F-15X on the Air Force's Budget Request

[Seriously]

On 8/28/2020 at 7:19 AM, JeremiahWeed said:

I don't claim to have my finger on the current pulse of a typical AD squadron.  If CT sorties are non-existent, that's a problem, no doubt.

However, MQT or FLUG syllabi shouldn't require extensive BFM missions.  It's a spot check to ensure the trainee is proceeding at an acceptable pace.  Is the MQT student reasonably proficient as a new wingman fighting a full-up adversary?  Can the FLUG student fulfill his new role leading and debriefing that mission, setting up the engagements, ensuring safety and adherence to the TRs.  If either of those students needs more than a couple of BFM sorties to move on to the next phase, there's a problem.

No, the new wingman is not proficient in fighting a full-up adversary. It wouldn't be a problem if you were proficient in BFM leaving the B-course, but you aren't anymore. Then when you get to your ops squadron, you get one BFM sortie in MQT and you're off to fly red air for a year until your FLUG. In that year, you probably got somewhere around 8-10 BFM sorties total in 4-5 training cycles. That means every 3 months, you flew 2-4 BFM sorties that includes 1 each of OBFM, DBFM, and HABFM... just barely enough to get the cobwebs out before moving onto ACM. Oh, and you weren't flying with an IP. You were flying with a flight lead who can just barely debrief without ACMI who is likely imparting bad habits, WOMs, and misconceptions. Then you get to that one LABFM flight in the FLUG with not enough time to even accomplish 1 each of 3/6/9Ks on offensive and defensive (you usually cut the 6Ks). You can see where this is going... The end result is a guy who isn't that proficient at BFM. When you reduce the training syllabus, gaining back that proficiency after training will take a very very long time, if it ever happens. Hence, WIC spin-up focuses almost exclusively on BFM. 

If it were me, I would not have cut the BFM sorties. If anything needed to be reduced, I would rather move some of the missionized sorties into the simulator (gasp!) where you can face higher fidelity adversaries and more realistic S-A threats.

 

[Seriously]

On 8/28/2020 at 12:22 AM, SurelySerious said:

But the slides are green!

One of the most optimistic things I've ever heard a poor squadron commander say was, "we will not sacrifice quality of training." 

The hell you won't when the OG is pushing 8 week training cycles.

[Danger41]

22 minutes ago, Seriously said:

No, the new wingman is not proficient in fighting a full-up adversary. It wouldn't be a problem if you were proficient in BFM leaving the B-course, but you aren't anymore. Then when you get to your ops squadron, you get one BFM sortie in MQT and you're off to fly red air for a year until your FLUG. In that year, you probably got somewhere around 8-10 BFM sorties total in 4-5 training cycles. That means every 3 months, you flew 2-4 BFM sorties that includes 1 each of OBFM, DBFM, and HABFM... just barely enough to get the cobwebs out before moving onto ACM. Oh, and you weren't flying with an IP. You were flying with a flight lead who can just barely debrief without ACMI who is likely imparting bad habits, WOMs, and misconceptions. Then you get to that one LABFM flight in the FLUG with not enough time to even accomplish 1 each of 3/6/9Ks on offensive and defensive (you usually cut the 6Ks). You can see where this is going... The end result is a guy who isn't that proficient at BFM. When you reduce the training syllabus, gaining back that proficiency after training will take a very very long time, if it ever happens. Hence, WIC spin-up focuses almost exclusively on BFM. 

If it were me, I would not have cut the BFM sorties. If anything needed to be reduced, I would rather move some of the missionized sorties into the simulator (gasp!) where you can face higher fidelity adversaries and more realistic S-A threats.

 

What’s the B course BFM syllabus now? 10 years ago it was 4 each of offensive, defensive, and high aspect with demo pro on the 4th. There were also “advanced” of each as well which was usually various tank configurations and some new concepts introduced. 

[1:1:1]

9 hours ago, Danger41 said:

What’s the B course BFM syllabus now? 10 years ago it was 4 each of offensive, defensive, and high aspect with demo pro on the 4th. There were also “advanced” of each as well which was usually various tank configurations and some new concepts introduced. 

A couple years ago it was 3 of each. Rumor has it that may have been reduced since then.

[SocialD]

Punks are also showing up to the squadron having only been to the tanker once (day only),  if they were lucky.   

[Clark Griswold]

On the subject of 4+ or 5- fighters

https://www.airforcemag.com/brown-launching-major-tacair-study-with-cape-considering-5th-gen-minus/

Sounds like a Gripen E


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SurelySerious]

1 hour ago, Clark Griswold said:

On the subject of 4+ or 5- fighters

https://www.airforcemag.com/brown-launching-major-tacair-study-with-cape-considering-5th-gen-minus/

Sounds like a Gripen E


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[quote] “I want to moderate how much we’re using those aircraft,” he said. “You don’t drive your Ferrari to work every day, you only drive it on Sundays. This is our ‘high end’ [fighter], we want to make sure we don’t use it all for the low-end fight … We don’t want to burn up capability now and wish we had it later.” [quote\]

If only there was a low cost light attack option for the low-end fight, General...

Edited February 19, 2021 by SurelySerious

[SocialD]

11 minutes ago, SurelySerious said:

“I want to moderate how much we’re using those aircraft,” he said. “You don’t drive your Ferrari to work every day, you only drive it on Sundays. This is our ‘high end’ [fighter], we want to make sure we don’t use it all for the low-end fight … We don’t want to burn up capability now and wish we had it later.”

 

Laughs in last decade and a half of flying circles in the sky, aging out our Strikes/Vipers/Bones/Hogs... just in case we need to sling an $50k bomb at a dude carrying an RPG.  

Edited February 19, 2021 by SocialD

[Clark Griswold]

1 hour ago, SurelySerious said:

If only there was a low cost light attack option for the low-end fight, General...

Yup

But methinks he / they wants more than the Light Attack / Overwatch.  Likely a wingman / missile platform / gap filler fighter to accompany the 5th Gens and fight where not needed.  I suspect we can't afford all the F-35s we have planned on and the B-21s we have said we need plus the likely more that we actually need, plus unfornicating the -46, etc...   to deter and / or defeat China/Russia/Iran/NK aggressions, perhaps simultaneously for some scenarios.

We will have to change course and address financial, operational and technical realities.

There was a NR article on a hypothetical aircraft proposal, an F-45 Mustang II here.  It is a lot of wishing and probably not possible for the cost and size the author envisions but I think his sentiment of light, reliable and focused mission capabilities is not without merit.

If I were CSAF and musing on this (God help the AF and America if that were the case) but I would want a jet that is:

- under 40 million a tail

- less an 5k an hour to fly

- good overall kinematic performance but it is not required to have 9G, Mach 2 or 60k service ceiling performance.  Better numbers are better but not at the expense of other factors.

- low radar cross section but not economically unfeasibly low 

- open mission architecture

- exceptional range / endurance for a multi-role striker, I would not want another mouth to feed scarce / expensive AR resources with.

- good weapons capability but it doesn't have to be Herculean, at least 4 AAMs / SDBs / etc... again keep it real and keep price in mind. 

I've ranted on other threads about a hypothetical platform like this and will likely continue to do so as I am a crank but we only have so much appropriation to spend and time before China tries to test us for reals, we need a lot of platforms that we can rely on, unfortunately afford to lose some and hopefully deter other enemies with.  This is one of them I think.

Just vaporware but this Gripen E with CFTs is a good start:

 

[di1630]

We can fight the low end fight today. The F-15X is a jobs program to keep Boeing defense afloat so they can/will compete with designs later.

If I were buying 4+ jets, it’d be more f-16s that can do multi role the cheapest.

As for what we have now:

An experienced F-16 guy told me they should just make most F-16s A/G only and stop supporting their old radars as they have no role in modern A/A. However with modern A/G weapons, old block 30s perform A/G terrific.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Lawman]

We can fight the low end fight today. The F-15X is a jobs program to keep Boeing defense afloat so they can/will compete with designs later.

If I were buying 4+ jets, it’d be more f-16s that can do multi role the cheapest.

As for what we have now:

An experienced F-16 guy told me they should just make most F-16s A/G only and stop supporting their old radars as they have no role in modern A/A. However with modern A/G weapons, old block 30s perform A/G terrific.




Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

I think somebody is playing 3D chess with the X...

Something along the lines of Boeing exec to Congress/SECAF:
Now that you’ve established Boeing’s light grey 15X program to fix your light grey problem, how about a 15Y program doing similar to get some new build Strikes... We can use “off the shelf” and “interchangeability” so it will be “Low Cost/Low Risk” development.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Clark Griswold]

3 hours ago, di1630 said:

We can fight the low end fight today. The F-15X is a jobs program to keep Boeing defense afloat so they can/will compete with designs later.

If I were buying 4+ jets, it’d be more f-16s that can do multi role the cheapest.

As for what we have now:

An experienced F-16 guy told me they should just make most F-16s A/G only and stop supporting their old radars as they have no role in modern A/A. However with modern A/G weapons, old block 30s perform A/G terrific.

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Yeah but I think they are looking for capes that you likely need new iron to deliver.  

The article referenced the desire for an OMS and specifically that the venerable Viper unfortunately doesn't have that, I suspect there are other desired capes it or other current 4th gens don't have or would be prohibitively expensive to upgrade to in a 25+ year old jet.

New iron can make the dollars and cents work considering the steeper & steeper climb in total ownership cost of old iron as corrosion/fatigue set in, parts become scarce, vendors stop supporting/go out of business, etc... 

[di1630]

Yeah but I think they are looking for capes that you likely need new iron to deliver.  
The article referenced the desire for an OMS and specifically that the venerable Viper unfortunately doesn't have that, I suspect there are other desired capes it or other current 4th gens don't have or would be prohibitively expensive to upgrade to in a 25+ year old jet.
New iron can make the dollars and cents work considering the steeper & steeper climb in total ownership cost of old iron as corrosion/fatigue set in, parts become scarce, vendors stop supporting/go out of business, etc... 

What mission are you looking to do? I’ll probably be able to argue why a block 30 viper could do it fine -or- why you need a 5th Gen fighter instead.

Lots of 4th Gen + airframes like the Eurofighter which are still rolling off the line yet completely unsuitable for either the low end or high end mission.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Clark Griswold]

4 hours ago, di1630 said:

What mission are you looking to do? 

That's a good question and one not answered in the article. 

I get the sense of what the CSAF wants, higher end / new capes than our current 4th Gens but not at Low Obs operational costs and with lower than legacy platform logistical & maintenance costs/issues.  

It might be (what mission(s) is he thinking of for the x plane) what missions can I not do with a 22/35?  I think the math is becoming harder concerning the F-35 and the other 69 other problems on his plate and he is looking at alternatives to afford what we need now and 20 years into the future, particularly as these legacy 4th gens start to time out or become more expensive to maintain.

4 hours ago, di1630 said:

Lots of 4th Gen + airframes like the Eurofighter which are still rolling off the line yet completely unsuitable for either the low end or high end mission.

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Not being cheeky but define completely unsuitable.  If by that you mean it can't go deep into the WEZ of high end threats to deliver weapons therefore no good at all for the high end fight I would respectfully disagree as there are defensive roles and offense supporting roles that a 4+ gen could fulfill to deliver the total airpower effects we want.  As to low end as in a permissive air environment ala Afghanistan, no argument, light attack/overwatch/RPA is needed there.

4+ gen likely now is valuable to the team if it can self-escort / defend all while accomplishing some of the attack mission set.  Not a first string player but a good second string member that rounds out the bench.

[di1630]

Not being cheeky but define completely unsuitable.  If by that you mean it can't go deep into the WEZ of high end threats to deliver weapons therefore no good at all for the high end fight I would respectfully disagree as there are defensive roles and offense supporting roles that a 4+ gen could fulfill to deliver the total airpower effects we want.  As to low end as in a permissive air environment ala Afghanistan, no argument, light attack/overwatch/RPA is needed there.
4+ gen likely now is valuable to the team if it can self-escort / defend all while accomplishing some of the attack mission set.  Not a first string player but a good second string member that rounds out the bench.

Yes, 4+ Gen, even 4th legacy paired with 5th Gen has potential. I’m a Critic of jets like the EF2K that provide 4th Gen capes at 5th Gen prices.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Clark Griswold]

Yes, 4+ Gen, even 4th legacy paired with 5th Gen has potential. I’m a Critic of jets like the EF2K that provide 4th Gen capes at 5th Gen prices.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Concur
As to the EF, it’s had a decent production run - why is it that pricey to own / operate?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[di1630]

Concur
As to the EF, it’s had a decent production run - why is it that pricey to own / operate?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s a European jobs program. Very disorganized, built to provide jobs, not capes. Brit version is ok, the older tranches have big issues.

If it were 1995, it’d be a great A/A asset. In 2021, at +100m per jet with a mech scan radar, low A/G capes, well, it’s just not competitive.

The only thing keeping it alive is export sales (Kuwait, Qatar, etc).

Hell of a kinetic performer though. 25 years too late.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[Lawman]

It’s a European jobs program. Very disorganized, built to provide jobs, not capes. Brit version is ok, the older tranches have big issues.

If it were 1995, it’d be a great A/A asset. In 2021, at +100m per jet with a mech scan radar, low A/G capes, well, it’s just not competitive.

The only thing keeping it alive is export sales (Kuwait, Qatar, etc).

Hell of a kinetic performer though. 25 years too late.


Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Somewhere in Europe circa 1997:

Euros: “We are building an Eagle killer... “

US: “Yeah we kinda did that a decade ago... and we gave you a chance to jump on it...”



Seriously the Typhoon is the 4.5 gen fighter version of Tornado, a plane which literally did nothing as well as any of its peers except fly fat slow and stupid down a runway and get shot down in spectacular fashion.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[1:1:1]

The Europeans made a BFM jet John Boyd would be proud of (aside from that pesky canopy bow and the fact that it costs 10x what an F-16 did). It's a shame it took them 25 more years to do it. As mentioned, this is nothing new for them, considering the same group of countries joined the swing-wing fad 10 years after the F-111, MiG-23 and Su-24 were introduced. There's nothing like spending twice as much to buy a fighter designed for the last war.

As for our Air Force, it seems like we don't know which war we plan to fight. If we need an FI gap-filler that is already in production and has lower lifecycle costs than the F-35, the F-16 seems like the obvious choice. If we just want a cruise missile platform then buy more F-15EXs. If we're going to be bombing what's left of Babylonia for the next 50 years then let's buy some AT-6s or AT-7s so that we can save a couple bucks on gas while we drop $69,000 bombs on used Toyota HiLuxs.

No doubt we won't choose any of these options and instead will try to develop a fighter than can do everything better and cheaper. At least we'll see that fighter before the European 5.5 gen fighter makes its debut. 🙄

[Clark Griswold]

On 2/25/2021 at 10:48 PM, di1630 said:

It’s a European jobs program. Very disorganized, built to provide jobs, not capes. Brit version is ok, the older tranches have big issues.
If it were 1995, it’d be a great A/A asset. In 2021, at +100m per jet with a mech scan radar, low A/G capes, well, it’s just not competitive.
The only thing keeping it alive is export sales (Kuwait, Qatar, etc).
Hell of a kinetic performer though. 25 years too late.

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Copy that.

Just vaporware but a Silent Typhoon concept for what could be a relevant 4.5 version.

Silent Typhoon: Advanced Typhoon concept | Hush-Kit

I like it and groking some on the idea of 4.5 fighters, what could make them relevant?  Capes that 5th gen don't / can't have to augment them on Night 1, 2, etc...

Large missile loadouts, 10 or more.  Link node between LO and Legacy.  Active radar on initial ingress to target(s).  If 2 seater, UCAV director.  DCA for HVAAs.  Long range patrol fighter/interceptor.  Etc...

If we could coordinate the team, spread the financial load, etc... getting them (Euros) to develop a "Super Typhoon" with the promise of sales to the US could work.  They develop to agreed upon new capes, paying for all of it.  We buy X number with the agreement they buy X number of LO assets (35 or an LO UCAV).

Keeps most offensive capabilities with the US so if NATO or other coalition has to go kick in the door somewhere, we will be in the coalition, giving them the assurance we are in it if they are in it.  Gives us a 4.5 gen asset with the risk (financial and technical) balanced out.  

[di1630]

Copy that.
Just vaporware but a Silent Typhoon concept for what could be a relevant 4.5 version.

Silent Typhoon: Advanced Typhoon concept | Hush-Kit
I like it and groking some on the idea of 4.5 fighters, what could make them relevant?  Capes that 5th gen don't / can't have to augment them on Night 1, 2, etc...
Large missile loadouts, 10 or more.  Link node between LO and Legacy.  Active radar on initial ingress to target(s).  If 2 seater, UCAV director.  DCA for HVAAs.  Long range patrol fighter/interceptor.  Etc...
If we could coordinate the team, spread the financial load, etc... getting them (Euros) to develop a "Super Typhoon" with the promise of sales to the US could work.  They develop to agreed upon new capes, paying for all of it.  We buy X number with the agreement they buy X number of LO assets (35 or an LO UCAV).
Keeps most offensive capabilities with the US so if NATO or other coalition has to go kick in the door somewhere, we will be in the coalition, giving them the assurance we are in it if they are in it.  Gives us a 4.5 gen asset with the risk (financial and technical) balanced out.  

A super typhoon would cost more than an F-35 with a fraction of the capes. Might as well stick with F-15 or F-16’s.

A block 70 F-16 would crush a EF2K in present form. EF2K has awesome power and maneuver but it’d be dead far before it can use them because it’s innards are 20 years outdated.

I laugh when I think of the euros talk of a 6th Gen fighter. In reality it’ll barely be 5th Gen.

The EF2K was what Europe designed while the US made the F-22. They are decades behind.

The Gripen is another example. I was in Hungary when C-models were there. The Hungarians I talked to were shocked looking in the cockpits at the steam gauges compared to their glass cockpits...they were equally as shocked as to how outperformed they were and I’m sure our 15’s weren’t playing full up.

Europe should buy vipers. Anything more is a waste for their needs.

As for a coalition to kick down the door...we’d be doing that. Maybe a little help from the Brits, some support from France, 2-ships from our N Europe allies, then when things are safe, everyone else will show up so they can take some credit.





Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

[JimNtexas]

Question for our fighter pilots.   I personally hate to see precious F22’s being used to intercept Bears off Alaska.    Homeland defense does not need LO.

Would not an F-15X be a better choice for that mission than a single engine F-16?

[billy pilgrim]

16 hours ago, JimNtexas said:

Question for our fighter pilots.   I personally hate to see precious F22’s being used to intercept Bears off Alaska.    Homeland defense does not need LO.

Would not an F-15X be a better choice for that mission than a single engine F-16?

Yes.

[Clark Griswold]

On 2/27/2021 at 9:06 PM, di1630 said:

A super typhoon would cost more than an F-35 with a fraction of the capes. Might as well stick with F-15 or F-16’s.

A block 70 F-16 would crush a EF2K in present form. EF2K has awesome power and maneuver but it’d be dead far before it can use them because it’s innards are 20 years outdated.

I laugh when I think of the euros talk of a 6th Gen fighter. In reality it’ll barely be 5th Gen.

The EF2K was what Europe designed while the US made the F-22. They are decades behind.

The Gripen is another example. I was in Hungary when C-models were there. The Hungarians I talked to were shocked looking in the cockpits at the steam gauges compared to their glass cockpits...they were equally as shocked as to how outperformed they were and I’m sure our 15’s weren’t playing full up.

Europe should buy vipers. Anything more is a waste for their needs.

As for a coalition to kick down the door...we’d be doing that. Maybe a little help from the Brits, some support from France, 2-ships from our N Europe allies, then when things are safe, everyone else will show up so they can take some credit.

Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app

Yeah, this Super / Silent Typhoon would have to be basically a new aircraft.  Outline and possibly engines the same but all the mission systems (radar, links, sensor fusion, etc...) would have to be new along with other capes to make it worth the while.  

IDK, going back to the new, clean sheet design idea, what's driving it is the long term unaffordability of the F-35, not the capes that it has now or with updates, it just likely costs too much and no amount of gov accounting kung fu is going to change that so the trial balloon of a new clean sheet 4.5 / 5.0- design is discussed by the boss as possibly part of introducing the idea of not buying all the 35s we said we wanted but a lot of them and this new platform(s)...

But instead of trying to invent another one-plane for a boat load of missions we go back to the idea and referencing your B30 Viper comment of single-role or I would say focused role tactical aircraft again.  Maybe two new airframes or more but with focus on a mission set with some X level of minimal readiness in another and that manages costs/risks, contains requirements creep, etc...

Attack, Conventional Air Superiority and LO support asset.  Three different missions perhaps three different platforms replacing the venerable currently in inventory 4th gens.  

 

[M2]

F-15EX Named the Eagle II

Chappy would be proud!