tflash Posted December 12, 2007 Posted December 12, 2007 We all read the news about the problems with the F-15C fleet, whose airframes are getting old. My question is, suppose there is such a structural problem that they have to be retired prematurely. What fighter can take its role? - buy more F-22's? Most logical, but quite expensive and you wont get many of them fast - F-15E could do the trick but there aren"t many of them and their A/G skills are highly in demand - could F-16 Block 52 CCIP take on their role? I mean: - have powerful radar and strong avionics suite - have same Amraam missiles - in clean config, have strong engine and good T/W ratio - have quite a good endurance - I dont know if they have JTIDS or some good FDL? - given tight ROE, somewhat less BVR performance is maybe not a problem? So, an F-16 Block 52 ADV seems an option? Or rather buy some superbugs? ;) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
GGTharos Posted December 12, 2007 Posted December 12, 2007 We all read the news about the problems with the F-15C fleet, whose airframes are getting old. My question is, suppose there is such a structural problem that they have to be retired prematurely. What fighter can take its role? I don't think that will happen, but since it is a 'what if' ... - buy more F-22's? Most logical, but quite expensive and you wont get many of them fast - F-15E could do the trick but there aren"t many of them and their A/G skills are highly in demand Correct on both counts. But, F-15E/K/SGs ARE in production currently. F-22's would be best for A2A. They're so expensive because they are an offensive weapon (as opposed to defensive, like an F-16 or MiG-29) - could F-16 Block 52 CCIP take on their role? Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeell no. No way jose :D I mean: - have powerful radar and strong avionics suite No match for the 15's radar. 15's always eat vipers in BVR. - have same Amraam missiles Doesn't matter. F-15's can give those missiles more range thanks to flight performance and SA. - in clean config, have strong engine and good T/W ratio Doesn't matter. Who cares about clean config? :) - have quite a good endurance Not as good as an F_15! :) - I dont know if they have JTIDS or some good FDL? They do have an FDL. - given tight ROE, somewhat less BVR performance is maybe not a problem? Then you're not replacing F-15's, are you? You're just running vipers on their regular missions ;) So, an F-16 Block 52 ADV seems an option? Or rather buy some superbugs? ;) Superbugs will do better than F-16's in BVR, and pretty darn good in WVR and A2G ... but I'd still rather have an F-15 for A2A (if I can't have an F-22) :) 1 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Pilotasso Posted December 12, 2007 Posted December 12, 2007 I have heard some technicians over at F-16.net saying that there will be a new AESA radar for F-16 Upgrades, different from UAE block 60 because they have different power output requirements than standard US (or any other for that matter) Falcons. I guess they would be enough for home defense. for heavier duty missions, F-15E's to replace current F-15's doesnt make much sense because either you keep buiding new planes with older technology or the latest eagle goodies and then their price tag can soar into 90 million each (As ROKAF did), not that much lower than an F-22. If F-15C's would be prepared to have an early retirement they would be canibalized gradualy in order to keep the fittest airframes flying for a few years more untill F-35's F-22's or whatever type fills its gap has time to come in sufficient numbers to do so. 1 .
cool_t Posted December 14, 2007 Posted December 14, 2007 Look here Please read. http://www.air-attack.com/news/news_article/2126/Boeing-F-15E-Super-Eagle-unveiled.html :pilotfly:
tflash Posted December 14, 2007 Author Posted December 14, 2007 Makes sense to me! Thanks for the link. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
mvsgas Posted December 14, 2007 Posted December 14, 2007 - could F-16 Block 52 CCIP take on their role? So, an F-16 Block 52 ADV seems an option? Or rather buy some superbugs? ;) I would rather have a block 50, 40 or 30. Any F-16 with a GE engine is x10 better than a PW engine F-16. Even F-15K is better than F-15E in terms of fuel efficiency and power. Quote: - have quite a good endurance Not as good as an F_15! ;) I'm no pilot, but all the pilots that I talk to say than F-16 have better fuel consumption, better range and loiter time than F-15C or D. I have no idea if they where lying to me but, I have been told, for the fuel that 2 F-15C/D use in an hour you could fly 6 F-16 for the same time. Again I have no prove of this, just repeating what I have been told before. To whom it may concern, I am an idiot, unfortunately for the world, I have a internet connection and a fondness for beer....apologies for that. Thank you for you patience. Many people don't want the truth, they want constant reassurance that whatever misconception/fallacies they believe in are true..
TucksonSonny Posted December 14, 2007 Posted December 14, 2007 We all read the news about the problems with the F-15C fleet, whose airframes are getting old. My question is, suppose there is such a structural problem that they have to be retired prematurely. What fighter can take its role? - buy more F-22's? Most logical, but quite expensive and you wont get many of them fast - F-15E could do the trick but there aren"t many of them and their A/G skills are highly in demand - could F-16 Block 52 CCIP take on their role? I mean: - have powerful radar and strong avionics suite - have same Amraam missiles - in clean config, have strong engine and good T/W ratio - have quite a good endurance - I dont know if they have JTIDS or some good FDL? - given tight ROE, somewhat less BVR performance is maybe not a problem? So, an F-16 Block 52 ADV seems an option? Or rather buy some superbugs? ;) They could buy eurofighter. :D It would be anyway a win-win deal. :thumbup: DELL Intel® Core™ i7 Processor 940 2,93 GHz @3 GHz, 8 MB cache | 8.192 MB 1.067 MHz Tri Channel DDR3 | 512 MB ATI® Radeon™ 4850 | 500 GB 7200 rpm Serial ATA | Samsung SM 2693 HM 25.5 " | HOTAS Cougar Thrustmaster |
GGTharos Posted December 14, 2007 Posted December 14, 2007 Of course it has better consumption ... single engine versus two engine. ;) But I'm pretty certain that the F-15 does better in both loiter time and range depending on how you load it out. CFT's not included (they are not well liked for A2A apparently) - but anyway, it would be better if someone with first hand knowledge chimed in here, because I'm just guessing. I'm no pilot, but all the pilots that I talk to say than F-16 have better fuel consumption, better range and loiter time than F-15C or D. I have no idea if they where lying to me but, I have been told, for the fuel that 2 F-15C/D use in an hour you could fly 6 F-16 for the same time. Again I have no prove of this, just repeating what I have been told before. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
mvsgas Posted December 14, 2007 Posted December 14, 2007 Sorry I'm bored - I dont know if they have JTIDS or some good FDL? ;) Sorry I'm bored and I'm not trying to criticize your post just wasting time. Anyway, what do you mean by this acronyms? Is it the same as a Integrated Data Modem (IDM)? Sorry I just never heard the term before. To whom it may concern, I am an idiot, unfortunately for the world, I have a internet connection and a fondness for beer....apologies for that. Thank you for you patience. Many people don't want the truth, they want constant reassurance that whatever misconception/fallacies they believe in are true..
ED Team Olgerd Posted December 16, 2007 ED Team Posted December 16, 2007 Sorry I'm bored and I'm not trying to criticize your post just wasting time. Anyway, what do you mean by this acronyms? Is it the same as a Integrated Data Modem (IDM)? Sorry I just never heard the term before. 'A bit' better - Fighter Data Link. It is a further improvement of JTIDS terminals for F-15. It implements digital data transfer capability based on TADIL-J (called Link16 in NATO) standard. The main area of employment is AA Situational Awareness and C2, as opposed to EPRLS (SADL) on F-16 bl30, which is used mainly for small AA F2F nets, FAC operations, and friendlies positions reports during CAS missions. P.S. Er... Sorry for such amount of acronyms. ;) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] К чему стадам дары свободы? Их должно резать или стричь. Наследство их из рода в роды Ярмо с гремушками да бич.
tflash Posted December 16, 2007 Author Posted December 16, 2007 You will find JTIDS (or Joint Tactical Information Distribution System) also on Tornado F3; SADL is now available also on A-10C, indeed in a CAS context. In essence, this data interchange allow you in the best conditions to obtain a 360° view on the air situation, allowing you to coordinate tactics with your and other friendly flights. The Gripen has a similar, very performant datalink system: Tactical Information Data Link System (TIDLS), see eg http://www.sovereign-publications.com/gripen.htm [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
tflash Posted December 16, 2007 Author Posted December 16, 2007 I would rather have a block 50, 40 or 30. Any F-16 with a GE engine is x10 better than a PW engine F-16. Even F-15K is better than F-15E in terms of fuel efficiency and power. I'm no pilot, but all the pilots that I talk to say than F-16 have better fuel consumption, better range and loiter time than F-15C or D. I have no idea if they where lying to me but, I have been told, for the fuel that 2 F-15C/D use in an hour you could fly 6 F-16 for the same time. Again I have no prove of this, just repeating what I have been told before. Well, I also understood that the fuel efficiency of the F-16, both in design (available fuel for other volume) and performance are quite considerable and in part responsible for it to have been able to evolve from a pure lightweight point defense fighter to a true muli-role aircraft. On the GE-engine: at least the Saudi airforce seems totally in agreement with you on this: http://www.defencetalk.com/news/publish/defence/Royal_Saudi_Air_Force_Selects_GE_to_Re-engine_F-15S_Aircraft30013721.php As to our main point, I remain very sceptic about future of F-15C since even when they fix the current problem, the age of the airframes means that whenever they would get in true combat again, the airframe would very easily overstress causing very limited availability. I truly fear the days of this magnificent aircraft are numbered earlier than expected. Lucky for us there is Lockon! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
mvsgas Posted December 16, 2007 Posted December 16, 2007 As to our main point, I remain very sceptic about future of F-15C since even when they fix the current problem, the age of the airframes means that whenever they would get in true combat again, the airframe would very easily overstress causing very limited availability. I truly fear the days of this magnificent aircraft are numbered earlier than expected. I think you are right Tflash. I think age and money are the big factors about keeping the F-15 flying. I think the USAF main concern right now, is the F-22. I don't believe they would allow anything to get in the way of getting as many F-22 as they want, if that means retiring F-15 early to use the money to acquire more F-22 they would do it. They could, maybe, extend the life of this aircraft (F-15) with a big maintenance program, new engine and avionics but it would cut into the F-22 funds so very doubtful they would do it. To whom it may concern, I am an idiot, unfortunately for the world, I have a internet connection and a fondness for beer....apologies for that. Thank you for you patience. Many people don't want the truth, they want constant reassurance that whatever misconception/fallacies they believe in are true..
EvilBivol-1 Posted December 18, 2007 Posted December 18, 2007 More news along the same lines: U.S. grounds 39 Lockheed P-3C surveillance planes - EB [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Nothing is easy. Everything takes much longer. The Parable of Jane's A-10 Forum Rules
p_o_d_2_2 Posted December 25, 2007 Posted December 25, 2007 So what do these groundings do to the Golden Eagle program? 1
Eagle Driver Posted December 30, 2007 Posted December 30, 2007 I truly fear the days of this magnificent aircraft are numbered earlier than expected. Lucky for us there is Lockon! That does not make me feel any better. I swear, if they start ripping Eagles apart with a big crane like they did to Tomcats, I'm going to get the biggest gun I can find and just start shooting people. The F-15 is like a family member to me... even though I've only seen one about five times! :cry: [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] If you fly a perfect Defensive BFM and the bandit does a perfect Offensive... Someone you know is going to be recieving Insurance money very soon.
Rhen Posted December 30, 2007 Posted December 30, 2007 Only 8 jets out of over 400 have been found to have problems, & the Eagle will be around for some time - at least until the Raptor numbers grow. However, every plane in the inventory, except the Raptor is currently residing in the bone yard.
Pilotasso Posted December 30, 2007 Posted December 30, 2007 Raptor 03 has already been retired... ;) Gone to a museum, not the boneyard. .
tflash Posted January 10, 2008 Author Posted January 10, 2008 More news on the cause, a faulty longeron: http://edition.cnn.com/2008/US/01/10/f15.groundings.ap/index.html "Loren Thompson, a defense analyst with the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Virginia, said it may make more sense to retire the older F-15s rather than fix them. Due to their age, another part could fail even after the longerons are repaired." [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
XLR8 Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 F-15 not doing so good. WASHINGTON - An Air Force investigation of the crash last fall of an F-15C Eagle fighter jet concluded that a defective metal beam in the frame cracked, causing it to disintegrate during flight. In a report being released Thursday, obtained in advance by The Associated Press, Air Force investigators said they had found the sole reason for the accident was the faulty support beam, called a longeron, which failed to meet the manufacturer's specifications. The investigation was led by Air Force Col. William Wignall. "The accident investigation board president (Wignall) found, by clear and convincing evidence, the cause of this accident was a failure of the upper right longeron, a critical support structure in the F-15C aircraft," the report says. About 20 minutes after takeoff from an airfield near St. Louis on Nov. 2, the forward fuselage of Maj. Stephen Stilwell's $42 million F-15C Eagle shook violently and then broke apart 18,000 feet above the ground. Stilwell, his left shoulder dislocated and his left arm shattered, barely had time to safely eject as pieces of his aircraft tumbled from the sky over the Missouri countryside. More troubling, however, are the results of a parallel examination finding as many as 163 of the workhorse aircraft also have flawed support beams, or longerons. The aircraft remain grounded as the Air Force continues to search for how serious the problem is and whether extensive, costly repairs are needed. Another 19 of the aircraft have yet to be inspected and also remain grounded. Nearly 260 of the A through D model F-15s, first fielded in the mid-1970s, were returned to flight status Tuesday following fleet-wide inspections. The twin-engine aircraft are used primarily for homeland security and are a key link in the nation's air defense network. "Two November, my world really changed," Air Force Gen. John Corley, head of Air Combat Command at Langley Air Force Base, Va., said at a Pentagon news conference. "And it changed in a catastrophic way." The Air Force's fleet of 224 newer F-15E Strike Eagles, which are used in Iraq and Afghanistan, do not have the structural problem. Those jets, whose role is more oriented toward ground attack missions, were temporarily grounded after Stilwell's crash, but returned to service shortly thereafter. The older F-15s are stationed at many so-called "alert" sites around the country, where planes and pilots stand ready to take off at a moment's notice to intercept hijacked airliners and guard protected airspace. Among the Air Force's other workhorse fighter jets is the F-16, which performs multiple roles, including air-to-air combat and air-to-ground attack. It entered the operational fleet in 1979. With the F-15s temporarily grounded, F-16s and other aircraft are pulled away from their regular duties to fill the gaps. That makes it difficult for the Air Force to accomplish its mission and leaves Air Force pilots unable to train properly. "This is systemic," Corley said. The longeron helps support the cockpit and strengthen the jet as it moves through high-stress maneuvers while traveling hundreds of miles per hour. Analysis of recovered parts from Stilwell's jet identified a crack in the beam near the fuselage that investigators say grew over time and was not detected during regular maintenance of the aircraft. In the report, Wignall said that prior to Stilwell's flight, "no inspection requirements existed for detecting a crack in the longeron." The F-15A through D models were built by McDonnell Douglas. That company merged with defense manufacturing giant Boeing in August 1997. Company spokeswoman Patricia Frost said Boeing representatives have not seen Wignall's final report and could not comment on it. "However, we are working with the U.S. Air Force to analyze the data gathered from fleet-wide inspections," Frost said "Once all of the data have been analyzed, a need for further inspection or repair can be determined." No decision has been reached as to whether Boeing might be liable for the repairs, which could cost as much as $500,000 per aircraft. "This is the starting point for looking into that question," said Lt. Gen. Donald Hoffman, a senior Air Force acquisition official. "I'm not going to speculate." The F-22 Raptor, a stealth aircraft intended to replace the F-15, is being fielded but in smaller numbers than initially planned. The Pentagon has said it will buy just 183 Raptors due to their high cost, but members of Congress are pressing Defense Secretary Robert Gates to buy more. A single Raptor costs about $160 million, according to the Air Force. The Air Force has said it needs 381 of the F-22s. Corley did not endorse more F-22s as the solution to the F-15 problems. But he indicated buying more F-15s would not be the Air Force's preference. "It was the best of breed at its time," said Corley, who was an F-15 instructor pilot in 1979. "It's not anymore." Loren Thompson, a defense analyst with the Lexington Institute in Arlington, Va., said it may make more sense to retire the older F-15s rather than fix them. Due to their age, another part could fail even after the longerons are repaired. "This is an aircraft that was designed during the Nixon administration," Thompson said. "It doesn't seem sensible to be making fixes so late in the game."
cool_t Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 Heres a Vid Look here http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=229_1200007455
p_o_d_2_2 Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 Well, at least the 15E's are ok, and hopefully enough of the others cleared to fly are C models that can be upgraded with all of the Golden Eagle stuff.
tflash Posted January 11, 2008 Author Posted January 11, 2008 Fatigue and structural issues are a core problem of legacy A2A fighters. If you train hard, at the edge, like you should do to have skilled A2A pilots, your airframes will suffer heavily and you end up with a less available fleet when it counts. You could do the opposite, like Russia with its Su-27, and try to limit the flight hours as much as possible. Than you can fly longer with your planes, but are badly prepared for real A2A. Todays fighters partly solve this problem by: - very advanced digital FBW so that during the whole flight envelope stress is reduced to the minimum and the aircraft is always operated within safe structural margins; - better simulators so that basic flight training does not require getting into the air and consuming airframe hours; - way better build materials then the classic Aluminium! These advances mean today's fighters DO have a significant edge over F-14/F-15/Su-27, even when their "raw performance numbers" seem more nimble. They would also do better in a classic cold war scenario, since they will be longer in the air, which is the first and formost condition for air superiority. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
TorwaK Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 The U.S. Air Force has released an animation showing the breakup of a F-15C from the Missouri Air National Guard's 131st Fighter Wing on Nov. 2, 2007. http://www.alert5.com/2008/01/animation-shows-what-happened-to-f-15.html [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Intel Core i7-6700K, @5GHz | Asus Maximus Hero VIII | 2 x eVGA GTX 970 SLI | Kingston Predator 16GB DDR4-3000Mhz | 2 x Samsung 850 PRO 240GB RAID-0 | AOC G2460PG G-SYNC LCD | OCULUS RIFT CV1 VR | THRUSTMASTER HOTAS WARTHOG | CH PRO PEDALS
S77th-GOYA Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=229_1200007455 animation of the crash
Recommended Posts