Will America sell Qatar 73 F-15 Silent Eagles?
Or will it go the way of the F-20?
http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/policy-budget/budget/2016/04/08/united-arab-emirates-f15/82813054/
>>29551916
Boeing would be over-joyed.
Wasn't Israel also looking into the F-15SE since America won't sell them F-22s?
>>29551944
Israel, Saudi Arabia, Japan, and Korea were all very interested in the F-15 Silent Eagle.
I am a mouth breather anons so why is Qatar not buying something more modern like a F35 or something cheaper like Russian shit?
>>29551944
No, they went for F-35s and if America gives them more money they'll probably buy more F-15Is.
>>29551925
They sure would be. This is probably the last chance for the F-15 to extend the production line.
>>29551963
They probably want to drop american satellite guided bombs on open air markets of other middle easterners who don't have oil money. You know, just like the Saudis are doing in Yemen.
You can't really beat strike eagle variants for that use
>>29551916
The real question is why the USAF isn't buying this instead of You Know What.
>>29552149
Why would they buy more F-15s?
>>29552149
I don't understand why the USAF isn't just using modernized P-51 Mustangs, they were untouchable in WWII and raped everything thrown at them so they ought to be just as good today with modern shit thrown on them at a fraction of the cost without any of the expensive gimmicks.
>>29552168
Because the F-15 is the most successful fighter jet of all time.
Why wouldn't you want to keep using your most successful, most reliable platform?
The Silent Eagle adds updated avionics, superior radar, and stealth capabilities to a system what is already respected (or feared) the world over.
What's the problem?
>>29552174
Admittedly, I think they would be good if bubba'd by modernism against sand dindus. But against any other modernized or slightly so military, they don't stand too much of a chance.
>>29552247
It's absurdly expensive for marginal improvement over the F-15E, especially considering there's no glaring need to replace the Strike Eagles.
>>29552283
Then there is no glaring need for the F-35 either.
Come on. Either the USAF needs new planes or they don't. If the F-15E doesn't need replaced then the F-35 is clearly unnecessary.
>>29552327
there's glaring need to replace the f18 and harriers though
>>29552327
>there is no glaring need for the F-35
Yes there is. The Legacy fighters (F-16, F-18, and AV-8B) are all falling apart and needed a replacement.
The difference is the Strike Eagles are mostly good to fly into the middle of the century, while the Legacy fighters the F-35's replacing are already falling apart.
>>29552247
>>29552327
Sticking with the F-15 would be fine if all other countries stuck to using their cold war era aircraft too, but that is not the case at all. China and Russia are out to pass the US in tech and performance.
>>29552384
Replace the F-16 with the F-15 Silent Eagle.
Produce a navalized variant to replace the F-18.
The AV-8B is a bit trickier. But I think we can all admit that that should have been a separate project from the beginning, anyway.
>>29552453
>Replace the F-16 with the F-15 Silent Eagle.
Too expensive, completely different roles.
>Produce a navalized variant to replace the F-18.
Too large, too expensive, and not technically feasible.
>But I think we can all admit that that should have been a separate project from the beginning, anyway.
No. It started out as a separate project (and in fact the STOVL part was the oldest element of the JSF dating all the way back to 1982) but the Lift Fan system that was developed made it possible to not just have an incredibly capable STOVL fighter, but have a fairly common airframe with minimal design sacrifices.
>>29552174
>>29552270
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/ov-10-broncos-were-sent-to-fight-isis-and-they-kicked-a-1764407068
The US has been using OV-10 Broncos against ISIS and apparently they work better than anything else.
>>29552531
Just two of them, though
>>29552397
>China and Russia are out to pass the US in tech and performance.
Russia is falling apart and China is still catching up and will be for at least a decade.
The only competition for US planes are EU and Japanese planes.
>>29552585
keep telling yourself that, that won't stop your rivals from continuing to improve their militaries. the US is going to be challenge in the next decade and will be caught with their pants down from jerking off about their "superiority".
>>29552585
>Japanese planes
>>29552731
>that won't stop your rivals from continuing to improve their militaries.
Because there is no way the us will improve in the same amount of time
>>29552531
>mfw an aircraft that someone could own as a private individual is currently in use as a combat aircraft
What a time to be alive
>>29551916
Nobody is ever going to buy Silent Eagles.
>>29552757
ATD-X will slice through dishonorabru gaijin planes like a wazikashi slicing through the necks of chinese peasants.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGfdzRjnf4Q
>>29554214
It's not even a prototype. It's a scaled down technological test-bed. From which they can ascertain whether they want to pursue their own fighter or not.
Think X-29.
>>29552453
>Replace the F-16 with the F-15 Silent Eagle
Nigga what? That makes no sense at all and completely defeats the purpose of the F-16. Also, daily reminder that the F-15SE was projected to have a unit cost of $100,000,000, which is $15,000,000 more than the F-35A and the the F-15SE is a distinctly less capable design.
-Less advanced radar with air-cooling, no OECM capability, and inferior processing
-Massively inferior ESM/OECM suite incapable of NBILST or DRFM jamming
-No MAWS whatsoever
-Non-stealthy datalink
-Inferior RCS reduction characteristics
-Likely inferior E/M characteristics
All for a higher price. Awesome. Maybe 40 year old designs aren't a great idea anymore?
>Produce a navalized variant to replace the F-18.
Still more expensive and patently inferior.
>The AV-8B is a bit trickier
No shit
>But I think we can all admit that that should have been a separate project from the beginning, anyway.
>Hey guys, why don't we make sure we have three separate trains of spare parts to maintain with little-to-no overlap
NTY
>>29551916
SE was cleared available for export last year when the Sorks and Israelis were looking into them. Boeing will have to sell it now.
>>29552327
>Come on. Either the USAF needs new planes or they don't. If the F-15E doesn't need replaced then the F-35 is clearly unnecessary.
>Implying the F-15E will be used of tacair or SEAD
>Implying it will be used in non-permissive airspace
>Implying legacy fighters aren't already at a tremendous disadvantage to 4.5+ fighters like the Su-35S
>>29557380
>No MAWS
Why?
>>29552270
I don't see an issue. We're spending a lot of money fighting ISIS. We might as well save money where we can. A old plane and a brand new plane both do the job just as well, since their AA capability is shit.
>>29557380
Imagine if they had dumped all the money from the F-35 into developing the Silent Eagle instead. None of that would be a problem then, and we'd have a better plane.
>>29557400
How exactly do you integrate MAWS into the F-15 without totally redesigning it or making it impossible to make stealthy? Kits like AN/AAR-57 create large bubble shapes on the surface of the airplane, and cutting big holes into the plane to install sensors would require extensive redesign, completely defeating the purpose of the SE program. They only got the weapons bays in because they used the space from FAST. Oh, I also forgot to mention lack of sensor fusion and HMD for the F-15SE, and smaller internal capacity.
>>29557435
That would totally defeat the propose of the Silent Eagle, which was to offer an alternative that didn't require large amounts of development money. If you're going to spend $67 billion on RTD&E you might want a new design instead of a ~40 year old one that, while impressive in the '70's and '80's, is subpar by modern standards.
holy crap some of you are idiots.
the Silent Eagle is a stupid proposal. and i say that as a guy who flies Strike Eagles
Energy weapons are going to make all planes and missiles obsolete. Satellites and drones? Fried. Even artillery with anything but a flat trajectory will be zapped out of the sky using lasers.
All warfare will again be reduced to armies marching across the ground, using the terrain for cover while trying to get a direct line of sight on the enemy.
It won't happen in the next decade. It may not even happen in our lifetime. But eventually, it will happen. It is an inevitable consequence of the development of lasers and computers.
Prove me wrong.
>>29557489
>the Silent Eagle is a stupid proposal. and i say that as a guy who flies Strike Eagles
Can you explain why?
Last night I got into a minor argument with some guy on another site who said that the F-15 was an inherently better design than the F-22/F-35 because the F-15 is designed to be easy to upgrade over time whereas the F-22/F-35 are stuck with whatever they had when they were first built.
How would you respond to these claims?
>>29557553
it's a 40 year old design. it's a great fighter, but it's showing its age.
i would have called him an idiot, told him to find a F-35/F-22 and F-15 maintainer and buy them a beer, and then i would have gone out for a beer because we all should have better things to do on a saturday night than argue with idiots.
>>29557543
>Implying detection isn't already the primary obstacle to successful engagement
>Implying DEWs somehow help with detection
>>29557543
>what is EMP
>>29557553
> the F-22/F-35 are stuck with whatever they had when they were first built.
That's bullshit.
>>29557629
Something that's easy to defend against.
>>29557629
>what is faraday cage
>what is current military anti-emp technology
>>29557620
>implying that hiding will not ultimately be a losing battle to seeking
Sensors will only get better. Eventually there will be nowhere left to hid.
>>29557649
>Faraday cage
That dude is retarded, but at least understand how EMP shielding actually works before posting
>>29557659
>Implying stealth won't get better as well.
>>29557635
Selected Quotes:
>The F-22 & F-35 avionics are built along the lines of a Dell laptop, everything is integrated. Just like a Dell laptop, if the NIC card goes out you have to replace the whole laptop, because it's integrated into the motherboard. Software upgrades are one thing, replacing hardware is another issue on the above planes.
>>29557669
Stealth can't get better forever. Unless you can find a way to remove your aircraft from this universe anyway...
>>29557682
And where is that from, exactly?
>>29557682
he's wrong and an idiot.
>>29557682
Just straight up tell him that's total bullshit, then explain to him that the electronics are just as modular as those on an F-15.
>>29552531
>Last year we lamented that the OV-10 Bronco the fact that the OV-10 Bronco was never really allowed to reach its full potential
Am I losing a grasp on the english language or does this make no goddamned sense
>>29557692
Sure it can, there is an infinite number of numbers between 0.0001 and 0.
>>29557719
He just missed an "and" after the first "Bronco", calm your autism.
>>29557718
more modular. the F-15E's are trying to get new radars and they take months to integrate the new ones because they're not "easily interchangeable". and i'm not sure how we're going to get the -220 motors to go with it since the ECS airflow's less and the cooling requirements so great.
>>29557737
Even then it doesnt make much sense
>Last year we lamented that the OV-10 Bronco and the fact that the OV-10 Bronco was never really allowed to reach its full potential
>>29557752
>meanwhile it takes YEARS to get the F-35 to do basic weapon integration.
How stealthy is the Silent Eagle? About as stealthy as a Rafale?
>>29557752
Yeah, the radar and communications suite should be easier to upgrade, but the E/W suite is integrated and distributed which makes it harder to upgrade.
>>29557766
>I am clearly unfamiliar with how much time it takes to get new weapons working.
>>29557767
"Stealth" is always hard to us mortals to quantify because the specifics are super-duper classified and the specifics would likely be unintelligible to anybody without a Physics Ph.D anyway.
But in vague terms, I've read that the F-15SE is only stealthy in an air-to-air context. It doesn't have the proper angling to hide its RCS from a ground based radar. So while it might be harder for another plane to detect, it would be nearly as vulnerable to surface threats as a traditional F-15E.
>>29557726
It won't work forever because you have to deal with constraints imposed on you by the physical nature of the universe. The aircraft will always have mass and will always emit EM radiation. You aren't reducing those infinitely to zero, you can only reduce those infinitely to some non-zero number. Your limit is non-zero.
Stealth is on borrowed time.
>>29557804
>anybody without a Physics Ph.D
Except not at all; specs essentially consist of effective RCS at direction and wavelength. Also; this isn't the 1980's, you can do effective RSWA with a home computer and the fight software as long as you have an appropriate 3d model.
>>29557805
>To some non-zero number.
Yes, but detection range is proportional to the fourth root of RCS anyway. As long as it's reduced at all, even form something like 0.000000000000000001m^2 to 0.000000000000000000001m^2 detection range will still shrink by a factor of 10. Extend that however many decimal places you like. There is an infinite number of numbers between any nonzero number and zero, and therefor infinite room for improvement.
>>29557857
Your limit is non-zero. But detection has no such limit. If it is there, there will eventually be technology that can see it.
Thermodynamics gives us hard and fast rules of the universe. "Stealth and Detection will always have a fair fight" is not one of them. Competitive forces will not keep stealth and detection in lockstep forever.
>>29557937
Your assumption is that stealth has a non-zero limit, which we know is untrue. Actually, detection has a harder limit given the limit on effective transistor materials and practical aperture size.
As I understand it, the Silent Eagle was never more than a mock-up. Its 'stealth' qualities have never been properly ascertained.
>>29557777
if we ever get funding for improvements to the F-15E's EW suite, it's going to take forever and cost a lot compared to the F-35
>>29557974
It'll probably never happen, but it should in principle be cheaper to replace. Also inferior because it's not distributed, but cheaper.
>>29557973
It was more than just a mock-up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UldoGIMRsSY
>>29557995
in principle, yes. in actuality, probably not.
>>29552174
You joke, but they really should've given it a bash for funsies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piper_PA-48_Enforcer
>>29551916
>Want the SE to sell at least some planes because I think it's cool and cute.
>Fucking hate barbaric states like Qatar.
Either way, I lose.
>>29557972
>Your assumption is that stealth has a non-zero limit, which we know is untrue.
No, it is true. The airplane will always have mass, and it will always emit EM radiation. The laws of thermodynamics do not permit any other possibility.
There will come a time when any object in the sky above a warzone will be seen by sensors, and blasted out of the air with immensely powerful lasers. Not even the birds will be safe, it will be a total bird genocide (when man builds ornithopter drones which mimic birds, all birds will become innocent casualties of war.)
>>29554214
>no ASF-X II
Git Out
>>29557805
It doesn't matter if your theoretical limit is zero or some non-zero value, you're still indefinitely refining towards whatever that limit is. This applies to both the signature you give off and the signature you're capable of detecting.
>>29557682
there's so much that's wrong here that it hurts to believe that such retards are allowed to use the internet unsupervised
>>29559792
I'm loving the mental image of someone trying to feed a fucking fighter jet into a PnP machine so it can have the microchips applied
>>29557832
Fucking this. Anyone who doesn't know enough to be comfortable with RCS estimates is either a moron or a pedantic troll.
>>29557543
Sideways turret movement. If you are at long range you're fucked, but when close enough, you might be able to overrun the turret. Also it's limited to visual range.
>>29560122
Relevant for large weapons. Eventually though turret mechanism and weapon miniaturization will make that less true.
Ain't even that fag.
>>29560122
Not to mention the scope for developing armor intended for resisting energy weapons. It's been a big push to make lasers effective against conventional hardware, and once it becomes worthwhile to invest in countermeasures things will be trading places in effectiveness for a good long time to come.
>>29557543
Is it possible to deflect an energy weapon with a mirror or something and retain enough power to kill?
(The mirror can be specially designed and cost as much as you like, as can the weapon, so long as it's physically possible.)
>>29560345
Depends on the 'energy'. For radiation weapons, absolutely.
Energized matter weapons like plasma or particle beams wouldn't give a fuck, they deal their damage by heat and/or kinetic impact.
>>29552149
Why isn't USAF buying modernized wright flyers? They were literally undoubtably the best plane when they were made, why do they need to be so snowflake as to aquire some stupid new design over the one that was the best?
>>29557682
Completely wrong. He's a fucking moronic Neanderthal.
Israel doesn't want this deal to seal...
Fucking kikes, now they want to shut down F-15 line just because they want to
Why the fuck they act like they rule the US ?
>>29551916
Qatar, when you are so rich you can afford a fighter plane for every military aged male in the country.
>>29561898
Qatar is the country that avoided Arab Spring by straight up paying everybody not to rebel.
>>29561946
>paying everybody not to rebel
it just mean that they have best conditions of life and they don't need to rebel
>>29562584
This
Why rebel when its going to bring your quality of life DOWN instead of up?
>>29558569
they did, it sucked.
>>29561946
or maybe the US just didn't promote rebellions in its various "allies" among the mid east countries
>>29551916
>two (2) wings of 4.5G++ F-15s
Yes yes pls.
>>29558580
You should look on the bright side, as I'd say they're one of the top 3 or 4 states most likely to employ them in their intended role (against some combination of Syria, Russia, and Iran).
>>29552453
>Implication that navalizing an F-15, let alone an SE wouldn't be massively more expensive than F-35Bs on nearly every level, and for less effectiveness.
Hahahaha ok
The new F-15SAs the Saudis got are pretty neat upgrade from the Es.
Loving the outer wing hard-points being activated.
>>29551944
>http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/air-force/2016/04/05/f-35-israel-lockheed-martin/82666534/
>Defense Minister Moshe “Bogey” Ya’alon told visiting Lockheed Martin executives and test pilots Tuesday that Israel’s planned F-35I force would allow it to preserve the nation’s qualitative military edge (QME) against regional adversaries.
>>29552531
>special forces aviation
>informing other procurements
It's not representative of the majority of needs baka desu senpai
>>29557997
Not him but that's just a E model with its left conformal tank converted to a weapons bay.
The vertical tails aren't canted should be a dead give-away.
>>29552453
>Navalise an airframe never designed for carrier work. This worked out ohso well with the Rafale N.
>>29557543
DEWs will have limited applications for strategic strike for a LOT longer, I think.
>>29557543
Sure just hope the plane sits in range for a minute
