons carriers. At least all the freighters. With the seeming success of Rapid Dragon. I see no reason why we cannot set up a similar systems for the 777F, 747-8F,767F, etc. It could be very nasty one time punch used with USAF transports and bombers.

 

[JG87]

The Mitchell Institute and the USAF both - weirdly - seem to ignore the combat radius demands of the Pacific. One could argue that the USAF needs a Tactical-Bomber more than any new fighter, something which can operate from airbases in southern Japan and reach the Taiwan Strait with a useful stand-off payload. A 3000lb payload 1250nm, something in that class.

Perhaps this is the fighter-mafia speaking, but the emphasis on more short-ranged stealth fighters appears detached from the geographic realities of the Pacific Theater.

FB-111H or Backfire-C would be nice. (Since we aren't keeping the B-1Bs apparently.)

They are retiring 17 of the oldest airframes. 45 will remain in service, with four in Type 2000 recallable storage. We beat them up in Afghanistan. It is going to cost a whole lot of of money and work to keep these 45 running until the B21 can replace them.

B-1s Can Make it to Finish Line, But Big Repairs Will Be Common Along the Way | Air & Space Forces Magazine

USAF expects to have enough resources to keep the B-1B bomber flying safely at least until it can be replaced by the B-21, service officials said.

www.airforcemag.com

 

[aonestudio]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1469285136604749836

View: https://twitter.com/CaricaMil/status/1469285136604749836

 

[elmayerle]

I have a question concerning the Pratt&Whitney F100 and the General Electric engines and that is where exactly are they made in the US? I've tried looking on the wikipedia but the articles concerning their makers are vague as to where they're actually built.

It's my understanding that the GE fighter engines are made in Lynn, Mass with the P&W in Hartford, CT. In both cases, the parts within the engines themselves are made all over the country.

Not exactly. P&W engines are built in Hartford, CT. The GE engines built in West Lynn, MA are the "small" military engines (T700, F414, et al.) while the large Ge engines are built in Cincinatti, OH (F110, F118, large civil engines, et al.)
.

 

[helmutkohl]

summary: Japan has allocated roughly 397 billion yen for a highly advanced F-15 upgrade
however cuts were made including the integration of a long range ASHM

空自F15戦闘機 改修費約3970億円に削減 来年度予算案に計上へ | NHKニュース

【NHK】費用が大幅に膨らんだ航空自衛隊のF15戦闘機の改修をめぐり、防衛省は、アメリカ側との交渉の結果、さらに10億円費用を圧縮…

www3.nhk.or.jp

 

[RavenOne]

Unfortunaely from that last batch, one of the QA went tech so it stayed and then another four ship delivery came through Mildenhall at lunchtime. SO here are m photos below of the remaining QA from the first batch carrying a flight test with unetricted climb then the second four ship arriving.

Cheers

 

[TomcatViP]

In addition to the those changes, the 2022 NDAA contains numerous provisions related to the Air Force fleet. It funds the service’s request to procure 48 new F-35s and adds five F-15EXs to an initial request for 12[...]

So, 17 EX added for 2022

Congress Passes 2022 NDAA, Sending Bill to President Biden | Air & Space Forces Magazine

The Senate voted to pass the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act on Dec. 15, continuing Congress's streak of passing an NDAA every year.

www.airforcemag.com

 

[Grey Havoc]

$12 billion deal may bring hundreds of Qatar, US Air Force members to Idaho base

www.stripes.com

 

[aonestudio]

Eagle II fires first missile during live-fire event

F-15 EX releases AIM-120 over Gulf of Mexico as part of Weapons System Evaluation Program.

www.acc.af.mil

 

[torginus]

Sorry, if this is a dumb question, but can the F-15EX be considered a new aircraft in the shape of the old one, like the Su-35, or the Super Hornet? As far as I know, both of those were redesigned from the ground up using new technologies and digital design. Or is this a very deep modernization/modification of the original, just like the rest of the Su-27 family?

 

[TomcatViP]

@torginus : Well, Boeing call it the Eagle II... So, by the say of it, it must be regarded as a new plane.
Then it's up to Boeing to match services expectations in the long term with what is branded as a new model.

 

[FighterJock]

Sorry, if this is a dumb question, but can the F-15EX be considered a new aircraft in the shape of the old one, like the Su-35, or the Super Hornet? As far as I know, both of those were redesigned from the ground up using new technologies and digital design. Or is this a very deep modernization/modification of the original, just like the rest of the Su-27 family?

In one word no. As you rightly said in your post torginus the F-15EX is far more like the deep upgrade of the Su-35 and the latest Block 3 update of the Super Hornet, no matter what Boeing try to say there is no way that it is a new aircraft unlike the NGAD. It is just Boeing trying to milk all they can out of the F-15 Eagle before it eventually has to retire.

 

[Moose]

Sorry, if this is a dumb question, but can the F-15EX be considered a new aircraft in the shape of the old one, like the Su-35, or the Super Hornet? As far as I know, both of those were redesigned from the ground up using new technologies and digital design. Or is this a very deep modernization/modification of the original, just like the rest of the Su-27 family?

You couldn't rebuild a Hornet into a Super Hornet (unless you count "throw old one out and build a new one" as a "rebuild"), you'd have a hard time rebuilding an Su-27 into an Su-35 but it's probably possible (if not exactly practical). Eagle to Eagle II would seem to be pretty doable, if one wished.

 

[TomcatViP]

@RAFAELdefense
We have completed the development of the latest generation of the Sky-Shield family of Electronic Attack (EA) Pods. It's now undergoing extensive flight trials on a 4.5 gen. fighter aircraft for an undisclosed customer & will soon provide unprecedented capabilities.

href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SkyShield?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc^tfw">#SkyShield</a> <a href="https://t.co/K6mxkUtUzO">pic.twitter.com/K6mxkUtUzO</a></p>&mdash; RAFAEL Advanced Defense Systems (@RAFAELdefense) <a href="

https://twitter.com/x/status/1488497690061295620

View: https://twitter.com/RAFAELdefense/status/1488497690061295620?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

 

[isayyo2]

@RAFAELdefense
We have completed the development of the latest generation of the Sky-Shield family of Electronic Attack (EA) Pods. It's now undergoing extensive flight trials on a 4.5 gen. fighter aircraft for an undisclosed customer & will soon provide unprecedented capabilities.

Hmmm, Korea or Singapore?

 

[Deltafan]

Indonesia – F-15ID Aircraft | Defense Security Cooperation Agency

www.dsca.mil

 

[Umigami]

Possibly the first Eagle 2 foreign sale.

 

[isayyo2]

Possibly the first Eagle 2 foreign sale.

I believe the SA or QA are the first "Eagle IIs" as the SA introduced fly-by-wire and QA has the new wing design.

 

[Umigami]

Possibly the first Eagle 2 foreign sale.

I believe the SA or QA are the first "Eagle IIs" as the SA introduced fly-by-wire and QA has the new wing design.

No EPAWSS

 

[helmutkohl]

So their air force will be flying F-15s, Rafales, KF-21s in addition to F-16s, Su-27s, Su-30s, F-5s and Hawks? i feel like they need to get rid of at least 3 types.

it also looks like to be the second country to use the F-15 and Rafale as a hi-lo mix (well a more hi-mid mix).

 

[Umigami]

So their air force will be flying F-15s, Rafales, KF-21s in addition to F-16s, Su-27s, Su-30s, F-5s and Hawks? i feel like they need to get rid of at least 3 types.

it also looks like to be the second country to use the F-15 and Rafale as a hi-lo mix (well a more hi-mid mix).

F5 already gone years ago. I think KF21 will replace F16 and Flanker fleet eventually.

 

[stealthflanker]

The F-15's if really taken will replace our Su-30's and 27's. as our flankers schedule to retire somewhere in 2027-2030 era. While those KF-21's will be capital defense squadrons.


Logistical wise, people may bitch about having PW-229, 220, M88, 414 and 404. But the view was based on countries. Currently we are only maintaining fighter engine from 2 Countries. Russia and US. As Russian engine retires we will still maintain 2 line engines which are French and US.

There are other concerns like avionics etc but well if AESA is as good as it said... there would be NO need at all in opening the radome other than regular antenna inspection. there will be no transmitter maintenance or replacement as it was customary with conventional radar (TWT lasts for about 200-500 Hr) The TRM will last very long without replacement and lets hope no cutting corners by reducing the "excess" module required for "graceful degradation" properties.

Another thing is blackboxes like optics and those fancy targeting pods... These items are likely to be maintained directly by US Contractors, the black box part might as well sent home to US for maintenance when the time comes.

 

[Archibald]

Wow, my mind is blown.

So their air force will be flying F-15s, Rafales, KF-21s in addition to F-16s, Su-27s, Su-30s, F-5s and Hawks?

I do hope Indonesia has a valuable National Aviation Museum. Because one day their "post Cold War fighters" exposition hall will be pretty awesome.

 

[alberchico]

Sukhois for palm oil: Russia and Indonesia announce new barter arrangement

After three painstaking years of negotiation, Russia and Indonesia have finally agreed to sign a major aerospace deal later this year: 11 top-of-the-line Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets in exchange for Indonesian palm oil, coffee, and other goods.

www.defensenews.com

Indonesia's finances were in such bad shape that for the purchase of the Flankers they were planning to barter raw goods such as palm oil and coffee. So how they the heck are they going to be able to afford a potential Eagle order as well as the new fleet of Rafales they just announced yesterday ? They can't even afford to make the required payments on the KF-21 program.

 

[Josh_TN]

Presumably palm oil and coffee.

 

[Umigami]

Sukhois for palm oil: Russia and Indonesia announce new barter arrangement

After three painstaking years of negotiation, Russia and Indonesia have finally agreed to sign a major aerospace deal later this year: 11 top-of-the-line Sukhoi Su-35 fighter jets in exchange for Indonesian palm oil, coffee, and other goods.

www.defensenews.com

Indonesia's finances were in such bad shape that for the purchase of the Flankers they were planning to barter raw goods such as palm oil and coffee. So how they the heck are they going to be able to afford a potential Eagle order as well as the new fleet of Rafales they just announced yesterday ? They can't even afford to make the required payments on the KF-21 program.

Loan from Qatar or UAE.