PAS11: Boeing’s iron Eagle

PAS11: Boeing’s iron Eagle

PARIS — Boeing could continue manufacturing variants of its F-15 Eagle — a fighter first flown in 1972 — all the way until the 2020s, the president of its military aircraft division confirmed Tuesday. If Boeing can lock in deals with the air forces of Saudi Arabia and South Korea, it could make new investments “for the long term,” Chris Chadwick told reporters, to make its Eagles or Silent Eagles as cheap and easy to produce as they’ve ever been.

At stake are a total of about 144 aircraft — the potential for around 84 for the Saudis and some 60 for the South Koreans — and Chadwick said Boeing is making a pitch very similar to the one it makes for its F/A-18 Super Hornet: The Eagle may not be the newest bird in the sky, but customers can get a familiar fighter for predictable costs, and both the Saudis and the South Koreans will get the convenience of commonality with their existing, older fleets of F-15s.

Boeing is at war with Lockheed over the South Korean fighter deal, but it could have the edge with the Saudis, who are said to like the Silent Eagle. Chadwick said he had no information about that, but he did say the discussions he’s seen between the Saudis and the U.S. government, which would be the go-between on a sale, “have been very positive.”


Boeing’s strategy of keeping its production lines going as long as possible, then offering lower-cost aircraft, which keeps the production lines going, which enables it to offer more lower-cost aircraft — et cetera — is a keystone for the aerospace’s giant’s portfolio. Chadwick also said that Boeing has plenty of new work, too, including the Air Force’s KC-46, which drew calls from international customers “within minutes” of DoD’s announcement earlier this year, because other air forces want to fly the same tanker as the Americans. But the older jets, like Eagles and Hornets, remain profitable because the company has learned how to crank them out in large volumes.

So does that mean that Boeing could sell Eagles to the U.S. Air Force? If it asked for them, sure, Chadwick said, but he acknowledged the Air Force is locked in to the F-35 and he didn’t expect more American sales of F-15s. However, he said there is the possibility that the Air National Guard may want to replace some of its F-15s, but it hasn’t asked for any new jets yet.

Join the Conversation

“keeping its production lines going as long as possible” — finally a strategy that makes sense

Dump the F-35 (stealth is dead), fix and reopen the F-22, and buy new F-15’s.

I’m starting to think the Silent Eagle is more a marketing ploy to combat Lockheed than a serious option.

Has anyone heard anything recent on this aircraft’s progress?

The F15SE is not more than a another F15 modification like the F15SG and not a new Air Craft, it is not more than a marketing advertisement to sell a outdated design. The RCS reduction of a F15SE will not be significant against a enemy with moder Weapons but good enough for Wars against poor enemys like Nord Korea our the Iran.

Stealth his dead for all progressives like Obama and Barney frank and libertarians like Ron Paul how will cut stealth Jets to get more money for is pet programs. The best evidence what stealth is not dead is the existing of new enemy stealth fighters like the J20 and the PAK FA.

I just wish 5 or 8 years ago that someone in the DOD had started a super eagle program like the Navy did with the Super Hornet. Focus on ease of manufacture, internal volume and load it with top quality off-the-shelf tech. Think a much more extensive reworking of the eagle than the Silent Eagle program. I realize it’s a ridiculously pie-in-the-sky idea but dammit, it’d be nice. It would make having so few Raptors a lot more palatable.

It’s not about being invisible. It’s about reducing detection range sufficient to gain a tactical advantage.

I live near the Boeing plant that produces the Eagles/Super Hornets. My question is, with the last F-15K to be delivered in April 2012, what is the production line going to do while it waits for the Saudi Deal.. just temp. close down?

I’m pretty sure it happened back in 2001 until the USAF gave Boeing a stop-gap order to buy time for the F-15K/SG deals.

Hey! A really great opportunity to recapitalize the F15C/D fleet.…wait…makes logical sense, NOPE won’t do it! costs too little and there are no Obama funds for stimulus…they went to crooked bankers who are now on vacation in Cabo San Lucas on our tax dollars

Kind of like what the Russians have done with the Flanker.

Stealth IS DEAD!!!!! The F-15 SE is and will be the best Platform. We DO NOT NEED FUCKING JSF at $160,000,000.00 Each!!!!!!!!!!!!! We can purchase the new F-15Silent Eagel at 1/4 the price of one JSF. This addition of the F-15 has a lower RCS than JSF. If JSF Loads Pylons to blow up a bridge it has a larger RCS than the F-15SE. JSF does not have an Air-Air Gun on-board. Something we said decades ago would never happen. Only Lockheed would build an aircraft (JSF) that cannot communicate with F-22, F-15, F-16, F-18, B-52, AC-130, HH-53, no legacy platform with IFDL and MADL on-board F-22. Leon will fix this shit in a Nano minute. Get ready Lockheed and you steer ropers and rip off artists on Wall Street and Texas… It time for you to pack your shit and go home. The DOD had had enough Cost overruns. Get the Fuck out of Washington and go HOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Chadwick, Aston Carter and the rest of those assholes at the Pentagon need to be fired. JSF is the largest 16 Year Waste of funding known to Man!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Firescout has more capability than JSF.…

Yes, Upgrade the F-15 and purchase the Silent Eagle for the Air Force. This platform is Air Domance.

You know at least Byron makes cogent arguments for for his cause even if I don’t agree with him. But Pucken has lost the plot.

What if we dumped the F-35 for a FB-22-A Strike Raptor for the Air Force and Navy and maybe even one for the Marines? The F-35 isn’t that stealthy and just seems like a waste of money. So much money is going for the F-35 that it seems like an over bloated/late boondoggle. I have heard the manufacturing lessons and materials used for the F-35 are going to be retrofitted to the F22A plus the increased sensor capabilities from the F-35 are being retrofitted to the F-22. F-35 seems like the same pattern of bloatware as FCS; which any engineer could see that an FCS vehicle only being 18 inches off the ground was a horrible mistake and big waste which led to the cancellation of FCS.

Highly doubtful in this economic climate.

5 or 8 years ago the DOD was all about the F-22. Although a “Super Eagle” akin to the Super Hornet would be nice for nations not cleared for (or could not wait for) the F-35.

That would cost MORE money & take MORE time. The F-35 is VERY stealthy, just not as stealthy as the F-22. Note that the PAK FA & J-20 will ‘only’ be about a s stealthy as the F-35…

Anything but offering a new (working) fighter type to airforces.

Constant innovation is soooo Russian…

What “tactical advantages” do you gain with the targets too far outside your ammunition’s range? You need to show up to fight!

But it would be perfect. Imagine 2.443 F-22s instead of 187, what that does

1) to the unit price (foreigners would have to buy non-American)

AND

2) to the overall program cost (= huge savings!)

AND

3) to your Airforce’s fighting strength!

Plus it would take much less time to navalize the F-22 and to teach it to carry bombs than to give birth to (any version of) the abortive F-$$.

Presuming Chinese and Russian RAM is comparable…

Presuming F-$$s fly…

If F-15SEs have a lower RCS, then that means it’s STEALTHIER than an F-35…if that’s the case and since stealth is “dead”, then we don’t need them either…just saying…

Trouble is: A F-15 “Silent Eagle” unfortunately costs 100 million $ (even South Korea’s F-15 K version does…), while a F-22 “Raptor” costs only 150 million $ . Meaning: For only 50 % more money you get 100 % (200 % ? 300 % ?) more stealth and a brand-new, true 5th-generation fighter. Or would YOU rather duel with PAK-FAs and J-20s sitting in a “F-15 SE” than in a F-22?

But although I recommend the U.S.A.F. to build only F-22s for air-to-air and carrier versions (instead of the more expensive and inviable F-$$s), and also because fighter-bombers rarely “work” before stealth bombers, cruise missiles strikes and air superiority fighters rendered the skies completely safe for them, I’m still convinced that a mix of F-15 “Strike Eagles” and A-10s would be the U.S.A.F.‘s ( ANY airforce’s!!!) best GROUND attack planes for at least another 40 years, No kidding. Not everything changes with time, not every plane “needs” stealth. Some designs are simply unbeatable!

Why don’t you sell the F22 to selected partners? … now that the Chinese and Russian know well the stealth and have their models, (plus the F35 details) …why not sell F22 to Japan, UK, Australia, even to France. Why not?

Barry — Indeed, cancel the very pittiful F-35 program and runaway from it. Re-open the F-22 production line and sell it to US Allies and buy new F-15E variants for ACC, ANG and AFRC. I also recommend that Boeing Company should develop the F-15F model a single seat variant of the E model, with IRST sensor, APG-82 AESA radar, EWSP sensor suite and other sensors available, RAM materials in the air intakes and airframe, integrate 5th Generation JSF cockpit, plus MBDA Meteor BVR AAM for all F-15s, etc. If you’re or anyone else is wondering why develop the F-15F variant? Is to provide new and existing customers to purchase additional aircraft. Just like the Sukhoi Company developed the Su-35S/BM Flanker E variant in the similar way, as an export variant. In my opinion Australia should replace the Legacy F/A-18A/B Hornets with either F-15s or F-22s instead of 100 JSFs.

Does anyone know about the detection range for the APG-82 AESA radar?

If the F-15 is outdated, then the Su-27 that other countries fly are even more outdated. Okay, so Russia and China are coming out with some stealth jets. But 1) they’re not going to be as good as the F-22 and F-35, and 2) with China’s defense budget at a mere fraction of America’s, they are not going to be able to produce enough J-20’s to take on 187 Raptors or however many F-35’s we’re building.

An navalized F-22 will take just as long to develop and test as an F-35C, and more than likely cost more.

Not if I do the talking. I would remember ways to make suppliers satisfy even the most eccentric, the most outlandish of my whims, and before schedule! I need to be truly independent of course, to think freely, not be on every corporation’s payroll like a prostitute or a career politician.

Believe me: Navalizing the F-22 and the A-10 is EVERYTHING BUT a “technical” problem! Or do you think the U.S.A.F. slipped into the F-$$ hole for “purely technical” reasons? Come on, this is America!

Barry — The F-15 is truly a very tough beast, the worlds most remarkable warplane, certainly never being beaten in air-to-air combat, with victory of 104 kills against MiGs, Su-7, Su-22s and Mirage F.1s in the Persian Gulf in 1991 and Kosovo in 1999 which downed MiG-29s, despite its 1968 airframe design age. Still going very strong. The F-15 deserves to be kept in production line beyond 2012. I recommend both the F-15 and F-22 are the top dream machines for air powers defence needs. F-15 is the most effective, offers numerous advantages including higher top speed, longer range, firepower with formidable punch, a much greater missile payload and cost effective.

Part 1 / 3

Just to make my point:

The U.S. Navy’s F-$$ “B” version (unit price: 150 million $ . Today. Right now. Still) is the most expensive F-$$ version of the three F-$$s, hence the most expensive fighter EVER made. Ridiculous…

In comparison, making an A-10 costs only 11,8 million $ . That’s only 7,86 % of a F-$$ “B”. Which means that for each F-$$ B the Marines could have 12,7 navalized A-10s instead, a cell phone or iPad call away, as easy as yelling for a cab or for icecream. Do you think that any Marine would object against fighting anywhere, everywhere in the World in the growing shadows of carrier-borne, dive-bombing A-10s?

(Continued)

Part 2 / 3

I know: No chance in Hell for that. Both Lockheed and even the U.S.A.F. fear and hate the super-effective A-10s…

Probably the U.S. Navy does, too. Imagine: Once the A-10 gets successfully navalized (although some other slight improvements would be welcome, too), it takes only

1) a mental baby step to create the first, “pure Marines aircraft carrier” (dedicated solely to land operations, or “invasion support”, or “blatant Imperialism”, like any regular helicopter carrier does, not to sea control like the classical aircraft carriers),

then

2) a second mental baby step to concentrate all aircraft carriers (of all sizes) dedicated exclusively to land operations in a single expeditionary fleet, and increasing it and improving it, etc.,

and finally

3) a third and last mental baby step to FULL MARINE INDEPENDENCE from the U.S. Navy!!!!!!!

(Continued)

Part 3 / 3

U.S. Navy admirals aren’t stupid, merely EXTREMELY narrow-minded: To these flabby corporativists, creating a new Armed Forces branch is worse than losing war after war abroad (petty institutional turf wars), wanna bet? The present “patriotic” military institutions and the businesses they represent would rather answer a Marine’s call for massive air support with a single, pathetically ineffective F-$$ B worth 12,7 A-10s!!! As you see, the A-10 is unfortunately TOO good for its own good, even in rôles that haven’t even been assigned to it!

That’s why I also said above that I was only defending MY own suggestion for a perfect Airforce, not what really goes on in the heads of the utterly corrupt, worthless U.S. brass.

How does this piece even remotely relate to anything “Barry” has done?

Interesting viewpoint…let me know whatever it is your smoking/sniffing/drinking…that stuff sounds good…

Right on.

Exactly. But the French won’t buy, because they’re just as chauvinistic as we are, plus they’re too cheap to fund a real military capability, and of course they’re untrustworthy.

Do you want the answer in Chinese or Russian?

About 100–125 miles against a target with a RCS of 1m3.

we totally should. could add other allies into the list too, like Canada. it would grow jobs and our economy. export laws and politics are in the way. an exportable F-22 would be a threat to the F-35.

http://​www​.raytheon​.com/​c​a​p​a​b​i​l​i​t​i​e​s​/​p​r​o​d​u​c​t​s​/​apg…

Retard, put your blinders on and just pay for 2.443 F-$$s!

Lockheed knows best.

ok so he’s wrong on stealth is dead, but the rest of his suggestions make sense. and what do you suggest, stay the course with F-35??? Since that strategy has worked so well for us in the past????

Hahaha…your funny…

still in drugs?????

and you gonna pay for that????

To the poster “Guest”

You rote: “This will never happen because of one fundamental truth. Too many people with too large egos would have to admit they made a mistake in backing the F-35. (…) It didn’t used to be this way. XB-70 was stopped at 4 acft; F-20 Tigershark was cut at 3 acft. Wonder what changed, when that made saying ‘oops, we screwed up’ a no-no.”

Ain’t that the Truth!!! But I wonder: Is the delicate self-esteem of these people with towering egos who feel too high-born to change their opinion about the F-$$ in public really worth 323 billion $ of taxpayers money, and also worth looking at a joke of an Airforce for 40+ years?

Couldn’t AT LEAST Obama himself have looked at the bill and called it quits in 2009, right after he sat down on the throne?

The F-$$ is totally unpatriotic!!!

“muscimol” asked a crystal-clear question and made her point, yet you dodged it.
Of the 5.179 planned F-$$s, only 2.443 will go to the U.S.. Airforce & U.S. Navy & U.S. Marines & U.S. what else, but the majority of all planned F-$$s ( = 2.736 F-$$s) will be exported to FOREIGNERS ! And of these 2.736 F-$$s to be exported, at least ~ 533 F-$$s were ordered by European countries. (I know: All these figures were claimed by Lockheed Martin itself, so they mean absolutely $hit!)

I’m saying this because I also don’t understand why any European country would possibly prefer a vastly inferior AND more expensive F-$$ over a vastly superior (at least airworthy…) F-22, given the choice! But no: As staunch, cash-rich allies we’re only allowed to peek into America’s trash can.

At a time when America desperately needs export dollars we have two fighter manufacturers — one produces obsolete aircraft with 50 year old designs that nobody wants, and the other takes orders for aircraft 5 times more expensive of foreign equivalents and delivers 6 monthly apologies from their CEO on their failure to deliver.

Sorry shipmate, but F-22 in any form is no where near robust enough for the Navy … we fly from aircraft carriers donchaknow. Even a good smooth arrested landing aboard ship would be considered a crash by the Air Force and Raptor isn’t designed for that kind of punishment.

I’d recommend either continuing with the F-35C Carrier version or let the smartguys at Northrup Grumman have some fun and design a rebuild for the 100 or so F-14s still stored at Davis Monthan AFB boneyard, something like the Silent Eagle in concept.

The F20 was just too close in performance and capacity to the F16, and everyone wanted to by what the USAF was buying, It’s not that the F16 was Better, it was what the big boys were using, so everyone else wanted them too.

The XB-70 was stopped because it was an obsolete concept.
The F-20 was stopped because its only solid customer (Taiwan) had been cleared for & ordered F-16s.

The P-51, F-86 & F-4 were “one helluva bird” in their day too…

Forget stealth in its current form, It is easy defeat not until a plasma shield / meta material variant is put into production will there be any real stealthyness. Not to knock our brainpower but in a war against a true worthy opponent will this point be made painfully clear. We would of been better served to adopt a particle cannon with mounted on a turret and wait until the tech was available at a price that would allow en mass production of cloud./ meta material system. It should of been applied to the F-15,16 and 18. Just like we redid the Bradley tank redo old jets. Then when the military gets the go ahead to allow anti –gravity/ with intertial dampening characteristics and have a real gen 5 plane that does away with G-LOK and other physiological stresses on the human body.

Lockheed and Boeing are allways at war with the compitive market,their are allways jobs at stake and billions of bucks!!

Seeing the B1 then later b2 now for later awesome to watch the latset roll off productie line,and proud to have been on the team..

In time,
Boeing may get their wish, keeping both the F-15(Silent Eagle mods?) and Super Hornet (“Silent Hornet”?)
lines open.
There’s an article over at Aviation Week titled
Senate Panel Barely Turns Back JSF Threat (from 22 June 2011)
wherein there is growing concern that the F-35 may be a lot closer to the edge of the chopping block than what some folks might realize.

If it happens, the UK’s switch to CATOBAR for its carriers, and their announcement of pilots cross-training on Super Hornets, would make for an easy conversion for the ships to employ the various Super Hornets.
And mention of those ~$50mil per aircraft buys for the US Air Natl Guard may become more reality.

LM might want to brush up on their Block 60+ F-16 mods, as they may become their only saving grace IF the F-35 does evenetually get cancelled: those politicians who vote on such things have more say in the matter than any of us here, so I’m just sayin’, don’t kill the messenger.

Barry — My pleasure. The F-15A/D and F-15E variants are my top favourite aircraft. Very attractive aeroplane with a very well designed airframe from McAir, since 1968. Then in December 1969 the USAF chose the design from McDonnell Douglas. According to one of my predecessors, when I said about the JSF being a wrong aircraft for future defence needs and claiming that the F-15 is a much better option for USAF and for Allies, as well as describing and explaining the capabilities about the aircraft. He said to me “I’m totally sold. I wish you were calling the shots on defense acquisition”. What did you reckon about the development for the F-15F single seat variant, as an Plan B or C options? I just hopefully it could be an alternative, so therefore the production line can be extended further, not just for your air force, but for the US Allies to have an opportunity to provide new customers to purchase additional aircraft as well as the two seat variants to be sold too. Meaning a combination of both F-15F and F-15SE for exports. Certainly with a affordable price tag.

ano8 — For example, If I was a Minister of Defence. I will pay for it, with affordable price tag. For the RAAF to have the best aircraft instead of single engine JSFs as an replacement for the Hornets for fighter force. To me, fighter pilots really deserve to have the best equipment available and thats what the F-15 is.

ano8 — Putting the best pilot into the best F-14, F-15 or F-22 does the job way better and defends the nation for sweeping the foes in air combat, absolutely not the terrible JSF. Look the Legacy Hornet has been a fantastic jet for the RAAF and I’ve been proud of the aircraft. Since it was acquired to provide an air superiority aircraft to replace the Mirage IIIO series, the Hornet was the most capable fighter in the region. Until in the early 1990’s and onwards, the acquisition of Russian designed Sukhoi Su-27SK and Su-30MK series fighters by most regional nations now presents an environment where the F/A-18A/B/F, F-35 JSF and other small airframes is or will be outclassed in all key performance parameters by widely available fighters. With the remaining fatigue life in Australia’s F/A-18A fleet to expire over this decade, a costly $3.9 billion program to replace fuselage centre barrels has been initiated to stretch the life of these aircraft. APG-73 radar, electronic warfare, guided weapon and missile upgrades are still in progress. So for the F/A-18A/B replacement, a combination of both: x 57 F-15F single seat and probably around x 28 F-15SE two-seat variants. In total 85 F-15s for RAAFs fighter force. Thats my opinion.

BradM — The better fighter for the ground attack mission is the F-15SE variant. Again the F-35 is a wrong aircraft. No replacement for the F-15E.

Araya — Thank you for the information about the detection range for the APG-82 radar. I thought it’ll be equivalent to the APG-77 (F-22s) radars detection range at BVR (about 200 miles). Anyway I appreciate the info.

*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