F-15 Eagle Thread

[TerraN_EmpirE]

The USAF needs to do a better job in selling the idea of the F-15X. It is just not believable when they insist that the new buys of F-15X would not affect the F-35 procurement. Sure it will because when you have a limited budget, there will be sacrifices. The F-35 program is already 5 years behind schedule and hundreds of airframe behind original timeline. LM says it has present capacity to manufacture 160 units a year and Lot 11 this year is only doing 141 units. If they have the funds, clearly they will buy more if not for funding being the limiter.

Having said that. the USAF do have an airframe shortage problem due to the truncation of the F-22 program. PCA is still a long way away and the existing F-15C/D's are old with the youngest being 32 years. It badly needs life extension and avionics upgrade to remain relevant. The aging issue leads to maintenance problem and spare parts. The proper conversation should be about options until PCA comes on stream. The options are replace the duties of the existing F-15C/D's with the F-16 fleet. After pushback from Congress, I think this idea is dropped for the time being. The next option is to buy more F-35s to do the job but I don't think this seems to have much traction. Personally I think this is a bad idea because the operating cost of the F-35 at $45,000 per hour is problematic and the main challenge currently for the F-35 program in terms of sustainment. If they don't get this down, it might truncate the program just like the F-22.

The current proposal with the F-15X has a number of benefits. Firstly Boeing has indicated a price lower than the F-35 which could mean below $80 million a unit. This comes with all the upgrades and a 20,000 hours service life. The missile loadout is said to be 22 and would be an excellent missile truck partner with the F-22/F-35. The biggest benefit is Boeing has run their numbers and confident that the operating cost on the F-15X will be $27,000 per hour versus $42,000 per hour currently with the F-15C/D. This means the F-15X will be basically self funded. Boeing's claims need to be validated but I think the F-15X option is attractive given the respective options.

F15CX and F15EX are unlikely in my view to be the supposed "Missile Truck". They are targeted for ANG squadrons at best assuming that the buy doesn't bite into PCA. (Something I almost guarantee it will. ) PCA is supposed to replace the Active duty F15s.
Even as a missile truck the drag on these birds is ridiculous.

You know guys we still have this ol' Thread and last post here wasn't that long ago.

Now then, somewhere else someone asked why not F15SE? So though I would post
The answer is Juice and the Squeeze.
The only way that F15X makes any logical sense is if the cost to extend the life of the legacy F15C and D is over 50 million a pop, and the people pushing this think that Boeing can pull off this program for 50-75 million. As above that line in the 75-85 million range is F35A.
F15SE was offered at 100 million. This is as the extent of modifications to achieve the reduced RCS and RAM treatments drive up the price point.
If you compare the projected F15SE RCS at .1m2 roughly that of F/A18E vs the F35 and factor in the projected price F35 wins. As it's RCS return is far better.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

So with F15SE out of the picture what is F15X?

Two versions based on the F15QA that is Qatar Advanced. Two versions a single seater F15CX and a two seater F15EX replacing F15C and D on a one for one.
Note the E this is as the basis of The QA is derived from the F15E.
All indications are that F15E will not be touched.
Part of this scheme appears to be to scrap any upgrades to the existing Legacy eagles and use the money that would go to upgrades to buy new birds. In essence they are cheating the New aircraft replace upgrades. Any upgrades for F15C/D road mapped would be standard features on the F15X.
These include JHMCS II, a new flat panel cockpit display, fly by wire controls (a first for American F15), Legion Pod, APG-82 AESA, Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability System (EPAWSS),
a new wing interior, AMBER missile racks which is part of the reason for the heavy missile load , more powerful engines, possibly upgraded data links allowing data share between the eagle and Stealths.
I expect like the E more use of CFTs.

 

[Brumby]

F15CX and F15EX are unlikely in my view to be the supposed "Missile Truck". They are targeted for ANG squadrons at best assuming that the buy doesn't bite into PCA. (Something I almost guarantee it will. ) PCA is supposed to replace the Active duty F15s.

Even as a missile truck the drag on these birds is ridiculous.

Currently there are 8 squadrons of which 5 are ANG and of the three active two are based in Kadena Japan and one in Lakenheath UK. In total there are 235 F-15C/D’s still in some sort of flying condition. The original F-22 program called for a total of 750 but currently there are only 185. In between the two programs there are only a combined inventory of 420 out of an original requirement for 750 front line fighters. Essentially there is no strategic depth in numbers when there is a national emergency. Those in the ANG will be called up out of necessity because there is simply not enough to go round. The EPAWSS upgrade was originally planned for the C/D’s but money had been pulled and only the E’s will be getting it. There are binary choices to be made and do nothing is dereliction. PCA is just too far away and is a convenient excuse in my opinion to kick the bucket down the road.

I agree a full loadout of 22 missiles will potentially invite drag penalty. The sensor shooter configuration with a “missile truck” is to address a high end fight due to a lack of F-22’s. Historically the pk’s from BVR is in the 0.3 range and I doubt it will get better with new technology. Bringing a maximal loadout of missiles to the fight is prudent when the calculus probably dictates 3 missiles needed per kill. Should the fight outcome ends up in post merge maneuvers, a significant portion of the loadout would likely be expended and consequently the drag normalised.

 

[Brumby]

You know guys we still have this ol' Thread and last post here wasn't that long ago.

The only way that F15X makes any logical sense is if the cost to extend the life of the legacy F15C and D is over 50 million a pop, and the people pushing this think that Boeing can pull off this program for 50-75 million. As above that line in the 75-85 million range is F35A.
F15SE was offered at 100 million. This is as the extent of modifications to achieve the reduced RCS and RAM treatments drive up the price point.
If you compare the projected F15SE RCS at .1m2 roughly that of F/A18E vs the F35 and factor in the projected price F35 wins. As it's RCS return is far better.

The people over in Warzone did a few recent articles on the F-15X which is worthwhile reading.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Their sources seem to suggest that Boeing will be very sharp with their price offering and will be significantly below the cost of a F-35A. Whether this means below $80 million a copy of below Lot 11 pricing of $89.4 million is hard to determine. It is a fact that the F-15C/D's need a suite of upgrades and life extension if it were to remain in service going forward. Say conservatively the number is around $15 million a copy. Warzone says Boeing's F-15X offers a much lower operating cost ($27K vs $42K per hour). If the facts hold up and based on an annual 250 hours flying time per airframe, the annual savings on operating cost is $3.75 million. Assuming an acquisition cost of $89 million less $15 million on upgrade, the annual savings would take 20 years to achieve self funding status.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

The EPAWSS upgrade was originally planned for the C/D’s but money had been pulled and only the E’s will be getting it.

It seems like the USAF code only to give to the E model as they made the choice to recap as opposed to reset.

Their sources seem to suggest that Boeing will be very sharp with their price offering and will be significantly below the cost of a F-35A. Whether this means below $80 million a copy of below Lot 11 pricing of $89.4 million is hard to determine.

With the way F35A prices have dropped it not hard to imagine a 80 million dollar lot before 2025. This F15X acquisition program runs in Parellel to that as such this is the reasoning for my figuring of a lower price point in F15X again looking back at early estimated it was somewhere around 30Million in 2010 for a F15C/D SLEP. If we assume that they added more to the package and start rolling up to a 50 million dollar mark.
Boeing had to figure a possible hair cut on in this. But I think K they wanted to keep the doors open and use it as a means to keep the line open for PCA.

The Air force shopped both Lockheed Martin and Boeing in this, I still feel the F22/F35 hybrid would have been the best option but my suspicion is that only would have worked had Lockheed Martin sealed a deal with the JSDF for a Hybrid Lightning Raptor (Brat Translation Alien Thunder Hoggie ;-) ) with out that the only other option was F16 Block 70+

 

[Air Force Brat]

It seems like the USAF code only to give to the E model as they made the choice to recap as opposed to reset.

With the way F35A prices have dropped it not hard to imagine a 80 million dollar lot before 2025. This F15X acquisition program runs in Parellel to that as such this is the reasoning for my figuring of a lower price point in F15X again looking back at early estimated it was somewhere around 30Million in 2010 for a F15C/D SLEP. If we assume that they added more to the package and start rolling up to a 50 million dollar mark.
Boeing had to figure a possible hair cut on in this. But I think K they wanted to keep the doors open and use it as a means to keep the line open for PCA.

The Air force shopped both Lockheed Martin and Boeing in this, I still feel the F22/F35 hybrid would have been the best option but my suspicion is that only would have worked had Lockheed Martin sealed a deal with the JSDF for a Hybrid Lightning Raptor (Brat Translation Alien Thunder Hoggie ;-) ) with out that the only other option was F16 Block 70+[/QUO

Yes, with the Dim congress, we will be fortunate if AOC doesnt attempt to disarm our military? Proof positive that cute, does NOT equate to Bright

 

[Brumby]

It seems like the USAF code only to give to the E model as they made the choice to recap as opposed to reset.

With the way F35A prices have dropped it not hard to imagine a 80 million dollar lot before 2025.

I agree. I think the $80 million delivery price is just round the corner. The current negotiations with the bulk buy with Lots 12 to 14 will likely substantially drive it very close to that number if not achieving it.

This F15X acquisition program runs in Parellel to that as such this is the reasoning for my figuring of a lower price point in F15X again looking back at early estimated it was somewhere around 30Million in 2010 for a F15C/D SLEP. If we assume that they added more to the package and start rolling up to a 50 million dollar mark.
Boeing had to figure a possible hair cut on in this. But I think K they wanted to keep the doors open and use it as a means to keep the line open for PCA.

Boeing in recent contracts had been very aggressive with pricing e.g. the T-X bid. It appears to me a business strategic decision to crowd out competition by aggressive pricing. Whether this will translate into a positive state with their bottom line is a different story. Given their recent aggressive stance, I expect that they will be very sharp with the F-15X pricing.

 

[Brumby]

Yes, with the Dim congress, we will be fortunate if AOC doesnt attempt to disarm our military? Proof positive that cute, does NOT equate to Bright

You should start worrying if AOC gets a seat onto any of the committees.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

inside
Lawmakers stand ready to protect F-35 from F-15X budget threats

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

:
"On Feb. 13, Republican Sens. John Cornyn and Ted Cruz of Texas, Susan Collins of Maine, Marco Rubio of Florida, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska sent a letter to President Donald Trump asking him to rethink the F-15X buy. All five senators come from states that make the F-35 or where the Joint Strike Fighter is planned to be based."

just a coincidence LOL

NO!, its not a coincidence, and that's what representatives are supposed to do, represent their constituency.... in this case, that's smart, although I'm not necessarily opposed to the F-15X,,, its a fine airplane... but it wouldn't last long without a 5Gen escort in contested airspace, maybe only a little longer with a 5Gen escort...

4Gen, and 4++Gen alike are in lot of trouble in airspace where S400s etc populate, you really should understand this by now???

I am moving this hear year as it again is F15X centric and Less F35.
@Air Force Brat is correct, that is there job. That is why programs in the DOD can become pork as powerful reps want to bring home the Bacon.

But also here I think is a failure of the people behind the F15X.
They created this program like a cabal.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.
The only reason we learned of it was because someone in on it leaked it.

Then it became clear that it was happening.
Because it was run almost in the black. They never bothered to sell it. F35 was sold we know it's a low observable strike fighter. F22 was sold it's a low observable air superiority fighter. What was F15X sold as?
Critics of the F35 rapidly tout it as the F35 Killer. The fighter that will send F35 packing with it's 22 AMRAAMS.
But wait a second here a strike fighter doesn't pack 22 AMRAAMS. (F15X wouldn't either it's a ridiculous amount of armament that would make it a sitting duck).
Variation 2 is oh well it's a Missile truck to support F35 on penitration missions. That F35 will scout ahead well F15x brings up rear and when F35 spots trouble it Link16s F15X who fires an AMRAAM. Except no because the whole point of sending F35 is that the mission is to risky to send a 4th gen. And with 22 AMRAAMS ( again BS) it would have a radar return of a B52.
So it's not for penitration.
F15X has no stealth it's not a rebrand of F15SE which only would have gotten a RCS reduction of maybe half. So it wouldn't be a stealth.
So what is it?
It's the F15 recap. But no one is saying that. No one is quoting what it would have cost to correct the structural issues of F15C and D well adding in the modern avionics and wings the Air force wants. Also No one is saying how much these will actually cost.

 

[TerraN_EmpirE]

The US Air Force doesn’t want F-15X. But it needs more fighter jets.


By:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

ORLANDO, Fla. — The U.S. Air Force

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. But it didn’t necessarily want the F-15X, and it didn’t intend to buy any

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, its top two leaders confirmed Thursday.

“Our budget proposal that we initially submitted

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

,” Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson told reporters during a Feb. 28 roundtable at the Air Force Association’s Air Warfare Symposium.

Wilson’s comments confirm reporting by Defense News and other outlets who have reported that the decision to buy new F-15X aircraft was essentially forced upon the Air Force. According to sources, the Pentagon’s Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation Office was a key backer of the F-15X and was able to garner the support of the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

Asked by one reporter, point blank, whether the Air Force wanted new F-15s, Wilson and Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein danced around the question.

“We want to buy new airplanes,” Goldfein said.

“We want to buy 72 aircraft a year,” Wilson added.

Air Force leadership has confirmed that, as long as current budget plans don’t change, it will request money for new F-15s in FY20. The service plans to purchase eight F-15X planes from Boeing in FY20, with an expected total buy of about 80 jets, Bloomberg reported Feb. 19.

Get the defense industry's most comprehensive news and information straight to your inbox
It’s normal for the Pentagon to be intimately involved with each service’s portion of the budget — and even to overrule service leadership and move funding around to better support the White House’s aims — something that Wilson herself alluded to in her comments.

“The Air Force and each of the services put in their budget proposals, given the top line that we’ve been allocated, and then there are further discussions that include the potential for some additional funds throughout that process,” she said. “It’s not something that is an Air Force decision. Ultimately it’s a Defense Department budget, and it goes into an overall presidential budget.”

However, the potential F-15X buy has received increased scrutiny for a number of reasons.

For one, Wilson has been vocal in dismissing reports that the Air Force had been considering purchasing an upgraded F-15.

“We are currently 80 percent fourth-gen aircraft and 20 percent fifth-generation aircraft,” she told Defense News in September. "In any of the fights that we have been asked to plan for, more fifth-gen aircraft make a huge difference, and we think that getting to 50-50 means not buying new fourth-gen aircraft, it means continuing to increase the fifth generation.”

Additionally, when Bloomberg broke the news that the Air Force would buy new F-15Xs in December, it reported that the decision was pushed by then-Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan, a former Boeing executive who has since become acting defense secretary. Shanahan’s spokesman has rebutted those reports, stating that “any DoD programmatic decisions impacting Boeing were neither made nor influenced by Mr. Shanahan.”

One official alluded to sustainment costs as being a critical factor in the decision to buy the F-15X over additional F-35 fighter jets.

Boeing has not disclosed its proposed F-15X unit price, with numbers from $100 million to less than $80 million having been reported by various outlets.

Gen. Mike Holmes, head of Air Combat Command, declined to comment on the cost per plane in a later roundtable, but said that some of the value of the F-15X proposal lays in the total ownership cost of the plane, especially when taking into account the expense of sustaining the F-35.

“There’s more to think about than just the acquisition cost. There’s the cost to operate the airplane over time. There’s the cost to transition at the installations where the airplanes are — does it require new military construction, does it require extensive retraining of the people and then how long does it take?” he said. “We’re pretty confident to say that we can go cheaper getting 72 airplanes with a mix of fifth and fourth gen than we did if we did all fifth gen.”

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

So now it makes some more sense.