Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 1 of 34 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 1001

Thread: USAF not F-35 thread

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,386

    USAF not F-35 thread

    http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...r-f-22-410575/

    About time, they could have already had scorpion HMS in service. At this rate, the F-22 will have used up half of it's service life by the time all of the weapons and upgrades it should have had are integrated.

    This was from May of last, but speaks to the overall problem with the USAF upgrade path with the F-22.

    http://archive.airforcetimes.com/art...ation-spending
    Last edited by FBW; 26th March 2015 at 12:26.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,386
    Didn't see this in the news thread either. The legion pod IRST for F-15, 16. The podded AN/AAS-42 has already flown with aggressor F-16 units.

    http://www.defensenews.com/story/def...-afa/23182593/

    IRST 21 is based on the AN/AAS-42 IRST that flew on the F-14D.

    The new IRST is the next generation of the F-14D AN/AAS-42 IRST that was
    operational aboard U.S. aircraft carriers and accumulated over 200,000 flight hours
    http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/pro...archTrack.html

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,386
    Excerpts from the Senate armed services committee about USAF:
    At 55 combat coded squadrons, moving to 49, it is also our smallest
    force ever -- by comparison, there were 134 combat coded fighter squadrons in Operation Desert
    Storm.
    The Active Component Air Force is currently 520 fighter pilots short of the total fighter
    pilot manning requirement and our projections indicate this will worsen in the future.
    F-15
    This investment continues modernization of the F-15C/D with
    Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radars, a more capable aircraft mission computer, a
    new electronic warfare self-protection suite, and the Eagle Passive/Active Warning Survivability
    System (EPAWSS)
    Nevertheless, we believe currently funded modernization and sustainment programs will facilitate safe and effective operations for all 196 F-15C/D aircraft through at least 2040,
    - interesting, I thought the total "golden eagles was to be 178.

    F-16:
    Unfortunately, there are important capabilities we were not able to
    fund. These include major upgrades like the F-16 Combat Avionics Programmed Extension
    Suite (CAPES) program originally planned to upgrade 300 aircraft
    F-22:
    Increment 3.1 is fielding now and is scheduled for completion in FY17; it is designed to deliver advanced air-ground capabilities including Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) ground mapping, threat geolocation, and a Small
    Diameter Bomb (SDB) carriage. Increments 3.2A and 3.2B remain on track for fielding in 2015 and 2018, respectively.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,449
    Nevertheless, we believe currently funded modernization and sustainment programs will facilitate safe and effective operations for all 196 F-15C/D aircraft through at least 2040
    This is the first time I've seen the number "4" in this context...
    Last edited by Rii; 27th March 2015 at 15:39.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,529
    The have tested it to be suitable till 18,000 hours (airframe). By limiting the hours per year you could maintain a sizable fleet beyond the 2030-2035 time-frame.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,449
    I read Stephen Baxter's novel Flood a couple years back: enormous quantities of water are bubbling up from the Earth's crust, progressively flooding the entire world over several decades, up to and including Mt. Everest. It's hardly a great work of literature (or even science fiction) but it's a fun read, if you like apocalypse fiction.

    I bring it up because in the middle of this novel's extended apocalypse, in the mid-2030s, there is a mass migration of people across the United States, fleeing low-lying places like Florida for the (temporary) safety of Texas. And at one point, this human highway of millions is buzzed by an F-15, apparently keeping an eye on things. The novel describes it as a flying antique.

    So for Stephen Baxter, the idea that USAF would still be flying F-15s in 2035 was an appropriate symbol for and consequence of the beleaguered state of the US government and its efforts to keep abreast of the apocalypse. Meanwhile, in the real world, the same thing is scheduled to occur, courtesy not of all-consuming floodwaters, but as a consequence of the astonishing institutional mismanagement of the last several decades, which has produced on the one hand a remarkable aircraft that the nation can't afford, and on the other a more modest, affordable aircraft that the nation can't afford either.

    Still, I know which tale makes for more interesting reading.
    Last edited by Rii; 30th March 2015 at 09:19.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,362
    Quote Originally Posted by bring_it_on View Post
    The have tested it to be suitable till 18,000 hours (airframe). By limiting the hours per year you could maintain a sizable fleet beyond the 2030-2035 time-frame.
    Kind of puts in perspective the F35 fanboys who claim that the Eurocanards aren't going to be relevant past 2020-25 if the F15 is to last until at least 2040

    Nic

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,445
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas10 View Post
    Kind of puts in perspective the F35 fanboys who claim that the Eurocanards aren't going to be relevant past 2020-25 if the F15 is to last until at least 2040
    Simple reasoning.

    The F-15 will not be a primary fighter through 2040 as it can count on the combo of F-22/35 for that.

    However, the Eurofighter does not have anything else to fall back on.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    2,250
    Mais non... it has.... le Rafale!

    Joking aside spuddy you win for most nationalist claptrap I've read today.

    Try widening your knowledge, take a look at the UCAV systems the Euros (including the UK ) are working on.
    Last edited by snafu352; 26th March 2015 at 16:47.
    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
    Bertrand Russell

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    New Sarum
    Posts
    4,362
    Personally I think the USAF (keeping the thread on track) will be flying alongside Mothership Eurocanards and their UCAV progeny by 2035 anyway.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas10 View Post
    Kind of puts in perspective the F35 fanboys who claim that the Eurocanards aren't going to be relevant past 2020-25 if the F15 is to last until at least 2040

    Nic
    I suggest you read the thread title again

    Having said that the F-15C and F-15E fleets would be on the back of the F-35 Fleet which as per current plans is going to be greater than 2000 units. You also have the F-22A.

    You then have to factor in that there are over 500 F-18E/F super hornets with the Navy, and there FA-XX efforts should result in some sort of LRIP by the early 2030's. The USAF should also have a 6th generation fighter by the early to mid 2030's. The F-15C and F-15E would not exist as front line fighters in that time-frame. Had there been no F-22's and F-35's you would have replaced them much earlier or taken a capability hit.

    The USAF isn't claiming that the F-15C in the 2030's will be a cutting edge fighter just like all the F-4 operators in the world at the moment aren't claiming that their fighter is the best in the world.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,362
    Quote Originally Posted by bring_it_on View Post
    Having said that the F-15C and F-15E fleets would be on the back of the F-35 Fleet which as per current plans is going to be greater than 2000 units. You also have the F-22A.

    You then have to factor in that there are over 500 F-18E/F super hornets with the Navy, and there FA-XX efforts should result in some sort of LRIP by the early 2030's. The USAF should also have a 6th generation fighter by the early to mid 2030's. The F-15C and F-15E would not exist as front line fighters in that time-frame. Had there been no F-22's and F-35's you would have replaced them much earlier or taken a capability hit.

    The USAF isn't claiming that the F-15C in the 2030's will be a cutting edge fighter just like all the F-4 operators in the world at the moment aren't claiming that their fighter is the best in the world.
    That wasn't my point, F18E/F are here to stay, but now it turns out that the F15 too! So with 2000 odd F35s + the F22 fleet, how many bazillion planes do you guys expect to field in 2040?

    Nic

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,529
    but now it turns out that the F15 too!
    That some F-15C's are going to be kept till 18,000 airframe hours was something that has been known for a while. How you stretch that in terms of times depends upon your utilization.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,445
    Quote Originally Posted by snafu352 View Post
    Mais non... it has.... le Rafale!

    Joking aside spuddy you win for most nationalist claptrap I've read today.

    Try widening your knowledge, take a look at the UCAV systems the Euros (including the UK ) are working on.
    Try actually reading and understanding a post before commenting.

    There was nothing nationalistic in what I said. All I said was that the F-15C/D can stay in service because the F-15C/D will not have to be the top fighter for the US throughout it's whole lifetime.

    Neither the Eurofighter nor Rafale have a replacement on the drawing boards at this time. No, UCAVs are not it either. They are barely in their infancy in an A2G role and even assuming they can compete in an A2A role in the next 10-15 years is wishful thinking.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,362
    It makes no sense to use the older Hi of a Hi/Lo mix, & use it to be the new Lo mix of your Hi/Mid/Lo mix, esp if budget is running scarce.

    Nic

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas10 View Post
    It makes no sense to use the older Hi of a Hi/Lo mix, & use it to be the new Lo mix of your Hi/Mid/Lo mix, esp if budget is running scarce.

    Nic
    The aircrafts are staying put with upgrades (F-15C's). The F-35A's entering are replacing the units loosing the F-16 capability. That number (both outgoing and incoming) is fixed and the rate of production is reflected in the SAR.

    In order to replace all the F-15C's ( being retained ) with F-35A's you would need to increase the USAF procurement beyond 2020 from the current plan of 80 a year. That number is dependent on the acquisition dollars available and is unlikely to significantly increase due to other commitments. Then there is the issue of having the life left in them to serve till then. They have already cleared these for a 18K hour service life.
    Last edited by bring_it_on; 27th March 2015 at 05:42.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    2,250
    Quote Originally Posted by SpudmanWP View Post
    .
    So says you. Remind me who are you again? Oh yes a person on a message board...
    I happen to think your assessment is incorrect.

    I doubt i'll change your mind but hey ho it isn't going to stop me from pointing out when you make comments that essentially add up to US good everywhere else not so good or behind or bad.

    To remind you it was you that stated: "However, the Eurofighter does not have anything else to fall back on. " in a thread titled "USAF not F-35 thread"...
    So don't cry about being unjustly labelled mate. Those of us who have been here long enough have seen you do it time and time again.

    Your obsession with the bomber, oh sorry strike fighter that shall not be named on this thread, seemingly leads you to dismiss any other method of achieving the tasking's that platform will undertaking.
    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
    Bertrand Russell

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,529
    So says you. Remind me who are you again? Oh yes a person on a message board...
    I happen to think your assessment is incorrect.
    Are you claiming that the next generation of UCAV's that are being worked upon are fully capable or will be fully capable at induction to replace frontline Air to Air fighters?
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Luxembourg
    Posts
    2,250
    No.
    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.
    Bertrand Russell

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,929
    replace maybe no, but work with, quite possibly. A flight of a manned fighter with a few autonous drones which would follow and fight designated targets could very well be done, including in air to air. While they wouldn't have the capability to analyze the situation like a human could, once the target is designated, you could order them to destroy it and even order a particular tactic. If, today, the video games industry can program the A.I. to "fly" this or that way, chances are that, with the budgets allowed, with hardware available, defence developers will be able to program the A.I. of the drones to do the same.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Columbia, MD
    Posts
    11,529
    Quote Originally Posted by snafu352 View Post
    No.
    So thats essentially what he is saying as well. The F-15C/D is going to be secondary to the F-22 and F-35 fleets, which would ultimately play a secondary role to the fighters that will look to replace them well into the future. No one is going to claim that the F-15C even with AESA and newer EW gear is going to be a cutting edge fighter in the 2030's nor will it act as such since its operator would have a sizable next generation fleet by then. As per the current plans the F-35 acquisition winds down in 2038 and by then the F-X should be in LRIP if not full rate of production. Depending upon how development, and budgets pan out you would be looking to either replace the F-15C/D's with the F-X (replace F-22+F-15C fleets) or continue buying more F-35's if there are cost or technical challenges developing or producing the F-X.

    UCAV's would obviously be in addition to this.

    @FBW, I suggest you change the title of the thread
    Last edited by bring_it_on; 27th March 2015 at 17:03.
    Old radar types never die; they just phased array

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,438
    Quote Originally Posted by SpudmanWP View Post
    Simple reasoning.

    The F-15 will not be a primary fighter through 2040 as it can count on the combo of F-22/35 for that.

    However, the Eurofighter does not have anything else to fall back on.
    Off course that by 2040 the only obvious advantage that those two aircrafts have over the Eurofighter on the ATA scenario, RCS, might well be entirely eroded...

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,445
    I was not trying to compare the F-22/35 with the Eurofighter.

    I was simply answering the question of how the F-15 could remain operational through 2040 when some claim that the EF will have trouble in a post-2025 world.

    The answer was simply that the F-15 has two newer planes (the F-22/35) that will handle future A2A threats and that the EF does not have anything in the pipeline that will be available to take over for it in the A2A role by 2025.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

  24. #24
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,550
    Quote Originally Posted by TooCool_12f View Post
    replace maybe no, but work with, quite possibly. A flight of a manned fighter with a few autonous drones which would follow and fight designated targets could very well be done, including in air to air. While they wouldn't have the capability to analyze the situation like a human could, once the target is designated, you could order them to destroy it and even order a particular tactic. If, today, the video games industry can program the A.I. to "fly" this or that way, chances are that, with the budgets allowed, with hardware available, defence developers will be able to program the A.I. of the drones to do the same.
    That's bit of a stretch frankly. If you want a drone with the speed, agility and flexibility of a fighter aircraft... well, odds are it'll cost far more to develop than a conventional fighter aircraft. The UK and France (and the US for that matter) don't seem to aiming for something that ambitious with the FCAS. Alternately, you could use the UCAV purely as a weapons platform in air combat but that's feasible only if we're willing to treat it as a (somewhat) expendable asset, but given the likely unit cost of the aircraft (not much cheaper than a fighter) that's not going to be possible.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,550
    Quote Originally Posted by Sintra View Post
    Off course that by 2040 the only obvious advantage that those two aircrafts have over the Eurofighter on the ATA scenario, RCS, might well be entirely eroded...
    Not necessarily. The Eurofigher will be nearing retirement so probably won't field 2040s tech (an awkward phrase). It'll probably have a sensor fit from an MLU dating back to 2025-30. Will we field technology capable of entirely eroding RCS in that time-frame? Most firms developing fighter aircraft in the world are probably hoping that's not the case (except perhaps for Saab). Maybe they'd develop some sort of strap-on gadget (an even more awkward phrase) nullifying stealth post-2030?

  26. #26
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,362
    Quote Originally Posted by Vnomad View Post
    Not necessarily. The Eurofigher will be nearing retirement so probably won't field 2040s tech (an awkward phrase). It'll probably have a sensor fit from an MLU dating back to 2025-30. Will we field technology capable of entirely eroding RCS in that time-frame? Most firms developing fighter aircraft in the world are probably hoping that's not the case (except perhaps for Saab). Maybe they'd develop some sort of strap-on gadget (an even more awkward phrase) nullifying stealth post-2030?
    You only need your drone to be stealth & subsonic, and have good onboard sensors & datalink to transmit data to accompanying fighters (any two seater will do). Direct LOS AESA datalink will enable a stealth drone & fighter to work in tandem, with the drone going anywhere the fighter can't in hairy scenarios and expanding weapons or sending firing coordinates to other assets.

    Nic

  27. #27
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,550
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas10 View Post
    You only need your drone to be stealth & subsonic, and have good onboard sensors & datalink to transmit data to accompanying fighters (any two seater will do). Direct LOS AESA datalink will enable a stealth drone & fighter to work in tandem, with the drone going anywhere the fighter can't in hairy scenarios and expanding weapons or sending firing coordinates to other assets.

    Nic
    1. If the fighter and drone operate in tandem, than the fighter also gets limited to subsonic speeds. What if the formation gets intercepted by enemy aircraft? The fighters will be able to scatter, withdraw or engage. The drones will be hobbled with by their limited speed and agility. Especially considering that the drone will be at a certain orientation to the fighter while the enemy attacks can come from any aspect.

    2. The need to maintain line-of-sight limits the pair's capability. The drone will always be 'leashed' to the fighter, making penetrative strikes and long range attack difficult to pull off given that the Rafale will still be detectable and the LOS has limited range and the fighter will need to remain on station throughout.

    Point is, the arrangement will rob the fighter pilot of the flexibility necessary for his job.
    Last edited by Vnomad; 27th March 2015 at 21:27.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,043
    Quote Originally Posted by SpudmanWP View Post

    The answer was simply that the F-15 has two newer planes (the F-22/35) that will handle future A2A threats and that the EF does not have anything in the pipeline that will be available to take over for it in the A2A role by 2025.
    It's safe to say those F-15C will provide cover for F-35 and not the other way around,
    F-35 is for A2G work

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Vnomad View Post
    Maybe they'd develop some sort of strap-on gadget (an even more awkward phrase) nullifying stealth post-2030?
    lasers consume too much power to install as a retrofit,
    but MALD, GaN AESA, & IRST can be expected 2030

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,445
    Quote Originally Posted by obligatory View Post
    It's safe to say those F-15C will provide cover for F-35 and not the other way around,
    F-35 is for A2G work
    After 2025, in denied environments.. put the bottle down
    Last edited by SpudmanWP; 27th March 2015 at 22:31.
    "The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES