Boeing Unveils New Stealthy F-15

[ROCK45]

Replacements

I would love to see the USAF pick up 2 or 3 squadrons of these SE Eagles but think the chances are really slim. The USAF fighting in two wars have more needs then putting up basically another fighter, AG platforms are needed more.

With the future tankers program, future bomber program, C-17 and other transport issues, current F-22, future F-22, future F-35, and a host of other projects I'm leaving out, I don't see the USAF buying any.

 

[wtsimpson7]

Boeing's new "Silent Eagle" seems to me to be aimed specifically towards the export market and not for the USAF. What a cool bird though.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Aviation week has a Feb 2009 article which provides the following estimates:

F-35A (1st lot LRIP - for the x2 F-35) = US$200m
F-35A (2nd lot LRIP- for the x6 F-35) = US$160m
F-35A after LRIP = US$70-75m (in 2014 dollars)
F-35B after LRIP = US$80-85m (in 2014 dollars)

I'd expect to see them do a reprint as they were at the Avalon briefing and the numbers were lower. But, as you say its complex due to other variables such as time, total volume per year, volume per buyer per year etc... as the total year volume per year over points in time impacts upon any years pricing.

thats because the price is being amortised based on total volume per lot per year ... if customers change their per lot per year allocation it impacts upon everyone

 

[Jezza]

The precise level stealth allowed to be exported to foreign countries is still to be determined by the US authorities who govern technology transfer rules. Will international F-35 customers be disappointed if they find out a fourth-generation fighter can match their fight-generation fighter's head-on performance?

Will we be disappointed??????
All for alternatives.

 

[ROCK45]

Levels

Jezza
Will international F-35 customers be disappointed if they find out a fourth-generation fighter can match their fight-generation fighter's head-on performance?

Much more would be needed to be changed on the F-15 to be close to that of F-35. Not even in the same ballpark it's not a true stealth aircraft design it's basically for lowing frontal RCS. Might be helpful for getting a little bit closers for a missile shot, shoot and scoot, using the Eagles good speed to get out of your enemies missile range. Or getting a little close to a SAM or radar to take it out and having a higher percentage chance of hitting the target because of the shorter distance, cutting down on the targets reaction time.

Not a replacement for a 5th generation platform a F-15 must be close to a forty year old design and might even be classified as 3rd + generation fighter with 4th generation systems in it.

 

[OPSSG]

Not a replacement for a 5th generation platform a F-15 must be close to a forty year old design and might even be classified as 3rd + generation fighter with 4th generation systems in it.

I agree that the F-15SE ('Silent Eagle') proposed is intended to give the F-15 platform a better AIM-120 launch window, in contrast to a Su-30 or J-10 type of aggressor. It is not intended to provide a golf ball sized RCS like the F-35.

As Deng Xiaoping famously said: "I don't care if it is a white cat or a black cat, as long as it can catch mice". Likewise, I don't really care what 'generation' the F-15SE is classed, as long as it remains tactically relevant.

Much more would be needed to be changed on the F-15 to be close to that of F-35. Not even in the same ballpark it's not a true stealth aircraft design it's basically for lowing frontal RCS. Might be helpful for getting a little bit closers for a missile shot, shoot and scoot, using the Eagles good speed to get out of your enemies missile range. Or getting a little close to a SAM or radar to take it out and having a higher percentage chance of hitting the target because of the shorter distance, cutting down on the targets reaction time.

If I may, I would like to expand on your point. The latest RCS reduction measures for F-15SE will aid international sales for Boeing. Therefore, there is a tendency to compare the 'Silent Eagle' to the Dassault Rafale or the Euro-fighter Typhoon. In many ways, the European competition are really medium multi-role aircraft and not a heavy like the F-15E strike fighter.

IMHO, the Strike Eagle (or Slam Eagle for the F-15K) is also well suited for maritime strike, relevant to Singapore, Japan and Korea, even if the LO tech offered is from only a frontal aspect. This is because most navy frigates / destroyers /cruisers are really mobile sea based SAM batteries often capable of working together. Given the current range of AAW missiles, naval strike missions are going to be very dangerous for small groups of aircraft due to the advanced targeting capabilities of the various naval radars and missiles.

If you want to get close to these AAW ships acting as pickets, various measures, including the use of MALDs (currently under development), as attack decoys may have to be considered. In that environment, I would think that a F-15SE may be tactically relevant.

Tactically, the F-15SG with or without 'stealth' is relevant to Singapore's needs. Keep in mind, the F-15's top speed is always relevant to a A2A fight.

 

[Aussie Digger]

Boeing's new "Silent Eagle" seems to me to be aimed specifically towards the export market and not for the USAF. What a cool bird though.

It seems aimed at continuing interest in the F-15 platform, I agree.

It also seems HEAVILY aimed at upgrades for existing F-15 users, to me...

 

[ROCK45]

Tactically

Hi OPSSG
I reread my posts and wanted to clear something up all F-15s are tactically sound platforms, the modern types even more so. Fighters are the most effective with they stay in there strengths and Eagles have a lot of them.
There is billions of dollars of R&D and time between these F-15s and either the F-22, or F-35, didn't want people to thing a few changes can transform an Eagle into a 5th generation platform. Tactically I can see parts of the Eagle profile improve and it's capabilities expand overall.

You mention using Eagles in the maritime strike role for Singapore, Japan and South Korean I find that very interesting. Are Singapore's Eagles setup for anti-shipping missions? It would seem a perfect way to use a new F-15SE Eagle. The concept is strange to me I'm used to F-15C's mainly and thinking about a Eagle loaded up with anti-ship missiles is very different. Eagles have good range and payload why couldn't they be effective ship killers?

Thanks

 

[OPSSG]

It seems aimed at continuing interest in the F-15 platform, I agree.

It also seems HEAVILY aimed at upgrades for existing F-15 users, to me...

1. Certainly looks that way doesn't it?

You mention using Eagles in the maritime strike role for Singapore, Japan and South Korean I find that very interesting. Are Singapore's Eagles setup for anti-shipping missions? It would seem a perfect way to use a new F-15SE Eagle. The concept is strange to me I'm used to F-15C's mainly and thinking about a Eagle loaded up with anti-ship missiles is very different. Eagles have good range and payload why couldn't they be effective ship killers?

2. It has been specifically mentioned in releases that the armament options of the F-15K includes the AGM-84 Harpoon Block II missile. I expect that the F-15SG would also be Harpoon capable. To perform maritime strike effectively, the F-15E needs 2 things: One, a good look down synthetic aperture radar (SAR) mode; and two, a good anti-ship missile like the Harpoon.

3. I set out the details of the two below:

(i) IMHO the F-15SG's AN/APG-63(V)3 AESA radar is well suited for maritime strike as it incorporates a high-resolution SAR mode, which Raytheon claims to be the first to offer true simultaneous, air-to-air and air-to-ground modes, utilizing highly agile beam interleaving in near-real time, providing the pilot and the WSO with unprecedented situational awareness and tactical flexibility.

(ii) The Harpoon Block II is designed to attack targets in congested littoral environments by incorporating the low cost integrated Global Positioning System/Inertial Navigation System (GPS/INS) from the Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) program. The improved littoral capabilities will enable Harpoon Block II to impact a designated GPS target point. For the anti-ship mission, the GPS/INS provides improved missile guidance to the target area. The accurate navigation solution allows target ship discrimination from a nearby land mass using shoreline data provided by the launch platform. Further, in 2008, Boeing was awarded a $73.7 million U.S. Navy contract to design and develop the Harpoon Block III missile.​

4. In fact, Singapore also operates 2 other types of Harpoon capable aircraft:

(i) specially modified Fokker 50 Maritime Patrol Aircraft (with SAR radar); and

(ii) the F-16 (the AGM-84 Harpoon was officially cleared on the F-16 on August 11th, 1994).​

5. Likewise the Korean F-16s are also cleared for the Harpoon and we are one of the 28 countries who are Harpoon customers.

 

[OPSSG]

I'll list 2 additional points brought forth in the latest news reports on the 'Silent Eagle'.

1. According to the Korean Times, the 'Silent Eagle' is Boeing's bid for South Korea's third phase F-X fighter jet acquisition program to begin by 2012:

...Earlier, Seoul officials said the third phase program would focus on obtaining the so-called fifth-generation stealth fighters. The F-X aims to procure 120 high-end warplanes by 2020, and Boeing already won the previous two deals with its F-15K fighters.

Boeing officials said the forthcoming F-15 'Silent Eagle (SE)' could provide Korea's Air Force with ``cost-effective stealth'' technologies as well as the F-15 Eagle's traditional long-range, large-payload capabilities...

Other improvements include the digital flight control system, which improves the aircraft's reliability and reduces airframe weight, and a digital electronic warfare system working in concert with an advanced electronic scanning array radar, Boeing said in a news release.

The aircraft's canted vertical tails improve aerodynamic efficiency, provide lift, and reduce airframe weight, it said.

2. While the Silent Eagle is expected to be 'open' for customer enhancements and modifications (an obstacle for JSF customers), it is important to note that the F-15SE will lack engine intake blockers (present in the Super Hornet), as noted by the 20 March 2009 report from Aviation Week, parts of which are quoted below:

...The idea behind the Silent Eagle is to capture orders from existing F-15 countries by adding what Boeing officials say are inexpensive modifications to the aircraft. But they say they're not targeting the market already served by the F-35 and F-22...

...Each CFT was designed to carry 1,500 gal. of fuel. The redesign of each tank incorporates two separate weapon bays. The top bay includes a rail launcher suitable for an AIM-9, AIM-120, a single 500-lb. Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) or two Small-Diameter Bombs. The bottom bay could dispatch these or a 1,000-lb. JDAM. Though this loadout is significantly less than the F-15E's traditional configuration, the internal carriage required for reduced radar cross section (RCS) is a limiting factor; the Silent Eagle loadout is similar to that of the F-22...

...Stealthy coatings can be applied on straight edges around the aircraft to reduce the RCS. However, their location and application must be approved by the U.S. government, and those negotiations haven't yet taken place. The F-15E1 does not currently have the coatings. Jones says the F-15 Silent Eagle can be made as stealthy from the front aspect as an F-35 using RCS-reducing techniques incorporated into the design.

Silent Eagle will lack stealthy propulsion system features, including engine intake blockers, which are part of the F/A-18E/F design. It will also lack infrared signature suppressors on the back end of the aircraft to temper exhaust from the engines and radar blockers, says Jones. These decisions were made largely to curtail costs...

...Jones says the cost of a new-build F-15 Silent Eagle is about $100 million, including spares and support for the RCS-reducing material. Though Boeing hasn't released the price of the F-15SGs sold to Singapore, officials say the cost is similar to that of the Silent Eagle...

 

[OPSSG]

According to The DEW Line, the F-15SE's stealth improvements do not help against ground-based radar systems, which are critical for waging offensive strikes against opponents armed with surface-to-air missile systems, parts of which are quoted below:

...Adding radar absorbent materials to leading edges can soften the F-15SE's head-on radar signature enough to be competitive against the frontal aspect radar signature of the export version of Lockheed Martin's F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, Jones claims. "We know we can get to the US government release level for international customers," he adds.

Canting both vertical stabilisers by 15° is intended to reduce radar returns to the side, but also reduces drag slightly on the aft section. Finally, embedding missiles and bombs inside a heavily modified conformal fuel tank also reduces radar signature in all directions, and allows the F-15SE to perform its warfighting mission even with "clean" wings.

Boeing acknowledges that the F-15SE's stealth improvements do not help against ground-based radar systems, which are critical for waging offensive strikes against opponents armed with surface-to-air missile systems. Lowering the F-15SE's thermal signature - a critical stealthy feature for the Lockheed F-22 Raptor - is also not part of Boeing plans.

But Boeing says the Silent Eagle is aimed at international customers more likely to use the it for defensive, counter-air missions, rather than offensive strikes in defended airspace where all-aspect stealth is necessary for survival.

Despite the stealth improvements, Boeing says the F-15SE will not trade off sensor or aerodynamic performance. Its Raytheon APG-63(V)3 radar would remain canted slightly forward rather than tilted back, preserving coverage and range at the expense of head-on radar cross section.

Moreover, Boeing has designed the F-15SE to also function as a non-stealthy, multirole aircraft with the F-15E's full weapons payload of 13,200kg (29,000lb). A conformal fuel tank with an internal weapons bay could be quickly removed after landing, allowing the aircraft to take off again with a full payload within 2h, it says....

 

[F-15 Eagle]

Boeing's new "Silent Eagle" seems to me to be aimed specifically towards the export market and not for the USAF. What a cool bird though.

It would be a sad shame if the USAF does not get any after the U.S. is the one who maid this cool looking jet. Since at the most the USAF will 243 if Obama continues production and not the full 381 I think maybe 140 F-15SE's for the USAF will do.

 

[rjmaz1]

I think maybe 140 F-15SE's for the USAF will do.

Why would the USAF buy the F-15SE when the F-35: flies further, cruises faster, turns quicker, is stealthier, has better avionics, is cheaper to maintain and cheaper to buy?

Being "cool" is not a reason to buy an aircraft.

Your suggestion in the other thread that the defence budget should simply be increased to buy things because they are "cool" is absolutely crazy.

We may as well bring back the Commanche, build more B-2's and add a couple extra aircraft carriers to the fleet.. That would be cool

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Guys,

As interesting as this concept is, it is no where near being competitive to 5th gen platforms on capability terms (i.e. the F-35), and i don't think it is intended to be. The level of RCS reduction will probably still be inferior to a clean F/A-18F, due to fundamental design limitations (no S curved intakes ect). The F-35 will have a level of RCS reduction at least an order of magnitude greater than than any F-15 variant (thats the difference between RCS reduction and LO), be more capable in aggregate terms (better avionics, better information distribution, better sensors, better HUI, and probably better aerodynamic performance) and SIGNIFICANTLY cheaper in non LRIP batches.

No no, this platform is intended to fill that 4.5th gen market that is still extremely strong. This F-15E will be tough for the Eurocanards, because they are already loosing ground to the F/A-18F and F-15E, a MORE capable F-15E for a comparable price will widen the gap. F-15E BII already offers capability a Typhoon tranche 2, one with comprehensive RCS reduction and limited internal weapons carriage is something Eurofighter will not ever match.

This platform is certainly more than a match for an advanced Flanker.

 

[Falstaff]

Guys,

No no, this platform is intended to fill that 4.5th gen market that is still extremely strong. This F-15E will be tough for the Eurocanards, because they are already loosing ground to the F/A-18F and F-15E, a MORE capable F-15E for a comparable price will widen the gap. F-15E BII already offers capability a Typhoon tranche 2, one with comprehensive RCS reduction and limited internal weapons carriage is something Eurofighter will not ever match.

It hurts but I have to admit that you're probably right, with the EF partner nations not even being able to decide what the T3 aircraft will have on board. The EF partners don't seem to be too keen on export, otherwise there would've been something like a Silent EF ("SEF") or Silent Typhoon ("STIFF" ?) or some kind of technology demonstrator.
For those nations willing to go for gen 4.5 an enhanced Eagle will definitely be worth taking a second look.

This platform is certainly more than a match for an advanced Flanker.

Definitely.

 

[swerve]

... Silent Typhoon ("STIFF" ?) or some kind of technology demonstrator....

The original Typhoon was nicknamed the Tiffie, so a "Silent Typhoon" wouldn't be a "STIFF", it'd be a . . .

I'll get my coat.

 

[Red]

In the case of Singapore, if we acquire more F-15SGs beyond the current 24, it would mean that the 'Silent Eagle' may compete against F-35 sales to Singapore.

OPSG, the 45-50 odd F5 S/Ts will be retired around 2014. I think it would be dangerous to fly them beyond 2014.

I seriously doubt that we will be able to get any F35s before 2014-2013. And not to mention training and IOC dates. As such, I believe another 24 F15SGs is almost certain and to me; a definite purchase. I doubt RSAF will allow a capability gap to develop as a result of the retirement of the F5 S/Ts. RSAF is looking at around 100 F35s to be purchased in 3 large batches. Additional F15SG purchases may result in lesser F35s purchased. But it depends on the threat scenario then as well.

 

[OPSSG]

OPSSG, the 45-50 odd F5 S/Ts will be retired around 2014. I think it would be dangerous to fly them beyond 2014.

...As such, I believe another 24 F-15SGs is almost certain and to me; a definite purchase...

Given the timing issue mentioned, I expect a second F-15 squadron. I'm just wondering if this second F-15 squadron would be more F-15SGs or a variant of the Silent Eagle.

What do you think?

 

[Red]

The 2013-2014 timeframe came from a previous RSAF COA in an interview with Janes. The next purchase has to be more F15SG.

I read the news about the F15SE with great interest. However, the F15SG was conceived and purchased to defeat the recent new SUs flying around in South East Asia. They are more than a match for the latter SU-27s/Su-30s. From that point of view, it may be a redundant upgrade. The current F15SG is already packed with state-of-the-art elecronics requiring 25% more air-conditioning.

If it costs the same, I think that there is no harm to opt for the F15SE. But I also think we should upgrade the original batch of 24 F15SGs as well.

I loath the 4 AAMs carried. There seems to be space for 2 more. I think Boeing should seriously consider adding space for 2 more AAMs without sacrificing too much fuel. I reckon it is very possible seeing as such Israeli F15I flies further than the F15E.

I would love to see Boeing re-arrange the hard-points on the F15SE so that changing the conformal fuel tanks becomes un-necessary. Is that possible?

 

[OPSSG]

^^^ Red, thanks for the above response.

You mention using Eagles in the maritime strike role for Singapore, Japan and South Korean I find that very interesting. Are Singapore's Eagles setup for anti-shipping missions? It would seem a perfect way to use a new F-15SE Eagle. The concept is strange to me I'm used to F-15C's mainly and thinking about a Eagle loaded up with anti-ship missiles is very different. Eagles have good range and payload why couldn't they be effective ship killers?

Evidently, martime strike tactics for the Germans is even more complex than what we mentioned in the earlier posts. I'm copying whole sections from a post by Sven Ortmannt so that you can be on the same page:

The German navy operated a wing of Tornado IDS multi-role combat aircraft until 2005. The wing had a dedicated maritime mission; maritime reconnaissance, anti-ship combat and attacks on harbours...

...This resulted in an interview of the last wing commander in a civilian journal... This interview was different. In order to make his point (the need for dedicated maritime raining of aircraft crews) he described the anti-ship attack tactic, and that was interesting for a change. It's thus now OK to write about this publicly.

The tactic included three munitions;
1) the Kormoran2 anti-ship missile (quite comparable to Exocet, Sea Eagle, Harpoon and most other Western anti-ship missiles).
2) The AGM-88 HARM anti-radiation missile
3) bombs

He claimed that it takes all three to sink a ship and that a very challenging synchronized attack with the subsonic anti-ship missile and the smaller supersonic anti-radiation was necessary to overwhelm the defence for a firepower kill. The bombs were just meant to deliver the killing blow...

Reading the above blog post certainly raised an eyebrow for me.