F-15 Silent Eagle

[SpudmanWP]

The only way Israel benefits form a F-15SE is if their existing F-15s get brought up to the same F-15SE standard (whatever that ends up being).

 

[Triton]

The only way Israel benefits form a F-15SE is if their existing F-15s get brought up to the same F-15SE standard (whatever that ends up being).

Perhaps something similar to the Boeing 2040C Eagle upgrade proposal:

• Fly-by-wire controls
• New-design Conformal Fuel Tanks (CFT)
• Increased weapon load
• Talon HATE pod
• Long-range IRST
• AN/APG-63 advanced active electronically scanned array radar
• Eagle Passive/Active Warning and Survivability System (EPAWSS)

 

[quellish]

2. With all the development time that would still need to be done, they could get an extra F-35 squadron before they could get the F-15SE

Why do you say that?

 

[SpudmanWP]

Why do you say that?

Because it would take years to begin & then finish the development of the SE and then you would need to add 3 years for production on top of that.

The F-35 is in production now, Block 3F is flying, and the ramp up has room to add an additional squadron without delaying any other orders.

 

[quellish]

Because it would take years to begin & then finish the development of the SE and then you would need to add 3 years for production on top of that.

Most of the development has already been done and paid for, including OML changes. Only a few options are not yet in production aircraft. The primary test aircraft was put into storage at AMARC a year ago. You can draw your own conclusions from that.

 

[SpudmanWP]

Only the briefest of tests has been done primarily to put the program in a good light re: whatever bid it was involved with. The fact of the matter is that very little has been done on avionics integration and certainly not much when it comes to it's new cockpit displays.

The biggest hurdle of the F-15SE proposal is that it's not finalized. It's always been a wishlist of features based on what bid it's currently involved in.

On a related note, when will the F-15SA get it's first delivery?

Does anyone have a shot of it's cockpit that is not a "mockup"?

 

[sferrin]

Is the SE going to be anything other than say, an SK with CFTs that can hold an AIM-120 (that will never get used)?

 

[kaiserd]

Because it would take years to begin & then finish the development of the SE and then you would need to add 3 years for production on top of that.

Most of the development has already been done and paid for, including OML changes. Only a few options are not yet in production aircraft. The primary test aircraft was put into storage at AMARC a year ago. You can draw your own conclusions from that.

The more likely scenario is that it would be a minimal change version of the Saudi's latest F15s (not sure the Saudi's or Israel would like to linger on that aspect).
Sounds like pure political posturing by Israel, ask for absolutely everything you can think of so to end up with most you can get.
I'm sure Israel would like another F15 squadron and to further extend the life of their F15 fleet but they have repeatedly decided to go for other options than more new F15s when the chance presented (F16i, F35).
I agree a F15 order now may only make marginal sense (time scales and cost very likely to be at best a match for the F35), more likely it is intended for such an order to be traded away for F35s.

In fairness a small order of new F15s with somewhat better payload/ range versus a F35 may marginally increase the Israelis deep strike capacity but not decisively so versus Iran; developments like conformal tanks for the F35 may be more achievable (financially and politically, technically we'll have to see) and have a greater overall impact on Israeli capacity.
Seems very unlikely any new Eagles would be tailored or intended for a primary air supperioity role.

 

[SpudmanWP]

Kick the door down & create the "wormhole" with the F-35s and let the F-15SEs carry the big bombs (remember that Israel got bunker busters).

I'm surprised that Israel didn't ask for some of our retired B-1Bs

 

[marauder2048]

There was a Flight article earlier this year indicating that Israel was looking to update the radars on the F-15Is. The article suggested AN/APG-82(V)1 which to my surprise is on the DSCA list.

Boeing has to average ~ 17 new built F-15SA deliveries per year for the next 5 years. Saudi Arabia was known to have options for at least
12 aircraft so Boeing may have enough long lead items (IIRC, some require 3 years lead time) on hand to deliver a good chunk of the Israeli
squadron in the very near term.

 

[Triton]

Kick the door down & create the "wormhole" with the F-35s and let the F-15SEs carry the big bombs (remember that Israel got bunker busters).

I'm surprised that Israel didn't ask for some of our retired B-1Bs

Which makes me wonder if "the latest Silent Eagle-standard aircraft" is referring to a "Day 2" strike fighter. The Boeing 2040C upgrade proposal is said to be an evolution of the F-15 Silent Eagle. Perhaps an F-15SA (Saudi Advanced) with Israeli-developed systems? Boeing is marketing the F-15SA as the F-15 Advanced.

 

[Sundog]

It seems to me they're asking for the SE to be a missile carrying platform that has enough stealth to not be detected behind the F-35's, where the F-35's will be used as small AWACS to help direct the F-15s. Also, the F-15s RADAR should have greater range than the F-35s due to the larger aperature so they might even be used to alert the F-35s to threats the F-35 can't yet see, or perhaps allow the F-35 to remain even more "passive." Not to mention, if it looks like an engagement might get into ACM, the F-35s have the F-15s for backup.

Also, the green light for Iran to develop nuclear weapons was given over fourteen years ago when nothing was done to stop their development and the previous administration outed a spy working to keep them from getting nukes for their own political purposes. Just today, they began shutting down their centrifuges. So please take the tinfoil hat crap elsewhere, like the bar.

 

[sferrin]

Also, the green light for Iran to develop nuclear weapons was given over fourteen years ago when nothing was done to stop their development and the previous administration outed a spy working to keep them from getting nukes for their own political purposes. Just today, they began shutting down their centrifuges. So please take the tinfoil hat crap elsewhere, like the bar.

If the deal was so great we wouldn't have to bribe Israel to go along with it now would we? Occam's razor and all that. Would also explain why everybody in the Middle East is now tripping over themselves to arm up. But hey, I get it, you buy your Kool-Aid by the barrel. We'll see how that works out won't we?

 

[Triton]

It seems to me they're asking for the SE to be a missile carrying platform that has enough stealth to not be detected behind the F-35's, where the F-35's will be used as small AWACS to help direct the F-15s. Also, the F-15s RADAR should have greater range than the F-35s due to the larger aperature so they might even be used to alert the F-35s to threats the F-35 can't yet see, or perhaps allow the F-35 to remain even more "passive." Not to mention, if it looks like an engagement might get into ACM, the F-35s have the F-15s for backup.

For a production run to constitute a single squadron, which I presume to be twelve fighters?

 

[SpudmanWP]

It seems to me they're asking for the SE to be a missile carrying platform that has enough stealth to not be detected behind the 's, where the 's will be used as small AWACS to help direct the F-15s. Also, the F-15s RADAR should have greater range than the s due to the larger aperature so they might even be used to alert the s to threats the can't yet see, or perhaps allow the to remain even more "passive." Not to mention, if it looks like an engagement might get into ACM, the s have the F-15s for backup.

The F-15SE's dish is not big enough to overcome the range at which it would have to stay behind the F-35s to stay safe.

You are also assuming that on a tech & capabi.ities level the APG-82(v)1 is on par with the APG-81, which it is likely not.

 

[Triton]

It makes sense that most of the development work will create an upgrade kit that will be used to SLEP the 25 F-15I Ra'am fighters and any number of the existing 58 F-15A/B/C/D Baz fighters whose service lives can be extended. Perhaps the new production run is intended to replace the 16 F-15A Baz fighters?

 

[lastdingo]

If the deal was so great we wouldn't have to bribe Israel to go along with it now would we?

Undue lobby influence and tail-wags-dog issues explain this - not a real or unreal threat from Iran.

 

[marauder2048]

It seems to me they're asking for the SE to be a missile carrying platform that has enough stealth to not be detected behind the F-35's, where the F-35's will be used as small AWACS to help direct the F-15s. Also, the F-15s RADAR should have greater range than the F-35s due to the larger aperature so they might even be used to alert the F-35s to threats the F-35 can't yet see, or perhaps allow the F-35 to remain even more "passive." Not to mention, if it looks like an engagement might get into ACM, the F-35s have the F-15s for backup.

For a production run to constitute a single squadron, which I presume to be twelve fighters?

Typically ~ 24 F-15s/squadron.

 

[marauder2048]

It seems to me they're asking for the SE to be a missile carrying platform that has enough stealth to not be detected behind the 's, where the 's will be used as small AWACS to help direct the F-15s. Also, the F-15s RADAR should have greater range than the s due to the larger aperature so they might even be used to alert the s to threats the can't yet see, or perhaps allow the to remain even more "passive." Not to mention, if it looks like an engagement might get into ACM, the s have the F-15s for backup.

The F-15SE's dish is not big enough to overcome the range at which it would have to stay behind the F-35s to stay safe.

I'm not sure that's true in the bi-static case. That is F-35s operating as forward bi-static receivers for F-15 emitters with tracks being communicated over MADL.

On an unrelated note, is JASSM restricted to STA-2/STA-8 on the F-15E?

 

[TomS]

I think also Station 5. Those three are the high-capacity ones. Sta 5 usually gets a fuel tank, it you can load weapons there instead if you can afford to lose the range.

 

[sferrin]

I think also Station 5. Those three are the high-capacity ones. Sta 5 usually gets a fuel tank, it you can load weapons there instead if you can afford to lose the range.

Isn't there a high capacity station on each CFT as well? I could swear I've seen a GBU-28 hanging on them.

 

[sferrin]

Hmm, it gets better. They want V-22s, tankers, and funding for Arrow 3 as well.

"WASHINGTON --- A new squadron of F-15's, modern tanker aircraft, helicopters, the V-22 Osprey tilt rotor, precision weaponry, and large scale financial aid for the Arrow 3 missile program - those are just some of things Israel is demanding from the US in the framework of a security aid package. "

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/168439/israel-wants-new-f_15-squadron%2C-tankers%2C-arrow-3-in-us-aid-package.html

This Iran deal is looking better all the time.

 

[TomS]

I think also Station 5. Those three are the high-capacity ones. Sta 5 usually gets a fuel tank, it you can load weapons there instead if you can afford to lose the range.

Isn't there a high capacity station on each CFT as well? I could swear I've seen a GBU-28 hanging on them.

I doubt GBU-28; everything I've seen says it goes only on centerline. I did find loads with 4 x 2000-lb GBU-104 on the CFTs, though, and those are similar in weight to JASSM.

http://www.f-15e.info/joomla/en/weapons/loadout-configurations/129-desert-storm

I've never seen JASSMs on the CFTs though. I wonder if the problem might be clearance rather than weight.

 

[shivering]

"If the deal was so great we wouldn't have to bribe Israel to go along with it now would we? Occam's razor and all that."

So what Israel wants is the major determinant of USA foreign policy?

There is also the stick of Israeli nukes (around 75+) which they have been accumulating since 1966+ (?). Israeli nukes may
make a few countries in the area uncomfortable.

Perhaps there are other issues at play as well?

 

[sferrin]

I think also Station 5. Those three are the high-capacity ones. Sta 5 usually gets a fuel tank, it you can load weapons there instead if you can afford to lose the range.

Isn't there a high capacity station on each CFT as well? I could swear I've seen a GBU-28 hanging on them.

I doubt GBU-28; everything I've seen says it goes only on centerline.

That at least I can shed some light on.

 

[sferrin]

"If the deal was so great we wouldn't have to bribe Israel to go along with it now would we? Occam's razor and all that."

So what Israel wants is the major determinant of USA foreign policy?

Wut?

There is also the stick of Israeli nukes (around 75+) which they have been accumulating since 1966+ (?). Israeli nukes may
make a few countries in the area uncomfortable.

Apparently not. It's only been since Obama has made his deal with Iran that many countries in the Middle East have decided to ramp up their purchases.

Perhaps there are other issues at play as well?

Such as? Israel's nukes are a red-herring. As you admit, they've been there for decades.

 

[TomS]

That at least I can shed some light on.

Whoops. OK, Sta 5 (centerline) and Sta 2/8. Looking at the CFT stations, I think they'd put the GBU-28 too far forward or aft, even if they were stressed for 5000-lbs, which I doubt.

 

[sferrin]

That at least I can shed some light on.

Whoops. OK, Sta 5 (centerline) and Sta 2/8. Looking at the CFT stations, I think they'd put the GBU-28 too far forward or aft, even if they were stressed for 5000-lbs, which I doubt.

I have a picture at home I'll have to dig up. It shows an F-15 with 2 GBU-28s and one sort of looks like it might be on a CFT. The angle is just so it looks like it might be either on the far wing shoulder station or the far CFT. It's probably on the shoulder station but I'll post it later.




Meh. Definitely on the shoulder stations.

 

[kaiserd]

"If the deal was so great we wouldn't have to bribe Israel to go along with it now would we? Occam's razor and all that."

So what Israel wants is the major determinant of USA foreign policy?

Wut?

There is also the stick of Israeli nukes (around 75+) which they have been accumulating since 1966+ (?). Israeli nukes may
make a few countries in the area uncomfortable.

Apparently not. It's only been since Obama has made his deal with Iran that many countries in the Middle East have decided to ramp up their purchases.

Perhaps there are other issues at play as well?

Such as? Israel's nukes are a red-herring. As you admit, they've been there for decades.

I am far from an apologist for knee-jerk anti-Israeli sentiment but it is not accurate to say that Israel's nuclear weapons are not a related relevant issue re: Iran's nuclear weapon program.
I agree that in reality Iran's nuclear weapon program is more realistically and primarily aimed at intimidating its local Arab rivals (Saudi Arabia and its allies) as Israel's nuclear deterrent and mutually assured destruction limits Iran's options (but may also act to limit Israel's options in a scenario of a full-scale inter-state war with Iran).
An underlying worry for Israel would be Iran achieving the bomb leading to a nuclear proliferation and arms race with Saudi Arabia also gaining this capacity, with associated risks of instability and non-state actors gaining control of such weapons.

But frankly right now Israel massively outclasses Iran as a military power and even if/when Iran gained the bomb Israel's parallel nuclear capacity would remain far more sophisticated, survivable and devastating.
No new additional massive package from the US is really required for Israel to maintain this advantage; it exists primarily due to political pressures in the US political system.

I am no dove but ultimately the only way Israel or any modern state can try to secure itself from weapons of mass destruction is to come to accommodations with its adversary states and to co-operate with all relevant parties to prevent non-state actors gaining such capabilities.

There is no politically and/or militarily possible course by the US or Israel to stop by force Iran developing this capacity if they are determined to so and are willing to pay the economic and diplomatic price. Everyone involved knows this (including the current Israeli government and the US critics of the Iran nuclear deal), the words to the contrary are only rhetoric for political purposes.

I'd like nothing more for the US to be in position to be able to bully the Iran government to an ideal position of no (civilian or military) nuclear program, dropping support for Hamas and Hezbollah, political, legal & religious reform etc. etc. Unfortunately the US doesn't have this political and/or military power and/or will to do this (faced with the same circumstances it probably never did - very little to do with what particular President or party is in power at the moment).
Israel can't militarily achieve any better than this deal; indeed an attack on Iran would almost certainly achieve much less favorable results for Israel than this deal. Another dozen F15 squadrons (yet alone 1) probably wouldn't change this.

Apologies for going a bit off topic

 

[Sundog]

Also, the green light for Iran to develop nuclear weapons was given over fourteen years ago when nothing was done to stop their development and the previous administration outed a spy working to keep them from getting nukes for their own political purposes. Just today, they began shutting down their centrifuges. So please take the tinfoil hat crap elsewhere, like the bar.

If the deal was so great we wouldn't have to bribe Israel to go along with it now would we? Occam's razor and all that. Would also explain why everybody in the Middle East is now tripping over themselves to arm up. But hey, I get it, you buy your Kool-Aid by the barrel. We'll see how that works out won't we?

I'll rely on the expert's opinions, not Israel's political wishes. You have more than enough Kool-Aid for everyone here, as we already know how well the previous deterrents to Iran's nuclear program worked out.

Now, back on topic, Boeing has been saying they would be getting new orders. If Israel does get the SE, is there a market elsewhere for the SE? Possibly Korea again, because contrary to their deluded notions, we aren't going to give them our stealth tech just so they can build a plane to compete against our own industry. If the KF-X get's built by Korea, it's going to be way more SE than F-35 anyway.

 

[Triton]

Boeing has been saying they would be getting new orders. If Israel does get the SE, is there a market elsewhere for the SE? Possibly Korea again, because contrary to their deluded notions, we aren't going to give them our stealth tech just so they can build a plane to compete against our own industry. If the KF-X get's built by Korea, it's going to be way more SE than F-35 anyway.

New orders from whom? Boeing pitched the F-15 Silent Eagle, also known as the F-15 Advanced, to Israel, Saudi Arabia, Japan, and South Korea. Israel was originally refused by the Obama Administration in 2010. Saudi Arabia passed in favor of what became the F-15SA (Saudi Advanced). Japan and South Korea passed in favor of the F-35A Lightning II. South Korea agreed to buy 40 F-35A fighters with an option to purchase 20 more. Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) partnered with Lockheed Martin to develop the KF-X. KAI previously partnered with Lockheed Martin to develop the T-50 Golden Eagle.

The US government refused to allow the transfer of four technologies — active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, infrared search and track (IRST), electronic optics targeting pod, and RF jammer — for security reasons.

 

[sferrin]

Boeing has been saying they would be getting new orders. If Israel does get the SE, is there a market elsewhere for the SE? Possibly Korea again, because contrary to their deluded notions, we aren't going to give them our stealth tech just so they can build a plane to compete against our own industry. If the KF-X get's built by Korea, it's going to be way more SE than F-35 anyway.

New orders from whom? Boeing pitched the F-15 Silent Eagle, also known as the F-15 Advanced, to Israel, Saudi Arabia, Japan, and South Korea. Israel was refused by the Obama Administration. Saudi Arabia passed in favor of what became the F-15SA (Saudi Advanced). Japan and South Korea passed in favor of the F-35A Lightning II. South Korea agreed to buy 40 F-35A fighters with an option to purchase 20 more. Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) partnered with Lockheed Martin to develop the KF-X. KAI previously partnered with Lockheed Martin to develop the T-50 Golden Eagle.

The US government refused to allow the transfer of four technologies — active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar, infrared search and track (IRST), electronic optics targeting pod, and RF jammer — for security reasons.

Couldn't they just source those four from European companies?

 

[Triton]

Couldn't they just source those four from European companies?

Saab, Selex ES, and Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) have offered AESA technology to South Korea.

Source:
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/isr/2015/10/25/seoul-debates-best-strategy-acquire-aesa-radar/74450986/

 

[Triton]

I understand that South Korea wanted the technology transfer for the KF-X project so that it could get around the U.S. Arms Export Control Act when selling the fighter to foreign nations.


Posted : 2015-10-25 17:06
Updated : 2015-10-26 18:00

"US strikes down T-50 exports to Uzbekistan"
by Kang Seung-woo

Source:
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2015/10/116_189398.html

The U.S. government has refused to allow Korea to export $400 million worth of indigenous supersonic training jets to Uzbekistan, sources said Sunday.

The denial of permission is another blow to Korea's program to develop its own military aircraft and comes at a sensitive time when the U.S. government's refusal to hand over key avionics technologies regarding F-35 fighters to Korea has become a political issue between the two nations.

Korea Aerospace Industries' (KAI) T-50 Golden Eagle was co-developed in 2006 with Lockheed Martin, using the U.S. firm's core technologies, including the avionics system and engine.

Because of this, Korea needs to get approval from the U.S. government to export the aircraft in accordance with the U.S. Arms Export Control Act.

"KAI has been in negotiations with the Uzbek government to export the supersonic trainers, but the U.S. government is opposing the deal, citing possible technology leakage and diplomatic policy," a source said.

The U.S. refusal comes at a sensitive time when the Korea's weapons procurement agency has drawn fire for failing to receive key avionics technologies from its purchase of 40 F-35 stealth jets as an offset package.

KAI seeks to sell 12 T-50s worth $400 million (454 billion won).

In addition, the U.S. also expressed concerns that Uzbekistan's procurement of the T-50s may ratchet up tensions with neighboring countries, the source said.

The military believes that the U.S. opposition is due to Uzbekistan's membership of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) that some say has emerged as an anti-U.S. bulwark in Central Asia. The SCO's other members are China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan.

"As Uzbekistan has close ties with Russia, the U.S. is worried that an export of T-50s to Uzbekistan may lead to its technologies being transferred to Russia," said a military official.

U.S.-Russia ties are at their lowest ebb in decades since Moscow's annexation of the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine in March 2014.

The U.S. opposition is a major blow to Korea, which has made all-out efforts to strike the contract with the Central Asian country.

President Park Geun-hye and Uzbek President Islam Karimov reportedly discussed the issue during their summit at Cheong Wa Dae in May.

In April, Defense Minister Han Min-koo and his Uzbek counterpart Kabul Berdiev signed the memorandum of understanding on promoting bilateral partnerships and Berdiev piloted the FA-50 simulator. The FA-50 is a light attack variant of the T-50 that has been exported to Iraq, the Philippines and Thailand. KAI also exported 16 TA-50s, another T-50 variant, to Indonesia.

However, the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), the nation's arms procurement agency, is still seeking to keep the talks with Uzbekistan alive.

"Despite the U.S. opposition, DAPA will step up efforts to persuade Washington to approve the deal," the military official said.

KAI, based in Sacheon, South Gyeongsang Province, is also promoting the supersonic trainer for the U.S. Air Force's trainer program, codenamed "T-X," aimed at replacing its fleet of T-38s, in 2017.

The U.S. plans to purchase 350 new aircraft worth billions of dollars.

 

[sferrin]

I'm astonished that this should surprise anybody. Why would a country not want to maintain control over who gets it's technology?

 

[Triton]

I'm astonished that this should surprise anybody. Why would a country not want to maintain control over who gets it's technology?

I'm astonished that the South Koreans are so upset about this issue.

 

[marauder2048]

I'm astonished that this should surprise anybody. Why would a country not want to maintain control over who gets it's technology?

I'm astonished that the South Koreans are so upset about this issue.

Weren't the South Koreans caught mishandling (a *kind* way of saying reverse engineering) the IRST on the F-15K? In any event, negotiating through the media is
a tried and true tactic the world over.

 

[phrenzy]

I wish Australia would consider them but I don't see it. We gave up a hell of a lot when the last of the Aardvarks went into retirement.

 

[Kiltonge]

I'm astonished that the South Koreans are so upset about this issue.

I'm astonished the South Koreans are so naive about this issue.

Having transfer-of-technology means nothing in terms of permitting export sales. The US State Department retains veto rights over export; just ask Volvo Flygmotor ( RM8 and RM12 ) or even P&W Canada ( CT7 made entirely in Canada but uses US-licensed IP: vetoed sale to Spain for onward sale to Venezuela ).

 

[GTX]

I wish Australia would consider them but I don't see it. We gave up a hell of a lot when the last of the Aardvarks went into retirement.

Yep, a lot of cost and angst...they were 30yrs old and a small, unique fleet in the world.