USAF fighter options
It’s no secret how old the current F-15Cs
are and that at some point in time
they’ll need to be replaced. Former
USAF F-15E pilot and Weapons School
graduate Lt Col (ret’d) Daren Sorenson
says, ‘The need is based on the national
security strategy and how that trickles
down to DoD [Department of Defense]
requirements to ill war plans to meet
that strategy. Since most of that is
classiied, it’s tough to deine the DoD
need in an unclassiied forum. In my
opinion, there is no good ratio for ifth-
to-fourth-gen replacements seeing as
how we’ve never really been forced to
use our ifth-gen assets against a near-
peer in real combat. While we can train
to many diferent scenarios and simulate
threat aircraft in large force exercises
such as ‘Red Flag’, it won’t completely
validate the force structure until those
capabilities are used in a real conlict.
‘In my opinion, we didn’t buy enough
F-22s to ill the need for air superiority
and that’s why you’ve seen them extend
the life of existing Eagles. Given that
the F-35 line is still open, the questionbecomes one of cost compared to an
alternate capability like a new F-15 from
Boeing. It’s my opinion that, for several
reasons, it’s beneicial to have a mix of
fourth and ifth-gen ighter assets.’
Sorenson adds that it also comes down
to an ability to support those assets
in service, the need to procure and/or
sustain larger fourth-gen aircraft leets
being a major factor in the need for
overall mass. ‘You can see the beneit
of retaining several wings of fourth-
gen ighters and the options that gives
combatant commanders’, he comments.
‘I think it’s one of the main reasons why
the F-15C and older types like the A-10
are still so valuable and haven’t been
retired yet.’
He concludes, ‘The next-generation
ighter is still years away and likely will
not be purchased in suicient numbers
to address all the force structure
requirements that future national
security strategies could require. If I
was Boeing, I’d take the F-15QA, make
a USAF version, call it the F-15X, ofer it
up as cheap as possible to the USAF and
see what happens.’New Eagles
A senior Air Combat Command (ACC)
oicer in 2015 described Boeing’s 2040C
proposal as ‘a great capability’, but
suggested that buying new would be
more cost-efective, adding that ACC
had studied buying ‘a wing’ of maybe 72
F-16s or F-15s, or perhaps even Super
Hornets. The study apparently indicated
that a purchase like this would come
in at a higher cost than bulk-buying
F-35s, and that upgrading some of the
current leet might be the best option
to maintain ighter numbers in lieu of
slower-than-anticipated F-35 deliveries.
Reports suggest that Boeing is ofering
an F-15X at the lyaway cost of $95m —
comparable to an F-35A.
The oicer’s comments demonstrated
the irst acknowledgment that such plans
had even been considered. It’s a world
away from a decade ago when the USAF
leadership latly refused to consider
buying a single new F-15.
The F-15X would likely be a single-
seat aircraft with ly-by-wire controls
(opening up stations 1 and 9), the 10 x
19in large area displays (LADs) from the
F-15QA and the digital Joint Helmet-
Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS II) as
well as EPAWSS. The airframe would be
equipped with strengthened wings and
have a 20,000-hour service life. It would
also be equipped with an AESA radar and
AMBERs, which would allow the F-15X to
carry 20 AIM-120Ds or a mix of air-to-air
and air-ground weapons, including eight
AIM-120s and 28 Small Diameter Bombs
(SDBs), or eight AIM-120s and up to seven
2,000lb (907kg) stores.
Top: Another view
of a tooled-up
F-15SA. The
F-15X proposal
is for a single-
seat version of
the Advanced
F-15. Richard
VanderMeulen
Above right: The
F-15QA is the first
Eagle to feature
new large-area
displays. Boeinghttp://www.combataircraft.net // November 2018 49