Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
S Korea 4-4E Replacement: F-15 Or F-35?  
User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3382 posts, RR: 1
Posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 19046 times:

Report from flightglobal.com suggests that PAK-FA has almost no chance of being selected and Typhoon very little, so the choice is really between F-15 (offered with conformal weapons bays) and F-35. Delivery of the winning aircraft is likely to start 2016.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...s-to-replace-f-4e-phantoms-362908/

What chance is there of F-15 still being in production 5 years from now? I believe Boeing was looking to shut down production in 2012 but has recently pulled back from doing so. All the same, how could Boeing keep the line open to be in a position to deliver more F-15's in 2016?

What would F-35's cost in 2016? Would S Korea have to pay a big premium over the projected price when full rate production is reached?

[Edited 2011-10-14 07:59:19]

61 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinebennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7562 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 19055 times:

At least the F15 is a known quantity.

With the F35, you have apparently no idea on cost.


User currently onlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4804 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 18978 times:

Quoting art (Thread starter):
What chance is there of F-15 still being in production 5 years from now? I believe Boeing was looking to shut down production in 2012 but has recently pulled back from doing so. All the same, how could Boeing keep the line open to be in a position to deliver more F-15's in 2016?

I guess the tension in the peninsula has given Boeing some pause... that the merest hint the ROKAF could order their F-15 Silent Eagle would send them scrambling for ways to keep the line on standby, even if it meant spending their own money.

As the article says and I quote;

"'FX-III is the USA's to lose,' said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst for the Teal Group. 'It's more than just the political dimension of a strategic relationship, which in itself is all-important to a country with a volatile and violent neighbour. It's also about shared logistics, training and doctrine.'

He cited a number of advantages for the F-15SE. 'It's got commonality with South Korea's existing fleet, a degree of stealth for the opening stages of a conflict and plenty of payload, which is important given the nature of the threat. Its only drawback is that it doesn't have all the qualities associated with the F-35.' He added that the F-35 offers a close relationship with the USAF for years to come, 'and the world's most modern air combat system [excepting the F-22].' He noted, however, that the F-35 cannot match the F-15SE on payload. 'The only other problems with the F-35 concern uncertainties about cost, timing and industrial benefits,' he said. 'I'd give the two US planes an equal chance.'

Boeing lauds the F-15SE's payload, which it claims is the highest in the competition, as well as a unique 'stealthy-when-needed' feature. In the early stages of the conflict, when stealth is useful for countering enemy air defences - given the decrepit state of the North's air force, the air-to-air mission does not seem to concern contestants - the F-15SE would operate with conformal weapons bays that help reduce the aircraft's radar cross-section.

Following the attainment of aerial supremacy, stealth would no longer be a major requirement, said Boeing. It would take three hours to trade the F-15SE's weapons bays for conformal fuel tanks, creating what Boeing refers to as an F-15K+ configuration, which is optimised for heavy loads of precision weapons. Boeing claimed this heavy configuration is ideal to efficiently destroy hardened targets in North Korea. The canted tails of the F-15SE allow for two additional weapons stations on the F-15SE's wings as compared with previous versions of the fighter."



If money would be an object, Boeing still has their regular Slam Eagles, or Super Hornets as a more economical one-for-one replacement for the retiring Phantoms.

The F-35's best chance here is if South Korea also views FX-III as a foil to China's J-20 and Russia's PAK-FA.



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently onlinemffoda From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1071 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 18898 times:

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 2):
I guess the tension in the peninsula has given Boeing some pause... that the merest hint the ROKAF could order their F-15 Silent Eagle would send them scrambling for ways to keep the line on standby, even if it meant spending their own money.

IMO, the ROKAF is the perfect candidate for the F-15SE. They could offer to pay the development costs (or some), in exchange for a deal like the UAE on the Block 60 F-16's. In addition to licensing / manufacturing offsets, they could receive a premium on any other F-15SE's that Boeing sells. And I suspect that a F-15SE could be way more successful then the F-16 Bk 60's.



harder than woodpecker lips...
User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3382 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 18827 times:

Quoting mffoda (Reply 3):
IMO, the ROKAF is the perfect candidate for the F-15SE. They could offer to pay the development costs (or some), in exchange for a deal like the UAE on the Block 60 F-16's. In addition to licensing / manufacturing offsets, they could receive a premium on any other F-15SE's that Boeing sells. And I suspect that a F-15SE could be way more successful then the F-16 Bk 60's.

Is there much of a market for F-15's now? Saudi Arabia. Who else might be in the pipeline?


User currently onlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4804 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 18598 times:

Quoting mffoda (Reply 3):

IMO, the ROKAF is the perfect candidate for the F-15SE.

So much so that they made a video of it for them.....

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=thedewline

Quoting art (Reply 4):
Is there much of a market for F-15's now? Saudi Arabia. Who else might be in the pipeline?

I guess Boeing is still harboring dreams of a stopgap USAF order even after being told flat out that it was a no go... and with South Korea entertaining thoughts of a stealthy KFX.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently onlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4804 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 18518 times:

Quote:
"You fear the Republic of Korea Air Force really wants the shiniest, newest product. What do you do?

You roll out a new paint job and simulate blowing stuff up in North Korea."


http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2011/10/18/seoul%20F-15%20paint%202.jpg
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/th...10/18/seoul%20F-15%20paint%202.jpg

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2011/10/18/seoul%20f-15%20paint.jpg
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/th...011/10/18/seoul%20f-15%20paint.jpg

Save for the "outdated" bit, you could probably say the same for the F-35.  

[Edited 2011-10-20 07:39:18 by SA7700]


"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently onlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4804 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 18318 times:

More here.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...rtin-square-off-on-f-x-iii-363629/


Edit:
I wonder where the post I was replying to in Reply 6 went?  scratchchin 

[Edited 2011-10-20 08:06:08]


"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12135 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 18321 times:

Quoting art (Thread starter):
What chance is there of F-15 still being in production 5 years from now?



Well, if the ROKAF were to order the F-15SE, development would need to begin almost immediately, and the prototype built soon for flight and weapons testing. Once those are approved the production would need to begin in 2013 fir a 2016 delivery date.

Quoting art (Reply 4):
Is there much of a market for F-15's now? Saudi Arabia. Who else might be in the pipeline?



I could see Singapore ordering some F-15SEs to go with their F-15Ss they are getting now. Once Australia realizes the mistake they made ordering the F-35A, I think they will look at the F-15SE. There would be some other ME countries that could order it, along with Japan. Columbia might be the first South American country to order it to counter the new fighters ordered by Venezuela.


User currently offlinePowerslide From Canada, joined Oct 2010, 569 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 18261 times:

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 7):
I wonder where the post I was replying to in Reply 6 went?

Certain mods just can't deal with any Boeing criticism.  
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8):
I could see Singapore ordering some F-15SEs to go with their F-15Ss they are getting now. Once Australia realizes the mistake they made ordering the F-35A, I think they will look at the F-15SE. There would be some other ME countries that could order it, along with Japan. Columbia might be the first South American country to order it to counter the new fighters ordered by Venezuela.

This is speculation. No one in their right mind would go for a paper airplane like the Silent Eagle when the JSF is almost done with their testing phase. IF the SE was in test flight mode like the JSF then I'd agree, but I don't think the Aussies will want to order more Super's to wait another two decades for SE development.


User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1693 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 18233 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8):
Well, if the ROKAF were to order the F-15SE, development would need to begin almost immediately, and the prototype built soon for flight and weapons testing. Once those are approved the production would need to begin in 2013 fir a 2016 delivery date.

However, compared to F-35, which is in the middle of flight testing, it is still a long ways off. It is likely that the USAF would allow a major non-NATO ally such as South Korea to cut ahead and get earlier delivery slots for the F-35 if the Pentagon wants to defer some F-35's for budgetary reasons.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8):
I could see Singapore ordering some F-15SEs to go with their F-15Ss they are getting now. Once Australia realizes the mistake they made ordering the F-35A, I think they will look at the F-15SE. There would be some other ME countries that could order it, along with Japan. Columbia might be the first South American country to order it to counter the new fighters ordered by Venezuela.

Singapore is a Security Co-operation Participant in the JSF project; it is highly likely that Singapore will buy F-35's.


User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2104 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 18124 times:

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 10):
It is likely that the USAF would allow a major non-NATO ally such as South Korea to cut ahead and get earlier delivery slots for the F-35

How would this work if Korea want FA in Korea? Boeing may go along with this if the St. Louis lines shuts down. Will LM play ball?

bikerthai



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1693 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 18077 times:

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 11):
How would this work if Korea want FA in Korea? Boeing may go along with this if the St. Louis lines shuts down. Will LM play ball?

bikerthai

They were discussing a parallel production line for Japan if they chose the F-35, and Turkey planned local production as well. So it should not be a problem for Korea.


User currently offlineconnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 13, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 17972 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8):
Once Australia realizes the mistake they made ordering the F-35A, I think they will look at the F-15SE.

Won't Oz be tempted to purchase more F/A-18E/F and EA-18Gs ? With their new tanker support range shouldn't be much of a problem.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12135 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 17882 times:

Quoting Powerslide (Reply 9):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8):
I could see Singapore ordering some F-15SEs to go with their F-15Ss they are getting now. Once Australia realizes the mistake they made ordering the F-35A, I think they will look at the F-15SE. There would be some other ME countries that could order it, along with Japan. Columbia might be the first South American country to order it to counter the new fighters ordered by Venezuela.

This is speculation. No one in their right mind would go for a paper airplane like the Silent Eagle when the JSF is almost done with their testing phase. IF the SE was in test flight mode like the JSF then I'd agree, but I don't think the Aussies will want to order more Super's to wait another two decades for SE development.

Actually, there is a F-15SE prototype flying now. It is the #1 F-15E (USAF tail # 86-0183) that was modified to the F-15E1 configueration. It has been flying since mid 2010 and has one CWB installed in place of one CFT. I don't think it has the canted tails, though.

Quoting connies4ever (Reply 13):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 8):
Once Australia realizes the mistake they made ordering the F-35A, I think they will look at the F-15SE.

Won't Oz be tempted to purchase more F/A-18E/F and EA-18Gs ? With their new tanker support range shouldn't be much of a problem.

Perhaps, at least for the EA-18G/H. Don't forget the RAAF will have only 5 KC-30As, so combat aircraft that don't require refueling, or just one refueling free up the tankers for other combat aircraft. The F/A-18Fs of the RAAF have a combat radius of 390 nm, the F-15SE has double that at 800 nm. That means the F/A 18Fs will need at least 2 refuelings per combat mission, and the F-15SE may not need any refuelings, or it may need just 1.


User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1693 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 17824 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 14):
Actually, there is a F-15SE prototype flying now. It is the #1 F-15E (USAF tail # 86-0183) that was modified to the F-15E1 configueration. It has been flying since mid 2010 and has one CWB installed in place of one CFT. I don't think it has the canted tails, though.

It's not a F-15SE. Boeing is making bigger modifications as part of their F-15SE beyond canted tails and CFT's; they are talking about major structural changes to lighten the F-15SE so it can regain lost range, and also redesigning the fly-by-wire system and electronic warfare suite.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12135 posts, RR: 51
Reply 16, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 17739 times:

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 15):
ThePointblank

Correct, the F-15E1 is only flight testing the CWB design. It is still officially a F-15E. There have been no F-15SEs built yet, nor has the design been 'frozen' yet.


User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1693 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 17640 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 16):

Correct, the F-15E1 is only flight testing the CWB design. It is still officially a F-15E. There have been no F-15SEs built yet, nor has the design been 'frozen' yet.

With the asking price for the F-15SE being pegged at a cool $100 million dollars, excluding any potential cost overrun because the aircraft hasn't been developed yet, it might make more sense to go with F-35 as the price will go down with time.


User currently onlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4804 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (2 years 10 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 17481 times:

It appears Boeing will indeed be spending its own money to keep the F-15 line open.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...anticipation-of-saudi-deal-363960/

Quote:
"Boeing is self-funding production of F-15E strike fighters in the expectation that Saudi Arabia may sign a contract at some point before November 2012, said chairman, president and chief executive Jim McNerney.

McNerney's comments provide some insight into the status of an opportunity to sell 84 F-15SA fighters to Saudi Arabia, along with radar and weapon upgrades for the country's existing F-15 fleet.

The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress on 20 October 2010 that Riyadh had requested the possible sale, but the deal has remained unsigned after more than a year."



This could have positive repercussions on Boeing's efforts to sell the Silent Eagle for KFX-III to the ROKAF.

Quote:
"This literally slipped right past us last week in Seoul. Buried in the Korean-language F-15SE Silent Eagle brochure, which we brought home as a souvenir, is an image revealing Boeing's concept for South Korea's KF-X fighter. It was so sneaky we didn't even spot it until it was pointed out to us by an alert blog reader, who had downloaded the same brochure on Boeing's web site. Yes, we are ashamed.

Judging by this image, Boeing is offering a single-seat fighter with a V-tail and an internal weapons bay. We detect a passing resemblance to a snub-nosed F/A-18. It's difficult to determine whether the image shows one or two engines, but South Korea's preference is clearly the latter."



On the other hand, South Korea's pursuit of an indigenous stealth fighter may bring that acquisition's prospects into question.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/th...er%20crop-thumb-560x368-143633.jpg

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/th.../10/21/KFX%20two%20view%20crop.jpg


http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/th...eoul-air-show-eurofighter-sha.html

Quote:
"South Korea needs help developing KF-X. Its industry feels up to the challenge of developing the new fighter's flight controls, aerodynamics, sensors and weapons. But it wants an industrial partner to transfer technology for the engines, sensor fusion software and systems integration. This presents a certain dilemma for potential US partners. How much do Boeing and Lockheed Martin give up for a piece of the KF-X programme, knowing South Korea's fighter ambitions means losing a historically reliable customer and possibly creating a future competitor?"

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2011/10/21/KFX%20Eurofighter%20vision.jpg
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/th.../21/KFX%20Eurofighter%20vision.jpg



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently onlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4804 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days ago) and read 15980 times:

Update:

Boeing is setting the stage for what may be the F-15's last hurrah.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...agle-tests-for-south-korea-367495/

Quote:
"Boeing is poised to launch a new series of ground, windtunnel and flight tests on several key features of the F-15 Silent Eagle proposed for South Korea's competitive F-X III contract.

Windtunnel tests will start by March or April on a scale model of the F-15SE with conformal weapons bays, said Howard Berry, Boeing vice-president for sales. The weapons bays, which are modified conformal fuel tanks, allow the F-15 to store weapons internally and lower the aircraft's profile to radars.

Flight testing will begin late in the fourth quarter of 2012 or early next year of an 'advanced international F-15', Berry said. The new-build test aircraft will feature the cockpit systems, digital electronic warfare system and sensors unveiled with the Silent Eagle concept in March 2009.

Boeing will also start windtunnel tests to determine the aerodynamic performance of various angles for the Silent Eagle's proposed canted vertical tails, Berry said.

The company's original concept featured tails canted at 15º as a stealth technique. The canted tails allow the aircraft to bank up to 15º on either side without presenting a 90º angle to airborne radars."



It seems a bit tardy to be doing the wind tunnel tests for the Silent Eagle just now...long after they broached the idea, and test-fired a missile from the converted CWB. Ditto for the canted tails. Looks as though they're trying to squeeze the last drop of revenue out of the Eagle before they partner with the South Koreans for their indigenous stealth fighter design. LockMart would love that.



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineLAXintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 25137 posts, RR: 46
Reply 20, posted (2 years 7 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 15832 times:

I was in Korea for work shortly after the Japanese decision in favor of the F-35, and virtually everyone I spoke to with links to the ROKAF and government said Korea would likely follow the Japanese lead. This apparently has historical precedence that from an ego perspective Korea tends not want Japan to have something better or more advanced then it.
Also the fact that the USAF is onboard with the F-35, and at some point those will be based in Korea is a big plus from commonality and operational vantage.

I really believe Boeing is going to have a hard time with any F-15 variant they try to push at this stage.



From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1693 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 7 months 10 hours ago) and read 15640 times:

The Russians have pulled out:
http://en.ria.ru/mlitary_news/20120130/171028735.html

No surprise here, I think. The article also states Saab tried to enter, but were turned away by South Korea, citing that they didn't meet requirements.


User currently onlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4804 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 15564 times:

And now, F-X III is officially open.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...cks-off-f-x-iii-competiton-367569/

Quote:
"South Korea's Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) has issued a request for proposals for its F-X III fighter requirement, paving the way for the acquisition of around 60 fighters.

The submission guidelines were issued at a meeting in Seoul yesterday. The contenders for the requirement are the Boeing F-15 Silent Eagle, Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II and the Eurofighter Typhoon."



The pressure is on the 4.5 Gen fighters to prove that they still got (or will have) what it takes to win vs a true 5thG entry in a contest that seeks a defender against the Chinese J-20 and Russian PAK-FA, and their other contemporaries around as well.

Fortunately for Rafale, it now only needs to hurdle the relatively less brutal battles on the bargaining table, and possibly in court for any protest that could be filed after its big victory.

[Edited 2012-01-31 12:54:29]


"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently onlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4804 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 15030 times:

Quoting LAXintl (Reply 20):
I really believe Boeing is going to have a hard time with any F-15 variant they try to push at this stage.

Reportedly, the F-35 could also have some difficulty meeting key requirements for F-X3.....

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...iling-key-korean-requirements.html

Quote:
"The United States Air Force (USAF) variant of Lockheed Martin’s F-35 will likely fail to meet two of the Korean Air Force’s key requirements — the ability to carry weapons externally and fly at Mach 1.6 (1,930 kilometers per hour) or faster, an industry insider said Tuesday.

He pointed out that the Korean military has clearly outlined the two key features as compulsory requirements in its request for proposal (RFP) released Jan. 30.

'The maximum speed of the F-35 Lightning II, which is still under development, is Mach 1.6, the bare minimum the Air Force has stated as a mandatory requirement,' the insider familiar with the RFP said."



But LM has a nice comeback.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...a-buoyed-by-japan-f-35-win-368264/

Quote:
"He pointed out that countries such as China and Russia are developing stealth aircraft, the Chengdu J-20 and Sukhoi PAK FA, which creates a requirement for aircraft with stealth technology, integrated sensors, and connectivity.

'To make a stealth aircraft, you need to carry all the sensors and weapons internally to make the aircraft very smooth,' he said. 'You have to align the edges of the airplane, bury the engines so you can't bounce a radar beam off the front of them. This means you can't add stealth to an existing platform. Stealth isn't something you can retrofit'."


http://cde.cerosmedia.com/1H4f3a42ee676bf012.cde


At the moment, I can't find the report saying DAPA is dropping the compulsory requirements. Anyway, nice to have a chance for another round of debates here re partial vs total stealth.



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlineOzair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 846 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 15003 times:

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 23):
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...iling-key-korean-requirements.html

Quote:
"The United States Air Force (USAF) variant of Lockheed Martin’s F-35 will likely fail to meet two of the Korean Air Force’s key requirements — the ability to carry weapons externally and fly at Mach 1.6 (1,930 kilometers per hour) or faster, an industry insider said Tuesday.

He pointed out that the Korean military has clearly outlined the two key features as compulsory requirements in its request for proposal (RFP) released Jan. 30.

'The maximum speed of the F-35 Lightning II, which is still under development, is Mach 1.6, the bare minimum the Air Force has stated as a mandatory requirement,' the insider familiar with the RFP said."

That is a terribly written article, I am not sure why they even published it other than to add to the JSF hysteria.

Will the F-35 fly at M1.6? Sure it will, it already has and there is no evidence that the aircraft won't reach that speed in operational service. It may not get too far beyond that but the point is a bit moot as none of the three contenders for the contract can reach M1.6 without burner anyway, especially with any meaningful payload.

The second key feature on being able to carry external ordinance is also odd. The JSF will carry external ordinance, if it didn't that would be a valid reason to cancel the entire program! The JSF development schedule might struggle to meet the South Korean timeline for external weapons capability though which is fair enough.

The end of the article says the following though,"Other industry officials, however, refuted Howard’s claim, saying the development of external pylons not only reduces the aircraft stealth capabilities, but also requires a fundamental change in the aircraft design, which the USAF is not willing to pay for."

Shouldn't be a surprise on compromising the stealth capability, as it would for each of the contenders and every other aircraft including the F-22, stealth UAVs and the starship enterprise and the JSF has never been advertised as able to carry external payloads in stealth mode. External pylons also won't require a fundamental change and are already within the planned development cycle for all three versions of the aircraft.

I wouldn't trust the "other industry officials" as having any idea what they're talking about if above is what they actually said!


User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2104 posts, RR: 4
Reply 25, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 15083 times:

This Mach requirement is not as outrageous as it seems. With Seoul being so close to the DMZ, a quick response seems to be more important to them stealthiness.

Consider that they would more likely face N Korea who are unlikely to get stealth capabilities, and if China gets involved, then the US would most likely get involved also. Why spend money on capabilities you don't need when your friends can provide that capability for you when you do need it?

If you do need deep strike capabilities in to N. Korea, then perhaps the SE would be sufficient.

Can the F-15SE meet the 1.6+ Mach with external ordinance?

I remember when POTUS was in Seattle and they had to scramble a couple of F-15's from California because a GA plane didn't get word that POTUS was in town. It didn't take the birds too long to cover the distance. The double sonic boom was the talk of the town.

(edit) Oh by the way, I bet the four 737 Peace Eye will go a long way in helping S.K. with stealth detection.

bt

[Edited 2012-02-16 06:26:39]


Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12135 posts, RR: 51
Reply 26, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks ago) and read 15071 times:

The F-15SE has a max airspeed of 2.5M (the same as other models of the F-15). I assume that is without external stores. So with external stores, it should easily be able to reach 1.6M, assuming they are equipped with F-100-220/-229 engines..

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/fighter/a/f15eagle.htm

The USAF F-15E with F-100-229 engines (29,000 lbs thrust in AB, each, 58,000 lbs thrust total) can reach speeds of 1.9M with external stores.


User currently offlineOzair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 846 posts, RR: 1
Reply 27, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 15116 times:

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 25):
With Seoul being so close to the DMZ, a quick response seems to be more important to them stealthiness.

Your probably right there and the F-15 and Typhoon, having two engines, should reach higher supersonic speeds faster than the F-35.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15735 posts, RR: 26
Reply 28, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 15032 times:

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 23):
But LM has a nice comeback.....

I don't know if Mr. Scott is an engineer, but if he is he should know better. He talks about "stealth" as if it were an on-off proposition when in fact it is anything but. You absolutely can retrofit certain low observable features. Of course it probably will have a radar cross section larger than a new plane designed with all the latest LO techniques, but that gets rather expensive.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2104 posts, RR: 4
Reply 29, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 14963 times:

Quoting Ozair (Reply 27):
Your probably right there and the F-15 and Typhoon, having two engines, should reach higher supersonic speeds faster than the F-35.

And you can also carry more payloads (or so I hope) to take out those thousands of artillery pieces that are pointing in your direction. You are not fighting a high-tech opponent. You are fighting an opponent with massive low tech inventory. The more bombs you put at the front, the sooner you can reduce the inventory.

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlineOzair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 846 posts, RR: 1
Reply 30, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 14852 times:

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 29):
And you can also carry more payloads (or so I hope) to take out those thousands of artillery pieces that are pointing in your direction. You are not fighting a high-tech opponent. You are fighting an opponent with massive low tech inventory. The more bombs you put at the front, the sooner you can reduce the inventory.

Better idea to hit the supply dumps and convoys. Cut the ammo off and then you don't need to worry about the individual pieces.

From a payload perspective the three aircraft are reasonably close anyway (taken from Wiki),
F-15E - 23,000 lbs
F-35 - 18,000 lbs
Typhoon - 16,500 lbs


User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1693 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 14849 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 26):
The F-15SE has a max airspeed of 2.5M (the same as other models of the F-15). I assume that is without external stores. So with external stores, it should easily be able to reach 1.6M, assuming they are equipped with F-100-220/-229 engines..

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/fighter/a/f15eagle.htm

The USAF F-15E with F-100-229 engines (29,000 lbs thrust in AB, each, 58,000 lbs thrust total) can reach speeds of 1.9M with external stores.

Depends on the exact configuration, I will add. There is a big difference in parasitic drag between a F-15E armed with only air to air weapons compared to the same F-15E loaded to the gills with bombs and external fuel tanks.


User currently onlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4804 posts, RR: 1
Reply 32, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 14836 times:

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 29):
You are not fighting a high-tech opponent. You are fighting an opponent with massive low tech inventory.
Quoting Ozair (Reply 30):

Better idea to hit the supply dumps and convoys. Cut the ammo off and then you don't need to worry about the individual pieces.

Perhaps the RoKAF could acquire some of the Warthogs the USAF will retire for that?.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...orce-details-aircraft-cuts-368240/

Quote:
"The USAF also will retire 102 Fairchild-Republic A-10Cs, as outlined last month as part of planned cuts for fiscal year 2013."


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Yunjin Lee-Korea Aero Photos



Survivable, battle proven and cheap!   



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2104 posts, RR: 4
Reply 33, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 14791 times:

Quoting Ozair (Reply 30):

You are too logical. This long term thinking is fine, except until the local stock gets depleted, milions of civilians would be under heavy bombardment.

Bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently onlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4804 posts, RR: 1
Reply 34, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 12955 times:

Finally, some movement in the F-X III front.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...seouls-f-x-iii-requirement-373141/

Quote:
"Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and the Eurofighter consortium have presented formal bidding documents to South Korea for the 60 aircraft F-X III competition.

The receipt of the formal bids was announced by Seoul's Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) on its website. It expects to make a decision by October.

The presentation was largely a formality, as the three companies have already mounted extensive campaigns for the requirement. Lockheed Martin is pitching its F-35A, Boeing the F-15 Silent Eagle, and the Eurofighter Consortium the Typhoon."


The report sounds like a rehash of an older release. Anyway, coming up with a decision in four months would be a record of sorts.

Whether Boeing will actually compete the Silent Eagle as presented two years ago or the sneaky, conceptual stealth design hinted in #18 remains to be seen.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/media/f15se/images/91720/boeing-f-15-silent-eagle-cutaway.jpg
http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace...eing-f-15-silent-eagle-cutaway.jpg

But the timeframe and likely capital expense are against a new project. Which brings us to the subject of using simulators for evaluating the candidates' performance. Quite dicey, that.



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1820 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 12590 times:

I never understood why Australia didn't buy the F15, the super hornet cant be that good as a strike fighter? Range, and capability of the F15 is way above the F18E.

User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 879 posts, RR: 12
Reply 36, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 12454 times:

Quoting sweair (Reply 35):
I never understood why Australia didn't buy the F15, the super hornet cant be that good as a strike fighter? Range, and capability of the F15 is way above the F18E.

Because Australia bought the F-18A/B back before the F-15E was around due to their need for a multi-role platform rather than a straight air superiority fighter. Thus when they were looking for an interim fighter between the F-18's they had and the F-35's they are going to buy they went with the F-18E/F due to the similarity it would have to what they already operated.


User currently onlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4804 posts, RR: 1
Reply 37, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 12376 times:

Re-submission of bids reset for July 5.....

http://www.defensenews.com/article/2...odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

Quote:
"SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea could delay awarding an eight trillion won ($6.9 billion) contract for 60 dvanced fighter planes, the arms procurement agency said June 20 after setting a new deadline for bids.

The makers of Boeing’s F-15 Silent Eagle, Lockheed Martin’s F-35 Lightning II and the Eurofighter Typhoon had submitted bids when the original deadline expired June 18.

But the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA) reopened bidding June 19, citing what it called errors in the relevant documents, and set a new date of July 5 for submissions.

[.....]

They said DAPA had asked Lockheed for more Korean involvement in tests on the F-35.

Noh said the two sides have been discussing the proposal and the U.S. firm would give its answer by June 22.

'If the U.S. side rejects our request, we will have no choice but to give a zero point in the criteria of flight-testing [of the F-35],' he said."



Is LM now between a stone and a hard place?



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2104 posts, RR: 4
Reply 38, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 12370 times:

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 37):

Is LM now between a stone and a hard place?

At this stage of the program, test flights are at a premium. But since money (specially export money) is involved, I'm sure LM can work some test flight out for the South Korean in Texas. I'm pretty sure the US Air Force would oblige. And if not, then just call up your Texas Congressmen . . . we are talking big money here people!

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 879 posts, RR: 12
Reply 39, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 12374 times:

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 38):
At this stage of the program, test flights are at a premium. But since money (specially export money) is involved, I'm sure LM can work some test flight out for the South Korean in Texas. I'm pretty sure the US Air Force would oblige. And if not, then just call up your Texas Congressmen . . . we are talking big money here people!

The issue with it is going to be getting them qualified in time to test flight the aircraft. They are not just going to turn the thing over to someone just for kicks when they are still in the process of hitting test points. They will end up buying it anyway in my view because the F-15 being proposed is a last gasp for that program and the Eurofighter just makes no sense for South Korea at all.


User currently offlinewvsuperhornet From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 516 posts, RR: 0
Reply 40, posted (2 years 2 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 12025 times:

If there smart they will buy limited numbers of F-35's for the stealth and then equip the rest of their airforce with F-15's. The F-35 seems to be having too many issues I wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket.

User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12135 posts, RR: 51
Reply 41, posted (2 years 2 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 11927 times:

The F-35A has a combat radius of 585 nm, the F-15SE is 800 nm. The F-35 can just bearly make it to M 1.6, the F-15 goes to M 2.5.

The F-15SE has 4 internal weapons pylons (in the CWBs), if equipped with CFTs, it has the same external weapons load as the F-15E, up to 24,000 lbs of weapons. The F-15SE ROC is up to 50,000 FPM with a ceiling at FL-600. The F-15SE will also be qualified to carry the same wide array of weapons the F-15E carries.

The F-35A also has 4 internal pylons, but they are limited to carrying only 3,000 lbs (total) of weapons, externally it can carry up to an additional 15,000 lbs of weapons on 6 wing hard points, for a total weapons load out of 18,000 lbs. The F-35 ROC is still classified but it cannot match that of the F-15 at MTOW. The F-35 is not currently qualified to carry any weapons, that will come later.

The F-35's 20mm gun has 4 barrels and a supply of 180 rounds, the F-15 has a 6 barrel 20mm and carries 510 rounds, giving it more than twice the firepower from the internally mounted guns.

The Eurofighter Typhoon is a M 2.0 airplane with a combat radius of 750 nm. It has a ROC of 62,000 FPM with a ceiling of FL-650. The Typhoon has 13 underwing and under fuselarge hard points and carries up to 16,500 lbs of weapons, all externally, it has no internal weapons capability. The Typhoon's gun is a 27mm single barrel gun with a 150 round capacity. The Typhoon is already qualified to carry several different weapons.

The way I see it, the F-15SE is the best choice followed by the Typhoon, because they meet the speed requirement and have excellent range. The F-35 is a medium range fighter that is much slower than the other two, therefore it would be my last choice.


User currently offlinerwessel From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2346 posts, RR: 2
Reply 42, posted (2 years 2 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 11856 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 41):
The F-35's 20mm gun has 4 barrels and a supply of 180 rounds, the F-15 has a 6 barrel 20mm and carries 510 rounds, giving it more than twice the firepower from the internally mounted guns.

The GAU-22/A on the F-35 is 25mm, which, assuming proportionate scaling, would result in a round of approximately twice the mass of the 20mm round.


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12135 posts, RR: 51
Reply 43, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 11692 times:

Quoting rwessel (Reply 42):
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 41):The F-35's 20mm gun has 4 barrels and a supply of 180 rounds, the F-15 has a 6 barrel 20mm and carries 510 rounds, giving it more than twice the firepower from the internally mounted guns.
The GAU-22/A on the F-35 is 25mm, which, assuming proportionate scaling, would result in a round of approximately twice the mass of the 20mm round.

Thanks for the correction, and it makes more sense for a bigger gun to have fewer rounds. I had read in the past the F-35s would be equipped with a 4 barrel 20mm.


User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 879 posts, RR: 12
Reply 44, posted (2 years 2 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 11588 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 41):

The main problem with the F-15SE is that it does not exist and would have to be developed. I could see buying it if it was built and flying but it is not. I would guess the price for one would be far higher than what Boeing is guessing at right now when all the development is said and done.

The Typhoon is nice enough I suppose but really adds nothing to ROK forces but all new core technology (engines, avionics, weapons) for no huge gains.

One other thing to remember is that the F-35's range, agility and speed figures include a full internal load of weapons. If you hang 4,000 pounds of bombs and 2 AIM-120's (the F-35's internal capacity is roughly 5,000 pounds as it will carry two 2,000 lb JDAM's and 2 AMRAAM's internal). If you hang that stuff externally on a Eurofighter its ability to move comes down quite a bit. I am also fairly positive the 750 NM range figure hinges on carrying external fuel tanks which would impact agility quite a bit.


User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2104 posts, RR: 4
Reply 45, posted (2 years 2 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 11414 times:

Quoting rwessel (Reply 42):
would result in a round of approximately twice the mass of the 20mm round.

When you go to the 25mm do you get some additional capabilities? Like proximity fuse and exploding rounds?
Those exploding rounds makes a huge difference.

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 44):

The main problem with the F-15SE is that it does not exist and would have to be developed.

Which can also be a benefit if some of the development work (like the canted tail) goes to Korea to provide some off-sets.
Boeing as a benefit of existing production cooperation with Korean manufacturers (on their commercial side) and can better handle industrial participation offset.

Not sure about the off-set of stealth technology, but structural mods packages (from the Engineering and design standpoint) can be sent over there.

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 879 posts, RR: 12
Reply 46, posted (2 years 2 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 11400 times:

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 45):
Which can also be a benefit if some of the development work (like the canted tail) goes to Korea to provide some off-sets.
Boeing as a benefit of existing production cooperation with Korean manufacturers (on their commercial side) and can better handle industrial participation offset.

I would agree if we were looking at a buy of a few hundred or there was an export market. But I don't see either. In my view the F-15 Silent Eagle is basically dead in the water. All in developed I would guess it would cost much more than an F-35.


User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2104 posts, RR: 4
Reply 47, posted (2 years 2 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 11355 times:

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 46):

I would agree if we were looking at a buy of a few hundred or there was an export market.

I don't disagree that the development cost may be higher than anticipated. Although from the what is known, most of the development are in the new tail, the CWB and the stealth coating (maybe electronics too).

But my point is that the development cost of these item (except for perhaps the stealth coating) can be done with detailed engineering work done in Korea which would give the F-15 a leg up in the "off-set" criteria (the amount of work that needs to be done in Korea to meet contractual requirement).

From the off-set stand point the F-15 also have the benefit of step sisters 787 and 747 work that can be off-loaded to Korea to meet any monetary off-set requirements.

Anyone know what percentage of the contract will need to be off-set?

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently onlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4804 posts, RR: 1
Reply 48, posted (2 years 2 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 11332 times:

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 47):
Although from the what is known, most of the development are in the new tail, the CWB and the stealth coating (maybe electronics too).

Latest press release doesn't mention anything about the canted tails...only RCS reduction.....

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...nces-silent-eagle-development.html

Does this mean those are no longer a priority or won't be pursued any further?



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlinelegs From Australia, joined Jun 2006, 239 posts, RR: 0
Reply 49, posted (2 years 2 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 11305 times:

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 48):
canted tails

The Boeing media release, while not making explicit mention of the canted tails, has photos that indicate the canted tailplanes are still 'on the table' so to speak.

Boeing Media Room


User currently offlinespudh From Ireland, joined Jul 2009, 301 posts, RR: 1
Reply 50, posted (2 years 2 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 11291 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 41):
The F-35A has a combat radius of 585 nm, the F-15SE is 800 nm. The F-35 can just bearly make it to M 1.6, the F-15 goes to M 2.5.

That's a bit of a red herring since the F-15 can't do M2.5 when armed with anything, even bullets for the gun. IIRC its maximum speed in A to A mode (4 sparrow/amraam + 4 sidewinder) was M1.8. Its max speed in A-G mode is likely to be significantly less than that due to non-conformal carriage of A-G weapons.

The F-35 supposedly can do M1.6 with full internal weapons be they ground or A-A so the gap in speed is not as clear cut as it might first appear.

On top of that any production version of the F-15SE is going to have to doff its hat towards forward aspect stealth. This means that the compressor faces of the engines are going to have to be shielded somehow. Maybe stealth has advanced a bit since the B-1 days but the the top speed of the B-1B was mach 1.25 in comparison to the Mach 2.0 for the B-1A largely due to the stealth features for compressor face shielding


User currently offlineKC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12135 posts, RR: 51
Reply 51, posted (2 years 2 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 11293 times:

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 46):
In my view the F-15 Silent Eagle is basically dead in the water. All in developed I would guess it would cost much more than an F-35.

The F-15SE is better and cheaper than the F-35. By better than the F-35 I mean it is a more capable airplane in every aspect a fight or fight/bomber is measured in, speed, range, weapons lload, targeting/navigation, etc. The F-15SE costs about $100M each, while the F-35Acosts are still climbing through the current price of about $140M, 40% more than what the F-15SE costs

Quoting Devilfish (Reply 48):
Latest press release doesn't mention anything about the canted tails...only RCS reduction.....
Quoting legs (Reply 49):
The Boeing media release, while not making explicit mention of the canted tails, has photos that indicate the canted tailplanes are still 'on the table' so to speak.

The canted tails are not a biug ticket item, and since the F-15 is built right next to the F/A-18E/F, whuich has a canted tail section, transferring that technology isn't very difficult.

If RCS is the most important factor, and I don't think it is, it is important to know the F-15SE will have the same frontal RCS as the F-35A. The frontal aspect is the most inportant of all aspects on an attack mission, or long range air defemse missions. Stealth is only useful in the first few days of the war, when the target area is still radar protected, after these radars are destroyed, stealth is a non-capability.


User currently offlinepowerslide From Canada, joined Oct 2010, 569 posts, RR: 1
Reply 52, posted (2 years 2 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 11316 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 51):
The F-15SE is better and cheaper than the F-35. By better than the F-35 I mean it is a more capable airplane in every aspect a fight or fight/bomber is measured in, speed, range, weapons lload, targeting/navigation, etc. The F-15SE costs about $100M each,

How can you make such claims for an aircraft that hasn't even been built or designed yet. On what basis do you know any of this?


User currently offlinetommytoyz From Tonga, joined Jan 2007, 1353 posts, RR: 6
Reply 53, posted (2 years 2 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 11307 times:

Quoting powerslide (Reply 52):
How can you make such claims for an aircraft that hasn't even been built or designed yet. On what basis do you know any of this?

I suggest on the basis that the F-15Se is planned as a derivative of the F-15K - and that performance is well known. Yes, the F-15SE has not been built yet, but no fully proven and functioning F-35 has been built yet either.

One could argue that preproduction F-15SE's are flying in the form of F-15Ks and Es, so to speak, just as preproduction F-35s are flying now. Neither the F-15SE nor the F-35 are in service nor combat ready and no production planes have been built, much less delivered. They are both in very similar positions.


User currently offlinepowerslide From Canada, joined Oct 2010, 569 posts, RR: 1
Reply 54, posted (2 years 2 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 11298 times:

Quoting tommytoyz (Reply 53):
Yes, the F-15SE has not been built yet, but no fully proven and functioning F-35 has been built yet either.

So you are giving the F-15SE the benefit of the doubt because of your personal hatred of the F35, got it. Outside the internet world of youtube, blogs and forums, countries aren't buying into the Silent Eagle pitch because they know a rehashed 4th gen aircraft with a new coat of paint that can't compete with an F35. Same thing goes with that F-18I Boeing is trying to pawn off - no one is stupid enough to buy that when the F35 is just around the corner. The SE won't happen.


User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2104 posts, RR: 4
Reply 55, posted (2 years 2 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 11210 times:

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 51):
a canted tail section, transferring that technology isn't very difficult.

I don't think it's a matter of transferring technology. I would bet the CFD is already done and the wind tunnel test is nearly complete with the canted tail configuration. The remaining testing would involve structural testing and flight testing.

The remaining development work would involve the detail layout of the internal structure of the tail. This detail layout and engineering CAD releases and production planning would be the work that could, in theory, be done by the Korean partner. Such a work package may seem trivial, but often priced at millions if not tens of millions of dollars.

Quoting powerslide (Reply 52):

How can you make such claims for an aircraft that hasn't even been built or designed yet.

Educated guess. The F-15 SE has basically the same skeletal structural as the F-15K (canted tail duly noted).
The CWB is similar to the CFT. The non-recurring (fabrication cost) of these items are not expected to change significantly between the SE and the K. The engines which are significant portion of the cost is also not much different. So too are the electronics. The only thing that is left to be accounted for would be any stealth features (paint, etc . . .). It would not be out of reach to predict that the stealth feature (though expensive to maintain) would not add significantly to the cost of fabrication of the aircraft.

So while the SE has not flown, the cost structure of fabricating the SE is probably well know within the company.

It's like trying to predict the cost of a 787 vs. a 747-8. While the 787 will be a better plane, the cost of the 747-8 would be better known when they start the program. And while we are at it, we can also draw parallel to the delays in the programs. 

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 879 posts, RR: 12
Reply 56, posted (2 years 2 months 2 days ago) and read 11190 times:

Quoting powerslide (Reply 54):
So you are giving the F-15SE the benefit of the doubt because of your personal hatred of the F35, got it. Outside the internet world of youtube, blogs and forums, countries aren't buying into the Silent Eagle pitch because they know a rehashed 4th gen aircraft with a new coat of paint that can't compete with an F35. Same thing goes with that F-18I Boeing is trying to pawn off - no one is stupid enough to buy that when the F35 is just around the corner. The SE won't happen.

I think this is the main thing. Japan could have bought anything they wanted and went with the F-35 for a nation that already has F-15's and for whom the F-15SE would be a perfect fit provide they believed the performance claims about it.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 51):

The F-15SE is better and cheaper than the F-35. By better than the F-35 I mean it is a more capable airplane in every aspect a fight or fight/bomber is measured in, speed, range, weapons lload, targeting/navigation, etc. The F-15SE costs about $100M each, while the F-35Acosts are still climbing through the current price of about $140M, 40% more than what the F-15SE costs

The F-15K (the non-stealthy one) was running $100 million a copy already so I don't see how you develop a fair chunk of new systems and keep the price the same.

I agree that it should have greater range and speed. It would have greater payload capacity in an external configuration but it would not in internal only, at least as proposed. Do you have a source on the targeting and navigation capabilities being superior for the F-15SE? If Boeing has really done all that for $100 million I say we should buy a bunch ourselves. The last slideshow I looked at for the thing showed it having to have external targeting pods to use laser guided weapons still as well as needing to carry an external navigational pod to operate at night.


User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2104 posts, RR: 4
Reply 57, posted (2 years 2 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 11163 times:

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 56):
Japan could have bought anything they wanted and went with the F-35

I thought they wanted and could easily afford the F-22, but were not allowed to have it?

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlinetommytoyz From Tonga, joined Jan 2007, 1353 posts, RR: 6
Reply 58, posted (2 years 2 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 11131 times:

Quoting powerslide (Reply 54):
So you are giving the F-15SE the benefit of the doubt because of your personal hatred of the F35, got it.

This Has nothing to do with the F-35 or me, what so ever. Only you are obsessed with the F-35. The F-15SE is a derivative or the F-15K, not a clean sheet design. For that reason, much performance data can be extrapolated. I think that is very reasonable.

It's sad to see everything not an F-35 being belittled. But there are a lot of great planes and technologies out there or planned that have little or nothing to do with the F-35.


User currently onlineDevilfish From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4804 posts, RR: 1
Reply 59, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 8076 times:

Update:

An interesting "non"-development on the way to design definition.....

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...esign-change-for-f_15-upgrade.html

Quote:
"However, Boeing, which is vying for Korea’s ongoing fighter jet acquisition program, has told Seoul not to expect a major retrofit of its F-15 aircraft, a senior military official said.

'Boeing said it does not recommend Korea to choose the upgrade option of canted vertical tails for the F-15 fighter jet, citing the low cost effectiveness of its proposed development plan,' the official said on condition of anonymity.

'Boeing argued that its test results show only a slight improvement through the modification of the tails.'

Canted vertical tails were one of the F-15SE’s two main features that Boeing proposed earlier to reduce the aircraft’s radar cross-section (RCS), an area that reflects a radar pulse back to a receiver."



I guess Boeing has grudgingly come to acknowledge that doing the invasive structural surgery needed for the canted tail design is far removed from the merely cosmetic cut and graft job they did on the promo frame.

Sure, they knew how to go about it...but doing it now probably makes their claim of a $100M flyaway price a myth. And Seoul would likely look askance at the feature being a separate, added high-cost-option. Minor stealth and aerodynamic benefit perhaps, but it's what they sold the South Koreans on.

With F-15Ks already in the fleet, and minus that unique selling point (ok, canted tails are not unique), the F-35 might have a better shot now at the RoKAF's OoB, especially if the local aerospace industry perceives more lucrative workshares in it... provided the F-35's own hurdles get sorted out first...not least of which being its price.                  



"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1820 posts, RR: 0
Reply 60, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 8014 times:

Did the F18 have canted tails to lessen RCS or was it of a different reason?

User currently offlineThePointblank From Canada, joined Jan 2009, 1693 posts, RR: 0
Reply 61, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 7966 times:

Quoting sweair (Reply 60):
Did the F18 have canted tails to lessen RCS or was it of a different reason?

Different reason. It improved aerodynamics, considering F/A-18 has it's large LEX's which generate strong swirling vortices that allow the aircraft to operate at very high angles of attack. F/A-18, for example, can reach an angle of attack as high as 50 degrees without stalling. As these vortices travel back away from the plane, they create a high-speed airflow past the two vertical tails making them more effective in providing yaw control. In addition, the tails generate some pitch control since the aerodynamic forces acting on the canted tails are broken into vertical (pitch) and horizontal (yaw) components. The vertical component is used most effectively during takeoff. By turning both rudders inboard, the canted vertical tails produce sufficient downforce to help lift the nose of the plane and allow it to takeoff at a lower speed, which is a major plus for a carrier-based aircraft.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic S Korea 4-4E Replacement: F-15 Or F-35?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Boeing, Eurofighter Or F-35 For Canada? posted Fri May 29 2009 01:34:22 by JoeCanuck
Which One Is Louder SR-71, B-1B, F-15 Or F-22a posted Sun Feb 5 2006 00:41:21 by 747400sp
F-15 Silent Eagle - Dead Or Alive? posted Thu Feb 16 2012 09:54:56 by andydtwnwa7
F-35 A Possible CF-18 Replacement For Canada? posted Mon Jan 19 2009 15:05:53 by AC788
Can The 767 Or 330 Be A Possible B52 Replacement? posted Wed Jan 16 2008 17:22:47 by Norlander
Is It Me Or F-15 Quiet posted Mon Dec 26 2005 19:37:24 by 747400sp
Will The Goverment Pressure Korea To Buy The F-15 posted Fri Oct 26 2001 23:19:00 by Boeing in pdx
Boeing X-32 Or Lockheed Martin X-35 Will Win? posted Thu Sep 20 2001 07:17:30 by B777-777X
F-35 Lrip Costs Per Aircraft - Over $200 Million posted Mon Mar 12 2012 14:53:01 by tommytoyz
Japan May Cancel F-35 Order posted Wed Feb 29 2012 17:40:17 by francoflier
Boeing, Eurofighter Or F-35 For Canada? posted Fri May 29 2009 01:34:22 by JoeCanuck
Which One Is Louder SR-71, B-1B, F-15 Or F-22a posted Sun Feb 5 2006 00:41:21 by 747400sp
F-15 Silent Eagle - Dead Or Alive? posted Thu Feb 16 2012 09:54:56 by andydtwnwa7
F-35 A Possible CF-18 Replacement For Canada? posted Mon Jan 19 2009 15:05:53 by AC788
Can The 767 Or 330 Be A Possible B52 Replacement? posted Wed Jan 16 2008 17:22:47 by Norlander
Is It Me Or F-15 Quiet posted Mon Dec 26 2005 19:37:24 by 747400sp
Will The Goverment Pressure Korea To Buy The F-15 posted Fri Oct 26 2001 23:19:00 by Boeing in pdx
Boeing X-32 Or Lockheed Martin X-35 Will Win? posted Thu Sep 20 2001 07:17:30 by B777-777X
India Buys 15 Chinooks posted Tue Nov 6 2012 13:52:44 by kanban

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format