Purpose of the F-15?

AKBill said:
What is the cost difference?
Click to expand...

Well production on the AV-8B ended 17 years ago so it’s hard to tell. Plus F-35B prices are dropping all the time due to increased production efficiency. Adjusted for inflation, I’d say 3 AV-8s to 1 F-35.
 
Velocity173 said:
Well there were plenty of people on POA and in the media calling the F-35 a “disaster.” Claiming it’s no better than previous generation aircraft. Everyone always has this all or nothing mindset on POA. It’s either the greatest aircraft ever made or it’s a POS. In reality, it’s an aircraft that’s gone thru all the teething pains that all new aircraft go thru and has come out the other side a pretty lethal platform.
Click to expand...

With the F-35 the Marines have a platform that can go into well defended areas, attack what needs to be attacked, and RTB intact. In comparison, the Harrier was a very vulnerable platform - no stealth, modest sensors, modest aero performance.
 
Velocity173 said:
F-15Es were used heavily in both Iraq and Afghanistan for CAS.
Click to expand...

Apparently, the role of CAS in the success of small units was completely lost on the two boneheads who just got captured in Venezuela. I still can’t believe they thought teaching outdated Ranger Handbook SUT to a handful of Colombians and Venezuelans for an actual coups was a good idea. Rambo is fiction. Air superiority is everything. There is a reason Ranger bat specializes in seizing airfields.

I’d rather be on the ground armed with just a radio and outdated CAS than on the ground with all the ammo in South America and no CAS...
 
kyleb said:
With the F-35 the Marines have a platform that can go into well defended areas, attack what needs to be attacked, and RTB intact. In comparison, the Harrier was a very vulnerable platform - no stealth, modest sensors, modest aero performance.
Click to expand...

And it goes farther, faster and carries far more ordnance than the Harrier.
 
kyleb said:
But, other than that, it's worse.

Right? ;-)
Click to expand...

Well, apparently it’s gun can’t hit the broadside of a barn and it’s mission capable rates are abysmal, but that stuff isn’t very important.
 
I worked with a former USMC Harrier MAG CO on the proposal for the F-35. He told me one night in a bar "There are two types of Harrier Pilots, those who have ejected and those who will.":cool:

The F-35B will be a good aircraft, if it isn't already, and much superior to the AV-8B.

Since the USMC could't afford it as a dedicated development solely for their mission, DOD decided to stick the USAF and USN with the F-35A and F-35C so the DOD could save money by having "Commonality". Given no choice, the USAF and USN signed on. Commonality "Savings" is a Pipe Dream in Development Programs. The benefits never materialize as advertised and the drawbacks are always understated and rear up almost immediately. In the end, if enough money is expended, good but definitely not great aircraft emerge.

The money spent in a "Commonality" fiction could have resulted in great aircraft independently developed for the specific needs of each service. On top of that, it would have kept competition alive instead of today's situation where if you want a fighter, you get Lockheed Martin. If you want a Bomber, you get Northrop. You want Cargo/Tanker, you get Boeing. Any competition is minimal except in Trainers and other specialized lower level aircraft. The companies know it and DOD will never admit it.

Cheers
 
The F-22 and F-35 have a very important shared purpose: to keep my company stock shares up and my pension healthy.

@X3 Skier , you are absolutely correct - add the word "Joint" to any military program and you've doomed it to cost overruns, delays, and enormous inefficiencies. The objectives and methods of each service are different (which is why we have them), so when we write a "joint" requirement spec we often have to cover the entire skyline of each service's needs. This drives the hell out of the cost.

And it's not just the obvious requirements, like weight or airspeed. Consider electromagnetic interference (EMI), for example. The USN shipboard environment, with surveillance and landing radars in very close proximity to the planes, drives additional shielding, filtering, signal processing, protective grids, etc., way beyond that required for a strictly USAF application. Similar concerns find their way into almost every subsystem - electrical power, computer systems, flight displays, sensors, and on and on and......

We should chat sometime, @X3 Skier . I was one of the developers of the IRST system as part of the YF-23 team. Kind of a weird tale, with the sad result that the F-22 does not have an IRST capability. I also had a hand in the development of the EOTS on the F-35.
 
Last edited:
Was the F-4 Phantom the last successful joint platform?
 
Half Fast said:
No, I think that would be the F-35, but of course it depends on how you define "successful."
Click to expand...
I'd say the F-35 jury is still out. Check back in 15-30 years to find out. I won't say it's a failure, because it's too soon to tell that also.
 
jsstevens said:
Was the F-4 Phantom the last successful joint platform?
Click to expand...

It wasn't really a Joint Program. The USN Developed it and the USAF eventually bought a Sh**pot of them with some minor mods including a gun pod. One of my first TDY's was to the MacAIr plant in St Louis in 1964. The Plant was wall to wall with Rhinos in USN and USAF colors.

Helo's and the Osprey are examples of other programs that resulted in multiple service use, probably because they are so D*** complicated to get to fly right, changing anything will result in an uncontrollable disaster. Of course I'm a fixed wing type so take that for what it is worth.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
I've seen the name rhinos mentioned re. Super Hortnets recently.
Now re.F-4.
Why Rhino?
 
Brad W said:
I've seen the name rhinos mentioned re. Super Hortnets recently.
Now re.F-4.
Why Rhino?
Click to expand...

The F-4 was the original Rhino. It had lots of other nicknames including Double Ugly. No idea how Rhino was chosen.

Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top