Here is a CNN news item which talks about a 'wake-up call' for the Air Force reagrding air-superiority.
Link to CNN
Link to CNN
Are the F-15s aging ?
- Thread starter plugnpray
- Start date
Don Vito Corleone
Elite
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 67
- 91
There are any number of Soviet fighters that offer greater capabilities than the F-15. That said, no F-15 has ever been lost in combat, and it doesn't appear that any of our real-world enemies have any significant ability to challenge our air superiority.
The current F-15Cs and Es have pretty advanced avionics capabilities, and will still hold their own in their intended applications. That said, the design is comparatively ancient, and I support developing the F-22 and JSF as a means for gradually modernizing our fighter arsenal.
The current F-15Cs and Es have pretty advanced avionics capabilities, and will still hold their own in their intended applications. That said, the design is comparatively ancient, and I support developing the F-22 and JSF as a means for gradually modernizing our fighter arsenal.
The MIG -21s that are being referred to were probably made in 1971. ( I agree that the Sukhoi's are much more recent) Could it be training of the pilots ? After all using heavier/precision bombs and accurate missiles does not count towards 'air'-supremacy.
Don Vito Corleone
Elite
- Feb 10, 2000
- 30,029
- 67
- 91
Originally posted by: athithi
This topic won't die, it seems
Some more reactions...
America salutes air power, India cool
I remember first hearing about this. Didn't India, Israel, and a couple other countries kick our asses in friendly air competitions like that one?
Originally posted by: tallest1
Originally posted by: athithi
This topic won't die, it seems
Some more reactions...
America salutes air power, India cool
I remember first hearing about this. Didn't India, Israel, and a couple other countries kick our asses in friendly air competitions like that one?
It doesn't matter. We can still sit a thousand miles away and beat the crap out of them all without launching a single fighter.
CaptnKirk
Lifer
- Jul 25, 2002
- 10,053
- 0
- 71
F-15 Eagle
There is a bit of 'fudging' in the way they are presenting this data.
The F-15C was built starting late Feb of 1979 and is the single seat version.
The F-15D two-seater first unit came out in June of 1979.
There were 470 of these models delivered.
They replaced the design of the F-15A & F-15B models which had began production in 1972
and there had been a total of 424 of them delivered when expanded cotract requirements
forced the design update into what became the F-15C & D models.
The U.S. fleet of F-15 'All' totaled 894 at the end of that production phase.
F-15E 'Strike Eagle' design enhancement vehicle began production in December of 1986
and continued until 1997 delivering an additional 190 aircraft to our inventory.
Our 'Fleet' total stands at 616 of all versions of the F-15.
with attrition due to failures & crashes our functional fleet is somewhat below 600 vehicles.
Now here's the perspective - the design of the F-15 was the result of a 'Scramble'
by F-4D's sometime in the late 60's when an unknown aircraft was spotted traveling
at a startling velocity somewhere in Southeast Asia, Vietnam era and arena.
The picture taken by the pilots was of a twin vertical supersonic aircraft with Soviet markings,
which was later determined to be a MiG product. This forced us to rethink our Superiority
Fighter design and seek a replacement to the aging fleet of craft made during the 60's.
So then, the design of the F-15 was done in the late 60's to confront something that the opposition
had that would outperform our then fleet of advanced fighters - they had caught up - and more.
Our highest aircraft fleet strength occured at the end of WWII, when the war came to an end.
on through the 50's we developed our jets to replace the prop jobs, but they were not replaced
on a 1 for 1 basis, a jet could replace 3 or 4 prop jobs, so our fleet count dwindles as the older
aircraft left the inventory and jets replaced them.
Now the present - and the future. Our present fleet, all vehicles is less than one fifth of what
the vehicle count was at the end of the Korean War, circa 1955.
The present fleet is composed of many old and aging aircraft, even as we continue to replace
them with 'sustain' production to offset the planned attrition - less than Qty (5) F-15's & F-16's
are produced currently each year for our forces, while we sell derivitives to Foriegn Governments.
By the year 2010 our present fleet will have aged and fatigued out to where only 1/4 of the
present fleet will be servicable, even with airframe mods and extentions to the servicability.
Enter the present production of todays and tomorrows fleet - the companies that made all the
thousands of aircraft in the 40's, 50's & 60's are gone. Bought up by a company that bought up
a company that again bought up a company - we are down to 3 builders of Military Fighters.
MacDac was bought by Boeing, and McBoeing is still building a miniscule five F-15's a year,
and the F/A-18E & F's are producing at a LRF (Low Rate Fabrication) of less than 50 a year.
Northrup/Grumman makes a few drones, and is a sub-contractor for the two other 'Big' companies.
Lockheed is the Prime Contractor for both the F-22 Raptor & F-35 JSF, and these contracts
are in various stages of maturity - with program life expectancy scheduled through 2045.
And Bubba, that's all you got.
Even with the present production run in process, our fleet attrition will leave us with the
replacement factor of 3:1 again as the more capable new toys replace many older models
and bring in a more robust 'Multi-Functional' fighter. JSF alone is designed to replace 5 older aircraft, such as the AV-8B Harrier, the A-10 Warthog, the F-14 Tomcat, and even the F/A-18C & D models.
So then, we have to build these aircraft just to try to stay current, even as we fall behind.
The ploy is to rattle the Congress and the Public so the funding isn't cut and leave us with
no options in the future - if the F-22 and the F-35 are cut, there's nothing to replace them.
There is a bit of 'fudging' in the way they are presenting this data.
The F-15C was built starting late Feb of 1979 and is the single seat version.
The F-15D two-seater first unit came out in June of 1979.
There were 470 of these models delivered.
They replaced the design of the F-15A & F-15B models which had began production in 1972
and there had been a total of 424 of them delivered when expanded cotract requirements
forced the design update into what became the F-15C & D models.
The U.S. fleet of F-15 'All' totaled 894 at the end of that production phase.
F-15E 'Strike Eagle' design enhancement vehicle began production in December of 1986
and continued until 1997 delivering an additional 190 aircraft to our inventory.
Our 'Fleet' total stands at 616 of all versions of the F-15.
with attrition due to failures & crashes our functional fleet is somewhat below 600 vehicles.
Now here's the perspective - the design of the F-15 was the result of a 'Scramble'
by F-4D's sometime in the late 60's when an unknown aircraft was spotted traveling
at a startling velocity somewhere in Southeast Asia, Vietnam era and arena.
The picture taken by the pilots was of a twin vertical supersonic aircraft with Soviet markings,
which was later determined to be a MiG product. This forced us to rethink our Superiority
Fighter design and seek a replacement to the aging fleet of craft made during the 60's.
So then, the design of the F-15 was done in the late 60's to confront something that the opposition
had that would outperform our then fleet of advanced fighters - they had caught up - and more.
Our highest aircraft fleet strength occured at the end of WWII, when the war came to an end.
on through the 50's we developed our jets to replace the prop jobs, but they were not replaced
on a 1 for 1 basis, a jet could replace 3 or 4 prop jobs, so our fleet count dwindles as the older
aircraft left the inventory and jets replaced them.
Now the present - and the future. Our present fleet, all vehicles is less than one fifth of what
the vehicle count was at the end of the Korean War, circa 1955.
The present fleet is composed of many old and aging aircraft, even as we continue to replace
them with 'sustain' production to offset the planned attrition - less than Qty (5) F-15's & F-16's
are produced currently each year for our forces, while we sell derivitives to Foriegn Governments.
By the year 2010 our present fleet will have aged and fatigued out to where only 1/4 of the
present fleet will be servicable, even with airframe mods and extentions to the servicability.
Enter the present production of todays and tomorrows fleet - the companies that made all the
thousands of aircraft in the 40's, 50's & 60's are gone. Bought up by a company that bought up
a company that again bought up a company - we are down to 3 builders of Military Fighters.
MacDac was bought by Boeing, and McBoeing is still building a miniscule five F-15's a year,
and the F/A-18E & F's are producing at a LRF (Low Rate Fabrication) of less than 50 a year.
Northrup/Grumman makes a few drones, and is a sub-contractor for the two other 'Big' companies.
Lockheed is the Prime Contractor for both the F-22 Raptor & F-35 JSF, and these contracts
are in various stages of maturity - with program life expectancy scheduled through 2045.
And Bubba, that's all you got.
Even with the present production run in process, our fleet attrition will leave us with the
replacement factor of 3:1 again as the more capable new toys replace many older models
and bring in a more robust 'Multi-Functional' fighter. JSF alone is designed to replace 5 older aircraft, such as the AV-8B Harrier, the A-10 Warthog, the F-14 Tomcat, and even the F/A-18C & D models.
So then, we have to build these aircraft just to try to stay current, even as we fall behind.
The ploy is to rattle the Congress and the Public so the funding isn't cut and leave us with
no options in the future - if the F-22 and the F-35 are cut, there's nothing to replace them.
kage69
Lifer
- Jul 17, 2003
- 31,455
- 47,853
- 136
It amuses that people are making comments like "we got owned" despite not knowing any the details of the training op. I seriously doubt the USAF didn't take it's fair share of "kills," even in aging aircraft. Our training budget is well beyond what most countries have to work with.
The fact that we possess nukes is irrelevent as well. How many times have they been used since WWII? How many conflicts have we had involving air combat since then? Air superiority fighters are not obsolete on the modern battlefield. We need to keep up, simple as that.
F-22 > * They may be expensive, but there's no denying their capabilities.
The fact that we possess nukes is irrelevent as well. How many times have they been used since WWII? How many conflicts have we had involving air combat since then? Air superiority fighters are not obsolete on the modern battlefield. We need to keep up, simple as that.
F-22 > * They may be expensive, but there's no denying their capabilities.
shiner
Lifer
- Jul 18, 2000
- 17,112
- 1
- 0
That sort of attitude post WWI is what caused us to be caught with our pants down at the beginning of WWII. Hell even at the end of the war the Germans and Japanese still had more advanced aircraft, they just weren't able to build them in enough numbers to matter.
kage69
Lifer
- Jul 17, 2003
- 31,455
- 47,853
- 136
That viewpoint would work if terrorists were all the Pentagon had to worry about. Trouble is, countries like NK and China could make trouble further down the road. Seeing as how it takes so long to develop and produce competent fighters, putting it off until trouble starts just isn't prudent.
lozina
Lifer
- Sep 10, 2001
- 11,711
- 8
- 81
We can't be ready for everything- it's simply not prudent, we need to prioritize. Fighter jets are not going to do much when nukes are flying, and besides, we still have an uncontested navy preventing China or NK or anyone from being able to fly sorties over American soil. Maybe we were caught off-guard in WW2 maybe not, either way we prevailed due to our industrial base. Our industries packing up and going to China is far more disconcerting to me than not having the most sophisticated interceptor. Because even then you pointed out Germany's superior design but the inability to produce them in any significant numbers which is why they lost and we won.
a bigger priority in my opinion is our foreign debt. It may not seem important to most of you but we spend a significant chunk of our GDP servicing this debt and it's only getting worse with our budget policies and trade deficit.
a bigger priority in my opinion is our foreign debt. It may not seem important to most of you but we spend a significant chunk of our GDP servicing this debt and it's only getting worse with our budget policies and trade deficit.
I read that it was 4 F15s vs 10 or more of the Indian planes.
In a real conflict it would be the other way around. This is just a stunt to take the taxpayers to the cleaners.
In a real conflict it would be the other way around. This is just a stunt to take the taxpayers to the cleaners.
CaptnKirk
Lifer
- Jul 25, 2002
- 10,053
- 0
- 71
you pointed out Germany's superior design but the inability to produce them in any significant numbers which is why they lost and we won
That's not quite correct - they had lost their supply line of fuels.
Tanks in the desserts were stranded under Rommel when they ran out of fuel.
The German Factories had moved litterally underground so the bombers couldn't
see where they were and strike them. Even at that, the locations leaked out into
intelligence surveilance, and they moved the factories (Messerschmitt, Focke-Wulf)
every few weeks, and the parts shops were in constant transition.
Luftwaffe
Logistics - the supply chain is what ended the Nazi threat, without gasoline for fuel
nothing ran, and they couldn't supply their army with anything - it collapsed.
That's not quite correct - they had lost their supply line of fuels.
Tanks in the desserts were stranded under Rommel when they ran out of fuel.
The German Factories had moved litterally underground so the bombers couldn't
see where they were and strike them. Even at that, the locations leaked out into
intelligence surveilance, and they moved the factories (Messerschmitt, Focke-Wulf)
every few weeks, and the parts shops were in constant transition.
Luftwaffe
Logistics - the supply chain is what ended the Nazi threat, without gasoline for fuel
nothing ran, and they couldn't supply their army with anything - it collapsed.
The F-15's were handicapped so that the dog fights would be equal. The only "surprise" to US commanders was that the Indian planes actually performed better than they were rated. In an actual dog fight, F-15 would own any Mig.
Its also worth pointing out the USAF doesnt even have the best pilots in the US, both Navy and Marine pilots get much better training.
Its also worth pointing out the USAF doesnt even have the best pilots in the US, both Navy and Marine pilots get much better training.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter