Boeing announces "Silent Eagle"

[mmx1]

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2009/q1/090317a_nr.html

New coatings, canted vertical stabs, and weapons bays inside the conformal fuel tanks.

Perhaps anticipating bad news for the F-35?
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/03/17/gates_readies_big_cuts_in_weapons/
Unnamed sources indicate Secretary Gates will announce major weapons program cancellations late this month.

 

[scoolbubba]

It worked well for the Super Hornet...put a totally different aircraft inside a familiar skin and get the people to buy into it.

 

[Bevo16]

It's what the AF should have done all along. The F-22 is a slick aircraft, but is "overkill" and the price tag is way to high.

 

[FLYMARINES]

This F-15SE might be something that will affect the Air Force's acquisition of the F-22 in terms of total numbers, but I don't see how it could in any way affect the F-35 program.

 

[PropAddict]

The F-22 is a slick aircraft, but is "overkill" and the price tag is way to high.

I'm not a jet guy, but I suspect that if I were, I would want the absolute best aircraft to make sure I could schwack the other guy and get my pink ass home. Hell, even as a concerned citizen I want us to have the 110% best tools available to maintain national security. There are some times where "overkill" is never enough.

That said, the AF should really have taken Boyd's advice and gone "high-low" with F-22 and something else, vice throw it all in "high" and end up with too few of everything.

 

[mmx1]

This F-15SE might be something that will affect the Air Force's acquisition of the F-22 in terms of total numbers, but I don't see how it could in any way affect the F-35 program.

I'm not even thinking domestically at this point. Boeing claims it's for foreign sales, and the F-35 is the 800-pound gorilla in the export market at the moment.

Might the AF buy a few if the F-22 buy is cut? I hadn't thought of that, but they'd probably prefer it to the Super Hornet.

 

[FLYMARINES]

I'm not even thinking domestically at this point. Boeing claims it's for foreign sales...

Gotcha. I thought you were insinuating that it could be a possible alternative to the F-35, at least for the Air Force.

 

[Uncle Fester]

The F-22's the chicken on the block at the moment, and its continued survival is now really a question of who plays politics best... Boeing's smart, offering an "easy," "budget-conscious"* alternative.

*NB: my use of quotations is indicative of hyperbole*; I'm aware that this Super Eagle is neither easy nor cheap.

*hyperbole: deliberate exaggeration or understatement for emphasis or comic effect.

 

[mmx1]

It is a rather creative way to reduce the RCS (and parasite drag); I wonder how it compares to the Super Hornet's philosophy of reduced RCS airframe but externally hung ordnance.

 

[usmarinemike]

Very interesting second article. I was just thinking yesterday what would happen to all of the Marine Corps' OTH dreams if and when the EFV gets cut. I guess we'll find out.

It seems to me that nobody will be particularly surprised when DDX goes away. Is this true? What about a reduction in the number of carriers?

 

[MIDNJAC]

As sort of a side note, how important do all of you fleet aviators feel that "stealth"/Low-RCS/etc is?

 

[phrogdriver]

The F-35 should at least tread water. If they cut the buy now, the per unit cost will skyrocket. I'd like to see a 35/SE faceoff. I bet the economics, at least, would favor the F-35.

 

[FlyBoyd]

That said, the AF should really have taken Boyd's advice...

I am so good I give advice without ever posting on a thread. Now if I can just guess the lottery numbers...

 

[torpedo0126]

I'm not a jet guy, but I suspect that if I were, I would want the absolute best aircraft to make sure I could schwack the other guy and get my pink ass home. Hell, even as a concerned citizen I want us to have the 110% best tools available to maintain national security. There are some times where "overkill" is never enough.

That said, the AF should really have taken Boyd's advice and gone "high-low" with F-22 and something else, vice throw it all in "high" and end up with too few of everything.

The thing is you have to decided what the best tools are to maintain national security. I agree with Gates AND Rumsfeld that a lot of the weapons programs aren't needed for the national security the US is looking for. A lot of it has to do with the jobs they bring.

 

[PropAddict]

The thing is you have to decided what the best tools are to maintain national security. I agree with Gates AND Rumsfeld that a lot of the weapons programs aren't needed for the national security the US is looking for. A lot of it has to do with the jobs they bring.

True all around, methinks.

But the Raptor is a world-beater. It is not just some minimally-functional, porked-up pet project foisted on us by electees out to make jobs.

I am so good I give advice without ever posting on a thread. Now if I can just guess the lottery numbers...

You know. . .right after I posted, I figured I'd see a post like this.

For clarification: Col. John Boyd http://www.aviation-history.com/airmen/boyd.htm