JSF Chief Slams Boeing on F-15

JSF Chief Slams Boeing on F-15

The general building the F-35 called Boeing on the carpet here at the Paris Air Show, saying they were misleading customers as they marketed the F-15 “Silent Eagle.”

My colleague Andrea Shalal-Esa of Reuters interviewed Brig. Gen. David Heinz, program executive officer for the F-35. “So for Boeing to make statements about a ‘dumbed down’ variant … is absolutely incorrect and it is speculative and I believe, a very disappointing marketing ploy to drum up business,” she quoted Heinz as saying.

Jim Albaugh, the head of Boeing’s IDS, said earlier this week that the F-15 version would offer customers as much stealth as the government allows for export in tersm of its front radar cross section.


“We are not trying to say that this is an airplane that has full-aspect stealth capability,” Albaugh said. “It doesn’t. But from the front, “it has all the stealth that has been approved for export by the U.S. government.”

One of the things that may have left Gen. Heinz fuming is his belief that Boeing has been telling international customers for the F-35 that the US is selling a less stealthy version of the plane than they are buying.

He said foreign countries who bought the F-35 would be subject to a U.S. disclosure process and U.S. export controls, but the aircraft being sold today were the same airplanes that were also being built for the U.S. military services.

Boeing’s military aircraft president Chris Chadwick said the F-15 was being marketed only to existing F-15 customers, and was not in direct competition with the F-35.

“If there are other customers who would like to talk to us about the enhanced version of the F-15 (the Silent Eagle) we’d be happy to discuss,” he said, responding to Heinz’s remarks.

Boeing’s F-15 and F-18 fighter jets are competing against Lockheed’s F-16 for massive fighter jet orders around the world. Analysts say Boeing, the top U.S. exporter and the Pentagon’s No. 2 supplier in prime contracts, risks getting edged out of the fighter market altogether as the U.S. government focuses more and more on the F-35.

Keen to keep its fighter production lines open, Boeing in March unveiled an F-15 version that offers some radar-evading capability as an alternative for countries that can’t afford the F-35 fighter being developed by Lockheed for the United States and eight other countries.

Boeing has said it is speaking to companies in the United States and abroad about co-funding development of a new F-15 version aimed at Asian and Middle East markets that would incorporate coatings to help avoid detection by radar.

Heinz first criticized how Boeing was marketing its F-15 Silent Eagle at a news conference in Washington on June 2, and also took a swipe at its radar-evading capabilities.

Join the Conversation

After the barrage of lie’s Boing spouted during their tanker tantrum DoD is obviously fed-up with Boing’s lack of integrity.

Today’s Non-Ethics Word: Boinginate
Pronunciation: \Bo-ing-i-nate\
Function: Verb
Etymology: North Western US & Boeing/Aeronovali/JADC Consortium
Date: 2008
Transitive verb
: to habitually lie, cheat, bribe or steal if you really, really want to win

Boeing really needs some upper management changes and some new direction.

It looks like the AF (as always) wants total committment to the new airframe — they see the existing aircraft as threats. Why? The F-35 is far more expensive and will not be ready for several years. Those countries that need reliable air assets soon do not want to wait for an aircraft that may be available in a few years.
This is another in a long history of forcing countries to buy an expensive, over designed aircraft when what they need is available now. We should have sold a lot of F-20s instead of more F-16s — the F-20 was reliable, available, etc. But by making Singapore (for example) buy F-16s, that drove the cost of them down for the US Air Force. More examples of this are everywhere.
Hopefully many countries will continue to buy the F-15, that is the aircraft that the US Air Force needs today. It would fly for the next 20 years, would be operational as soon as it rolled off the assembly line. We have logistics and trained maintenance folks everywhere.

At the Conference Board in April of 2006, Jim McNeary’s speech was “Turning Ethics and Compliance Into A Competitive Advantage.” Is this guy walking the talk or what?

I really love reading how this miracle machine will do every thing but fix your coffee..and they are working on that lie too I bet. This is a classic example of how the Air farce, and its corporate led cronies are trying to push a piece of inbred mongrol trash down the Anerican tax payers throat, and a classic example of WHY legacy fighters, and the F22 are just as good and better than a unproven, untested, and unreliable piece of trash that one day may kill more pilots than it will save.

I have already written and gotten responses from my state senatorss about stopping funding for this uneeded system, and they agree with what I have written about. And I thin it is great news that they are not in support of the F35 lite trashII.

New models of the F15, the F16 with thrust vectoring nozzles, updated aviaonics, and beefed up airframes and new engines can out perform the F35, day, night, and even against the dreaded S300/400.

There is still way more combloc weapons( From A-Z!) around the world with their weapons systems pointed towards us,it just dosn’t stop at Iraq and Afganistan…NK has been acting up there will be others that act upin the future…I’ll give the go-ahead and take an order of 400 Silent Eagles…the more tools in the toolbox the better.

what the heck …its all on paper… just print more money and dig the material out of the rock and keep everybody in a good job at the same time.

For the clueless…

The F-15SE is intended for the export market, not for the USAF.

Are you serious operation7th? The RCS of the F-35 is orders of magnitude less than any 4th gen fighter out there. That’s the biggest advantage it has over the S300/400 — it can get in closer for the kill without being detected. There isn’t a single 4th gen fighter, beefed up avionics or LO or whatever, that will be getting within 200m of an S400 battery without being tracked. Even the silent eagle is no comparison, especially since all those platforms have to carry external weapons. It of course goes without saying that the avionics on the F-35 are on another level as well. If it wasn’t a huge advantage over any 4th fighter, our allies wouldn’t be climbing all over themselves to get a piece.

From the beginning, the F-15 was over-instrumented; about 300 dials and indicators to keep the pilot “in the cockpit”, when he should be “out of the cockpit” rubber necking for targets. The 5th gen aircraft (take your pick) supposedly all have so-called glass cockpits. Even the A-10 is being upgraded to this standard. The question becomes, is it cheaper to upgrade what we have or replace what we have? No amount of coating will give an F-15 a meaningful amount of stealth. Good grief, the frontal RCS of a B-1B is the size of a small bird! Problem is, radars, not to mention inrared detection systems, can look at you from many angles. Close in, electro-optical systems simply see you directly. One recalls that is how we lost an F-117 to Serbia, and that is arguably one of the stealthiest birds we had. The B-2 is still the stealthiest bird we have, pound for pound. Which gets to the question, is the long range bomber REALLY a dead concept. We can debate the relative merits of the various fighters until the cows come home, but short of ICBMs, nothing really reaches out and touches someone like a stealthy heavy!

B-2 is a subsonic 4th Gen jet. F-35 and F-22 are supersonic 5th Gen jets. B-2 is not the stealthiest jet out there; the F-22 is. The F-15 is a 1960’s airframe design. It has a great combat record as does the F-16. Radars “see” the 15 and 16, but not the F-22 and F-35. That’s the difference in the Generations. In terms of RCS, the –15 is an elephant compared to the bumblebee F-22. As for saying the F-15 is very stealthy from the front is a gross misstatement. A radar beam bouncing around inside the inlet and bouncing off the engine disk makes a good return echo even with interior coatings. The radar bounces around the canopy and cockpit, even off the seat. Even a few degrees off of direct ahead aspect means the radar beams will find the vertical tails, missile outlines, etc. Yes, the “new” F-15 is better than the earlier versions, but in no way are they even close to the RCS of the Raptor or Lightening II.

Findale, though an excellent writer, does not know much about aircraft! Glass cockpits do not have individual dials but they commonly present far more information to a pilot than the “dial and indicator” cockpit. Then you have the heads-up display and various voice frequencies about 20 assorted warning tones in your headset…

The advantage that the F-15E (especially the E model) has is that there are two guys in there to split the load. One guy could fly the plane while one guy stares at a target with binoculars.

In Iraq, in Afghanistan, in many conflicts — stealth is not needed. If we are discussing bombers — the “low stealth” B-52 is doing a lot of the lifting there. In some potential future conflicts stealth would come in handy but for many of them it would be just an unnecessary expense.

Interesting comments, but I think there are some fundamental misunderstandings here. At least as far as I understand things. First, the Silent Eagle has internal weapons carriage to lower its RCS, so no external stores bouncing beams back. Not sure what they have considered for engine intakes. Secondly, let’s be realistic here…the F-15SE is not a contender to take out Russia’s latest flying telephone poles. Rather, it offeres countries that can’t afford F-22s and F-35s with what they really need, a little stealth and a lot of flexibility…without development cost. Even the US doesn’t need all the Gee-Whiz of 5th gen fighters very much. After air superiority is established, why do you need stealth? The F-15SE seems like a great idea for the purpose it was intended. If only the F-22 and F-35 were still (or ever) as relevant as the F-15.

When the stealth capability becomes widely deployed around the world, countermeasures will be developed that will render it irrelevant. Its easier and cheaper to counter the capability than to create the capability. Its just a matter of time before some new widget is developed (or old school system is adapted like the Serbs in the 90s) to counter the stealth of the new airframes.

As an experience mechanic on th F-15, F-16, and F22 I can tell you that the F-15 has always been the better aircraft. The only way that the F-22 beats the F-15 is that is newer, ie. newer technology. It’s not really the
“Boeing” F-15, It’s the “McDonnell Douglas” F-15. Boeing bought ought McDonnell Douglas in the late 90’s. Our goverment and military screwed us tax payers by not buying the F-23. (Northrop/ McDonnell Douglas) It was a better airplane in every way, built buy two companies that new how to build fighters. The F-15 is superior to the F-35 in everyway. You can not beat the better payload capabilty, range, speed, manuverubility, or the reliability of 2 engines. Buying the f-35 is a dumb move just like trying to use the F-16 as cheap altenative to the F-15. The F16’s airframe and componets have been constantly upgraded with time which has only resulted in reduced performance and billions of wasted dollars. The same thing will happen with the F-35. Each time the F-15 has been upgraded resulted in a better performing aircraft. There is only so much you can do with a small, single engine platform before it becomes a flying brick.

*required

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement