USAF Considers F-15 Retirement

I thought we were talking about F-16s, not F-22s :stuck_out_tongue:

Something also to keep in mind, the Charlie-model Eagles can’t operate in the battlespace without significant jamming support. They’re not very survivable. Modern air defences would chew up the Eagle and spit it out, much like the A-10C. You’d need to seriously soften the area up before you could let them fly safely.

As far as the Hornet goes, it’s a great aircraft, but as someone else has already noticed, it’s shortcomings include the fact that despite the enormous leap in capability from the A & C-model Hornets to the Super Bug, it’s still notoriously slow and short-legged. It’s got a turn radius that would make a quail weep, but it still needs a lot of support to be a factor in the battlefield. I love the Hornet and it is formidable foe in the air, but the Air Force needs something with more capability.

The Eagle is just fast, you can’t get around that. It is quick, it is agile, and it carries a lot of gas and guns. The Raptor is the logical successor in the air superiority role and we have almost as many Raptors as we do airworthy Eagles.

This is like the A-10 discussion. Video game enthusiasts like me through prodigeous chest-beating and online gnashing of teeth showed the Pentagon the error of their ways and reprieved the A-10. We DID that! With a little duct-tape and some Krazy-Glue, the Eagle will be good for another thirty years.

4 Likes

The C models are just as survivable in the modern battlespace without jamming as the E models are, and guess what, Mudhens aren’t going anywhere for a very long time.

As far as I’m aware this is just discussion of a possible proposal. Until I see it happen I don’t think that the C model will get retired.

For the USAF to maintain the ability to have Air superiority and remain a credible deterrent force the C models are essential. If you remove C models from RAF Lakenheath for example, and replace them with anything but F-22’s, you have just told Russia that we no longer have the ability to immediately enforce air superiority/ US policy over western europe.
It can be argued that we may or may not have that capability right now regardless, but I can tell you that if you remove the C models, its no longer an argument, its a foregone conclusion.

Do the same thing in Japan, the other Active duty (non guard) C model squadron, if you remove them from Kadena you have just done the same thing with China/ North Korea/Russia. They are a significant part of US foreign policy and our air superiority, and unless they are replaced with F-22’s you will be forced to abandon US policy and interests to do it.

Now if you want to talk about whether our interests are valid or not or whether we need to maintain air superiority that is a different discussion I don’t intend to hold, but if our strategy has not changed (which as far as I’m aware it hasn’t) Retiring F-15’s and trying to fill their gap with F-16’s is ludicrous, its not even a stopgap. It is willingly choosing to disadvantage yourself and weaken your foreign policy.

3 Likes

Alright, alright, alright. Hear me out.

We reboot the F-16XL concept. We slap a Pratt F-135 in that puppy and give it a super-awesome AESA.

Then modify the static F-16 inlet to become a variable geometry inlet.

Also, give it thrust vectoring. Gimme 12 hours and I’ll have the proposal together. I need a test pilot. What’d’ya say?

3 Likes

This… This could be a thing, Could we possibly you know…
Give it Two engines…
And two tails?

And make it from the remnants of McDonnel Douglas?

I would test fly that

2 Likes

Not sure what kind of dimensional acrobatics you’d need to pull to stuff thrust-vectored F135s in the F100 recesses in the Eagle but I think it needs to happen for the benefit of posterity.

I mean to satisfy certain Ohioan and Australian elements we would probly have to include swing wings as well… just for posterity

2 Likes

Oof. Those are fighting words- I’ll try not to completely derail the thread.

If you want to see the most vicious fight you’ve ever witnessed, gather a bunch of engineers into a room, call their attention, and then yell,

“SWING WINGS ARE ABSOLUTELY WORTH THE TRADE OFF IN WEIGHT AND DESIGN COMPLEXITY FOR THE IMPROVED AERODYNAMIC PERFORMANCE IN CERTAIN FLIGHT REGIMES.”

Be prepared to clean up buckets of blood. Buckets.

1 Like

I won’t even argue that point, I’ll just say that wouldn’t that be Bitchin awesome?

1 Like

Yeah probably.

6 Likes

*Opens Door

Thrust Vectoring is a meme

*Closes door

4 Likes

Oh Maclean…

Never change

Never change Laddie

3 Likes

@klarsnow

You mean this? It’s got all that minus the variable geometry inlets and the thrust vectoring :wink:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-06c6j3zL4GM/U_NC61WWdII/AAAAAAAAEAQ/vuzi6qR-ztI/s1600/F-18%2BSuper%2BHornet.jpg

In all seriousness, a Block III Super would be a game changer. CFTs, more RCS features, and fixing the stupid design canted pilons. But certainly no replacement for the 15C.

Hey, I can dream.

2 Likes

Is there any talk of up engine-ing the super bug at any point? I do like the jet but it always seems its greatest limfacs are always its speed and fuel fraction

In many ways I wish the strike eagle could get some of the MacD goodness that the super hornet benefitted from being ten years younger.

there is 4+ gen and there is 4++ gen, and the strike eagle v super hornet illustrate those differences avionics wise.

Best way to put it is that in the Strike eagle you often feel like you are fighting the damn systems to get what you want out of the jet, It is not particularly integrated or designed for a user interface.

From what understand about the superhornet it is probly the first really integrated/ avionics/fused jet out there. and if so… I’m jelly

It’s one of the proposed options for the Advanced aka Block III.

The other changes like the CFT and pylons would fix a lot of the gripes with the current E/F like the drag and fuel.

I don’t know. If my experience in DCS has taught me anything, it’s that American military aircraft cannot be on the same continent as Russian air defense networks without getting shot down.

Sounds like an issue between the controls and ejection seat. :stuck_out_tongue:

2 Likes

@near_blind

Look at it.

LOOK AT IT

4 Likes