Boeing announces "Silent Eagle"

[Flash]

Reading some of the articles on this new proposal and you find that it probably is intended for its stated market, international buyers, vice the domestic market. The 'stealthy' features of the aircraft are geared for air-to-air radars and not for ground based ones, and would thus 'compete' with the F-22 instead of the F-35 for the US market.

It it not even that drastic a change in design, apparently current aircraft can be modified with the features. So a Super Hornet it is not, and neither is it much of a threat to the F-35 or F-22.

http://www.flightglobal.com/article...-f-15-silent-eagle-with-fifth-generation.html

 

[Junkball]

Marketing at its finest. I wonder how far along this design is. Meaning, are we looking at a half-baked F-15K/SG upgrade with bent vertical stabs and a new coat of paint?

 

[phrogdriver]

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.

I thought hi-lo was supposed to be F22/F35.

I don't know if the F-22 fits in at all with Boyd's concepts of what a fighter should be. His major surviving acolyte is Pierre Sprey, and I'm pretty sure he opposes the F22.

 

[FlyBoyd]

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[/quote]

I couldn't pass it up...it was just there...waiting for me.

Thanks for the link.

 

[nugget61]

Out of curiosity, how do they determine that this will be the 15SE and not the next single letter that they're up to in the airframe series? I mean the super's not the 18SH

 

[Flash]

Out of curiosity, how do they determine that this will be the 15SE and not the next single letter that they're up to in the airframe series? I mean the super's not the 18SH

It is a Boeing designation, not a DoD one.

 

[Huggy Bear]

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

Nice to have and undoubtedly a big advantage, but as long as there are other assets to do first wave strikes and deal with the double digit SAMs we can hold our own.

 

[eddie]

Nice to have and undoubtedly a big advantage, but as long as there are other assets to do first wave strikes and deal with the double digit SAMs we can hold our own.

to deal with SAMS = P/G rowlers
First Wave = Air Force stealth?

How / Where does the Battle Group come in?

 

[Fog]

IMO, the AF can hardly afford one single-mission a/c, and they have that in the F-22. They need to retire all the F-15C's (and any A models left in the ANG inventory) and buy this a/c. Hell, the wings are falling off their C models anyway! Think about it, the Super Hornet isn't the most exciting USN a/c ever built, but for doing the fighter and the attack role, it does both better than the F-14 (D model doesn't count - never built enough), F-18A-D, or F-4 - and, of course, the A-6/7 never even tried to multi-mission.

 

[HackerF15E]

Wow...four whole AMRAAMs and two guys in the cockpit to figure out how to use 'em. That's some serious combat airpower right there.

 

[BigRed389]

to deal with SAMS = P/G rowlers
First Wave = Air Force stealth?

How / Where does the Battle Group come in?

TLAM is a pretty big part of strike planning.

And SSGNs seem to be the new go to shooter for the future.

 

[LazersGoPEWPEW]

IMO, the AF can hardly afford one single-mission a/c, and they have that in the F-22. They need to retire all the F-15C's (and any A models left in the ANG inventory) and buy this a/c. Hell, the wings are falling off their C models anyway! Think about it, the Super Hornet isn't the most exciting USN a/c ever built, but for doing the fighter and the attack role, it does both better than the F-14 (D model doesn't count - never built enough), F-18A-D, or F-4 - and, of course, the A-6/7 never even tried to multi-mission.

They don't need wings to fly as referenced in this thread. http://www.airwarriors.com/forum/showthread.php?t=136771&highlight=f-15

 

[eddie]

TLAM is a pretty big part of strike planning.

And SSGNs seem to be the new go to shooter for the future.

Did not mean to forget your side of the house, but I did...


I guess I meant the airwing. If Air Force tankers and first-strike craft are required to pave the way for Navy attack, what's the point of having an airwing you can park anywhere in the world? (Maybe sub/surface assets can "clear the beach" well enough?)

I guess I'm just reminded of the series Carrier, remembering how they dropped no bombs (due to tasking policies??), and wondering what exactly the deterrent value of the airwing in the Gulf was (maybe it would have been better to park it elsewhere).

I think I'm oversimplifying the problem, but still curious.

 

[busdriver]

Hacker, can you even get to a safe flame out position on internal fuel alone?