Boeing F-15EX/QA and related variants

Josh_TN said:
My understanding is that these proposals come from the Air Force, not the White House. If they want more money, then it is the legislative branch that controls the purse, not the executive. So I think your post comes with some...strings attached...
Click to expand...

I am hearing the exact opposite and have had private conversations with a couple of reporters also chasing this angle and they seem to be in sync with the decision being driven by FYDP and beyond spending and the current SecAF wanting to prioritize F-35A over F-15EX. It has already been reported that Kendall wanted to outright cancel the EX and this was brought up during a 4/27 HASC hearing as well. The AF in its FYDP ramps up F-35A annual procurement as soon as it stops buying F-15EX's and that is also in sync with when the bulk of the Increment 2 F-35 Block IV hardware changes (EW apertures etc) are expected to be cut in and begin testing. So this is very much an admin driven decision..and we should expect the services UPL next year to pehaps even reflect additional long lead funding for FY25 and beyond EX's.

rooster said:
They've already basically cancelled the EX
Click to expand...

They haven't "cancelled" the EX in any shape or form. It's still a close to $10 Billion program for ANG fleet modernization. With annual orders being 24 for FY-23, and 24, it gives the Air Force (through UPL) or Congress a good middle ground to get a couple of years of additional procurement funded in FY-25 and 26 which basically gets them very close to the original desired quantity to recap the F-15C fleet.

Unless NGAD is already in EMD and expected to be in LRIP around 2026-2027, I seriously doubt Congress will honor the administrations request to stop buying the F-15EX after FY24. Another 20-40 EX's are probably on the cards beyond the 80 the admin currently wants to have.
 
Last edited:
The EX apparently is going to be the opening platform for HACM (or else the Echos?). I suspect while the total buy seems lowered now that long term it gets picked up more. I think long run it’s the F-16 that truly gets murdered, and, we’re Congress to stop protecting it, the A-10.

Also I think the A-10 should be retired, now that the sandbox wars are over, but I just don’t feel like being yelled at anymore to defend that position.
 
bring_it_on said:
Josh_TN said:
My understanding is that these proposals come from the Air Force, not the White House. If they want more money, then it is the legislative branch that controls the purse, not the executive. So I think your post comes with some...strings attached...
Click to expand...

I am hearing the exact opposite and have had private conversations with a couple of reporters also chasing this angle and they seem to be in sync with the decision being driven by FYDP and beyond spending and the current SecAF wanting to prioritize F-35A over F-15EX. It has already been reported that Kendall wanted to outright cancel the EX and this was brought up during a 4/27 HASC hearing as well. The AF in its FYDP ramps up F-35A annual procurement as soon as it stops buying F-15EX's and that is also in sync with when the bulk of the Increment 2 F-35 Block IV hardware changes (EW apertures etc) are expected to be cut in and begin testing. So this is very much an admin driven decision..and we should expect the services UPL next year to pehaps even reflect additional long lead funding for FY25 and beyond EX's.

rooster said:
They've already basically cancelled the EX
Click to expand...

They haven't "cancelled" the EX in any shape or form. It's still a close to $10 Billion program for ANG fleet modernization. With annual orders being 24 for FY-23, and 24, it gives the Air Force (through UPL) or Congress a good middle ground to get a couple of years of additional procurement funded in FY-25 and 26 which basically gets them very close to the original desired quantity to recap the F-15C fleet.

Unless NGAD is already in EMD and expected to be in LRIP around 2026-2027, I seriously doubt Congress will honor the administrations request to stop buying the F-15EX after FY24. Another 20-40 EX's are probably on the cards beyond the 80 the admin currently wants to have.
Click to expand...
So they buy 80 and that leaves how many available? Basically a useless quantity, but Boeing makes a few billion along the way.
 
rooster said:
bring_it_on said:
Josh_TN said:
My understanding is that these proposals come from the Air Force, not the White House. If they want more money, then it is the legislative branch that controls the purse, not the executive. So I think your post comes with some...strings attached...
Click to expand...

I am hearing the exact opposite and have had private conversations with a couple of reporters also chasing this angle and they seem to be in sync with the decision being driven by FYDP and beyond spending and the current SecAF wanting to prioritize F-35A over F-15EX. It has already been reported that Kendall wanted to outright cancel the EX and this was brought up during a 4/27 HASC hearing as well. The AF in its FYDP ramps up F-35A annual procurement as soon as it stops buying F-15EX's and that is also in sync with when the bulk of the Increment 2 F-35 Block IV hardware changes (EW apertures etc) are expected to be cut in and begin testing. So this is very much an admin driven decision..and we should expect the services UPL next year to pehaps even reflect additional long lead funding for FY25 and beyond EX's.

rooster said:
They've already basically cancelled the EX
Click to expand...

They haven't "cancelled" the EX in any shape or form. It's still a close to $10 Billion program for ANG fleet modernization. With annual orders being 24 for FY-23, and 24, it gives the Air Force (through UPL) or Congress a good middle ground to get a couple of years of additional procurement funded in FY-25 and 26 which basically gets them very close to the original desired quantity to recap the F-15C fleet.

Unless NGAD is already in EMD and expected to be in LRIP around 2026-2027, I seriously doubt Congress will honor the administrations request to stop buying the F-15EX after FY24. Another 20-40 EX's are probably on the cards beyond the 80 the admin currently wants to have.
Click to expand...
So they buy 80 and that leaves how many available? Basically a useless quantity, but Boeing makes a few billion along the way.
Click to expand...
"Useless"? More the most other F-15 customers.
 
It's also 33% less than a Rafale (without Block upgrade) and 20% less than a Typhoon for a larger, generally more capable aircraft.
It stands probably at 20M$ more than a J-10, something not bad for a vastly superior airframe.

You have to wonder what could have been the price of an F/A-18X (classical)!
 
TomcatViP said:
It's also 33% less than a Rafale (without Block upgrade) and 20% less than a Typhoon for a larger, generally more capable aircraft.
It stands probably at 20M$ more than a J-10, something not bad for a vastly superior airframe.
Click to expand...

I did not know that the F-15EX Eagle 2 was 33% less than a Rafale and 20% less than a Typhoon, not bad going when you have to consider that the F-15 is getting on to being nearly 50 years old and is the only fighter in the world to get over 100 to 0 air to air kills.
 
Just a couple observations:

It seems that this relatively low price does not include the electronic defense suite, the podded sensors and other costs (after cross checking with the foreign F-15 thread, TomcatVIP has already shared the link).
breakingdefense.com

Air Force's math on the F-15EX and F-35 doesn't add up - Breaking Defense

In a new op-ed, JV Venable of the Heritage Foundation goes deep on Air Force budget figures to answer the question of which is more expenses, the F-35A or F-15EX.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com

Also the price paid by the Air Force is different from what a foreign country would have to pay for it.
So comparing those numbers with the price of other fighters on the export market is misleading IMHO.
 
Manuducati said:
Also the price paid by the Air Force is different from what a foreign country would have to pay for it.
So comparing those numbers with the price of other fighters on the export market is misleading IMHO.
Click to expand...

So there has been some fiddling with the numbers by Boeing to make the F-15EX Eagle 2 appear to be attractive.
 
Well last time I checked EPAWSS was a rough 10M$ supplement. But it's an evolutionary system, contracted for some upgrade instead of being a Block fix cost (what I understand).

Please read Teal group take on the subject:

F-15EX Electronic Warfare Systems to Surpass F-35 in Capability – and Funding? - Teal Group

With Boeing F-15EX Eagle II procurement now doubled in the Pentagon’s FY23 defense budget request and F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF)
www.tealgroup.com www.tealgroup.com

Now, when Boeing announced their EX price without EWPASS, at that time, numbers were slightly (marginally) different. So it belongs to the best journalist among the readers to get an update on that. But, IMOHO, to this day, @Manuducati stands right.
 
Last edited:

BAE Systems accelerates electronic warfare system production for F-15E and F-15EX Eagle fighter jets

BAE Systems has received a contract from Boeing to produce additional Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability Systems (EPAWSS) for U.S. F-15E and F-15EX Eagle aircraft – providing state-of-the-art situational awareness and self-defense capabilities.
www.baesystems.com www.baesystems.com
www.acc.af.mil

F-15 EPAWSS Program Begins Low-Rate Initial Production Installations on F-15E Aircraft

The U.S. Air Force F-15 Eagle Passive/Active Warning and Survivability System (F-15 EPAWSS) program achieved a major milestone on July 19, 2022, when Boeing began installing the Electronic Warfare
www.acc.af.mil
 
https://samm.dsca.mil/policy-memoranda/dsca-22-74



MEMORANDUM FOR :

OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR COST AND ECONOMICS, DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE (ATTN: ALAN J. LAVERSON, SAF/FMCE)
DIRECTOR, DEFENSE FINANCE AND ACCOUNTING SERVICE, INDIANAPOLIS, IN

SUBJECT :

Establish Special Nonrecurring Cost for Japan for Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability F-15 System (EPAWSS) AN/ALQ-250, DSCA Policy Memo 22-74

REFERENCE :



  1. Establish Special NC Request for DSCA Policy Memo 22-74, dated April 14, 2022


The attached Finding, approves the nonrecurring cost (NC) recoupment pro rata charges for the sale, coproduction, or licensed production of the items shown on the Finding table. The NC charges listed in the Finding will be provided in Appendix 1 of the automated version of the Security Assistance Management Manual (SAMM) found on the DSCA Web Page.

Unless waived, the DoD NC recoupment charge is required to be reimbursed to the Department of Defense within 30 days following delivery or purchaser acceptance (whichever comes first) of each item sold or produced; and the recoupment will be recorded under DSCA(Q) 1112 Report. In accordance with the Arms Export Control Act, any country requesting a waiver of NC charges must request the waiver in writing prior to finalization of the purchase, if it is to be approved.

If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact: Ms. Yvette Chandler, DSCA (Office of International Operations, Global Execution Directorate, Assistance & Monitoring Division (IOPS/GEX/AMD)), (703) 697-9445; e-mail: yvette.d.chandler.civ@mail.mil or Ms. Paulina Pentz, IOPS/GEX/AMD, (703)697-9825; e-mail: paulina.c.pentz.civ@mail.mil.

Earle L. Kirkley, III
Deputy Assistant Director for Global Execution
Office of International Operations

ATTACHMENT :
As stated

FINDING :

In accordance with DoD Directive 2140.02, dated May 22, 2018, I hereby approve nonrecurring cost (NC) recoupment pro rata charges for the sale, coproduction, or licensed production of the Major Defense Equipment shown below:

CATEGORY - XI MILITARY ELECTRONICS​

ITEM DESCRIPTIONNSN/MASLPREVIOUS NC CHARGENC CHARGE
Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability F-15 System (EPAWSS) AN/ALQ-25058AN250EPAWSS$2,940,151.00$1,868,224.00
This NC recoupment charge is effective immediately.

Earle L. Kirkley, III
Deputy Assistant Director for Global Execution
Office of International Operations
 

Attachments

  • DSCA 22-74.pdf
    142.3 KB · Views: 3
TomcatViP said:
View attachment 685593

news.usni.org

Report to Congress on the Air Force F-15EX Eagle II Fighter Program - USNI News

The following is the Oct. 11, 2022, Congressional Research Service report: Air Force F-15EX Eagle II Fighter Program. From the report On March 11, 2021, the U.S. Air Force took delivery of its first F-15EX Eagle II fighter. The original Eagle II program was intended to deliver 144 aircraft to...
news.usni.org news.usni.org
Click to expand...

"Planned Total Quantities

The F-15EX program currently plans to deliver 80 aircraft (*): 2 funded through R&D, 6 through existing F-15 budget lines, and 72 through a dedicated F-15EX budget line."
"The program originally planned to procure 144 aircraft; however it changed its plan with the FY2023 budget request. The F-15EX program is a middle-tier acquisition program but is expected to become a Major Defense Acquisition Program following the establishment of an Acquisition Program Baseline, which will declare the total number of aircraft included in the program. That total is not yet known, in part because the Air Force has yet to decide its desire for Eagle IIs to replace the current F-15E Strike Eagle fleet in addition to the planned F-15Cs."

(*): 2+6+(3x24) = 80


"Annual Quantities

The FY2023 Air Force budget request included a request to procure 24 F-15EXs in FY2023. Figure 2 (**) shows F-15EX procurement quantities authorized through FY2020, requested procurement quantities for FY2021, and projected requests through the FYDP.
The figures in the table do not include two aircraft procured with research and development funding."

(**): 2+(1x12)+(2x24) = 62
 
US to withdraw permanent F-15 fighter force from Okinawa (ft.com, subscription or registration may be required)

The US air force plans to replace its entire fleet of F-15 fighter jets based in Okinawa, Japan, with a “rotational” force, a shift that some American and Japanese officials worry will send a dangerous signal to China about deterrence.

The air force intends to retire two squadrons of ageing F-15 Eagles that have been permanently based in Okinawa, according to six people familiar with the situation. The decision has triggered alarm in some parts of the Japanese government and the Pentagon because the air force does not intend to replace them with a permanent presence in the near term.

The move will involve half of the roughly 100 air force fighters in Japan and is part of a modernisation programme. Critics are concerned about possible gaps that could weaken the ability to deter China. “The message to China is the US is not serious about reversing the decline in its military forces,” said David Deptula, a retired F-15 pilot and former vice-commander of US Pacific Air Forces who blamed years of under-investment for a lack of aircraft. “This will encourage the Chinese to take more dramatic action.”

The air force plans to send fifth-generation F-22 fighters from Alaska to Okinawa’s Kadena, a critical air base in the region, for a six-month rotation after the F-15s’ departure from the base next year. But several people said the force had not worked out future rotations, which raised concerns about possible gaps.

The air force said it could not discuss the plan for security reasons, but Ann Stefanek, the air force’s spokesperson, said it would “continue to maintain readiness in support of our US-Japan alliance, which is a cornerstone for security in the Indo-Pacific”. US Indo-Pacific Command, which oversees US forces in Asia, did not comment. Japan’s defence and foreign ministries did not comment.

[snip]
Click to expand...

This seems rather unwise, to say the least...
 
Rotating deployments of F-22s and F-35s sounds like an upgrade to me, considering the F-15 is increasingly outgunned by newer PLAAF threats. Also consider that Kadena is easily ranged by every Chinese cruise and ballistic threat. The bigger concern here is the future survivability of any pred-eployed US asset within the 1st island chain.
 
batigol said:
Rotating deployments of F-22s and F-35s sounds like an upgrade to me, considering the F-15 is increasingly outgunned by newer PLAAF threats. Also consider that Kadena is easily ranged by every Chinese cruise and ballistic threat. The bigger concern here is the future survivability of any pred-eployed US asset within the 1st island chain.
Click to expand...
Well we can guess now where some of these older F-15s may end up.
 
Flyaway said:
batigol said:
Rotating deployments of F-22s and F-35s sounds like an upgrade to me, considering the F-15 is increasingly outgunned by newer PLAAF threats. Also consider that Kadena is easily ranged by every Chinese cruise and ballistic threat. The bigger concern here is the future survivability of any pred-eployed US asset within the 1st island chain.
Click to expand...
Well we can guess now where some of these older F-15s may end up.
Click to expand...
From reading the above articles it sounds like the airframes are nearly timed out and will be heading to the Boneyard soon?
 
isayyo2 said:
Flyaway said:
batigol said:
Rotating deployments of F-22s and F-35s sounds like an upgrade to me, considering the F-15 is increasingly outgunned by newer PLAAF threats. Also consider that Kadena is easily ranged by every Chinese cruise and ballistic threat. The bigger concern here is the future survivability of any pred-eployed US asset within the 1st island chain.
Click to expand...
Well we can guess now where some of these older F-15s may end up.
Click to expand...
From reading the above articles it sounds like the airframes are nearly timed out and will be heading to the Boneyard soon?
Click to expand...
So where are they going to get them from I wonder.
 
Is the F-15EX going to get a proper suffix because "EX" is non-standard perhaps instead F-15X or F-15T?
 
NMaude said:
Is the F-15EX going to get a proper suffix because "EX" is non-standard perhaps instead F-15X or F-15T?
Click to expand...

No. EX is official.

www.af.mil

F-15EX Eagle II unveiled as newest fighter

Lt. Gen. Duke Richardson, Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics military deputy, presented the F-15EX Eagle II during an unveiling and naming
www.af.mil
 
Last edited:
isayyo2 said:
Flyaway said:
batigol said:
Rotating deployments of F-22s and F-35s sounds like an upgrade to me, considering the F-15 is increasingly outgunned by newer PLAAF threats. Also consider that Kadena is easily ranged by every Chinese cruise and ballistic threat. The bigger concern here is the future survivability of any pred-eployed US asset within the 1st island chain.
Click to expand...
Well we can guess now where some of these older F-15s may end up.
Click to expand...
From reading the above articles it sounds like the airframes are nearly timed out and will be heading to the Boneyard soon?
Click to expand...

If those F-15s are worn out, make some sense to withdraw them and replace them by something newer and fresher.
The logic would be (in that order)
- F-35s, because they are new, stealth, and plentiful
- F-15EXs, because they are new, and would replace F-15s with F-15s
- F-22s: best of the lot (stealth + "official" F-15 successor) but not enough of them.

And then there is this.
Also consider that Kadena is easily ranged by every Chinese cruise and ballistic threat. The bigger concern here is the future survivability of any pred-eployed US asset within the 1st island chain.
Click to expand...

So replacing "permanent basing" by "rotations" might not be a bad idea.

Bottom line: replacing permanent-based worn-out F-15C by rotations of either F-15EX or F-35s is not that bad an idea.
If F-15EX, ground crews are familiar with them, at least partially.
if F-35: not familiar, but better against the Chinese (stealth).
if F-22s can be scrounged and rotated to Kadena: best of F-15 & F-35 altogether, but not enough of them.
 
Grey Havoc said:
US to withdraw permanent F-15 fighter force from Okinawa (ft.com, subscription or registration may be required)

This seems rather unwise, to say the least...
Click to expand...

I think two things are driving the decision: the age of the F-15C/D fleet (this is AFAIK the last active unit to use the type) and the fact that permanent basing of formations within the PRCs ballistic missile footprint is seen as being too predictable. Previous to a couple years ago, there was a standard six month detachment of bombers to Guam. Apparently now bombers are moved around unannounced to several different airfields for a varying amount of time as a way of being less predictable about aircraft positions. In the short term F-22s from Alaska are slated to do a deployment. Long term I'd hope they would base F-35s or F-15EXs (if more are bought) - the F-15E/EX and F-35 fleets are less maintenance intensive and more replaceable assets. Putting F-22s within SRBM range seems like a bad Day1 idea given how few there are and how intense any initial bombardment would be likely be.
 
Josh_TN said:
Grey Havoc said:
US to withdraw permanent F-15 fighter force from Okinawa (ft.com, subscription or registration may be required)

This seems rather unwise, to say the least...
Click to expand...

I think two things are driving the decision: the age of the F-15C/D fleet (this is AFAIK the last active unit to use the type) and the fact that permanent basing of formations within the PRCs ballistic missile footprint is seen as being too predictable. Previous to a couple years ago, there was a standard six month detachment of bombers to Guam. Apparently now bombers are moved around unannounced to several different airfields for a varying amount of time as a way of being less predictable about aircraft positions. In the short term F-22s from Alaska are slated to do a deployment. Long term I'd hope they would base F-35s or F-15EXs (if more are bought) - the F-15E/EX and F-35 fleets are less maintenance intensive and more replaceable assets. Putting F-22s within SRBM range seems like a bad Day1 idea given how few there are and how intense any initial bombardment would be likely be.
Click to expand...

This is key IMO. Rotation of units, more roadway operations exercises, use of decoys, improved dispersion facilities and shelters should all be employed, not to mention increasing munitions stocks in theater as well as layered base air defenses (not holding my breath on the latter). I am positive the Chinese would not make the same mistakes Russia has made in Ukraine in a hypothetical airbase suppression & denial campaign across the first island chain.

With the USAF practicing Agile Combat Employment doctrine, it seems the USAF is slowly adapting the reality of the situation. I don't know enough about the JASDF's contingency plans but they have participated in ACE exercises lately.
 

Boeing’s $14 Billion Indonesia Jet Deal Stalls Over Financing​

Click to expand...
Or alternatively, Boeing won't barter Palm Oil for jets :p

www.bnnbloomberg.ca

BNN Bloomberg – Canada Business News, TSX Today & Interest Rates

Get the latest Canadian business news, TSX updates, interest rates and Bank of Canada coverage. Explore stock market investing and get expert financial insights on investment portfolio strategies.
www.bnnbloomberg.ca www.bnnbloomberg.ca
 
isayyo2 said:

Boeing’s $14 Billion Indonesia Jet Deal Stalls Over Financing​

Click to expand...
Or alternatively, Boeing won't barter Palm Oil for jets :p

www.bnnbloomberg.ca

BNN Bloomberg – Canada Business News, TSX Today & Interest Rates

Get the latest Canadian business news, TSX updates, interest rates and Bank of Canada coverage. Explore stock market investing and get expert financial insights on investment portfolio strategies.
www.bnnbloomberg.ca www.bnnbloomberg.ca
Click to expand...
We're using FMS scheme, no palm oil needed.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom