This airframe is like Jason - It just won't die From AW&ST:





News

Boeing Unveils New, Stealthy Silent Eagle F-15


AWIN First Mar 17 , 2009
Amy Butler abutler@aviationweek.com
St. Louis, Mo.




Boeing unveiled the prototype of a new variant of the F-15 Strike Eagle aimed at the Asian and Middle East markets that will incorporate stealthy coatings and structure here on Mar. 17.

Company officials hope the new aircraft will garner up to 190 orders, extending the F-15 line beyond the current backlog of 38 aircraft for South Korea and Singapore. Since the company lost the Joint Strike Fighter contest to Lockheed Martin, the future of its St. Louis manufacturing facility has been uncertain. Continued F-15 sales, as well as additional orders for F/A-18E/Fs and EA-18Gs, are the only work in the foreseeable future for the plant.

Major design changes in the new “Silent Eagle” version include internal bays within the existing conformal fuel tanks that can carry a variety of air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons. Each tank will be configured to hold two air-to-air missiles, including the AIM-9 and AIM-120 or a combination of the two.For the air-to-ground mission, 1,000- and 500-pound Joint Direct Attack Munitions can be carried or four 250-pound Small Diameter Bombs per tank. Weapons loadout can also be split between the AIM-120 and JDAM for a multirole mission.The Silent Eagle configuration includes 15-degree outward-canted V-tails - a shift away from the characteristic vertical fins of the F-15 that reduces the radar cross-section.

The Mach 2.5 speed of the Strike Eagle is maintained, but the cost is about 180-200 nautical miles of range capability because of the reduce fuel in the conformal tanks, says Brad Jones, program manger for F-15 future programs.


The new design includes a digital electronic warfare system (DEWS), made by BAE Systems, that can operate simultaneously with the aircraft’s Raytheon active electronically scanned array radar.

Stealth coatings, though not yet applied to Boeing’s prototype, could be added at a later time. Boeing says the coatings could contibute to an equivalent amount of front-aspect stealth as that offered by Lockheed’s F-35. This includes reducing radar returns from sharp edges on the aircraft, including antennae.

Stealthiness for the F-15 was explored about a decade ago for the U.S. Air Force as an alternative to the Lockheed-led F-22, but was never pursued. “The internal carriage is what is new. The stealth is not,” Jones says, adding “We are not really after the F-22 market or the F-35 market” with this new design.

The level of stealthiness exportable on the F-15 is up to the U.S. government to decide, Jones says. Though USAF officials have been given courtesy briefings on the Silent Eagle, talks on stealth exportability have not yet occurred.

A radar blocker for engine inlets, already fitted in F/A-18E/Fs, could be added depending on how much radar cross-section reduction is required by the customer and allowed by the government.

Jones estimates the cost of a Silent Eagle will be about $100 million per aircraft, including spares, if built new. A retrofit kit including the conformal fuel tanks, DEWS and coatings could be added to existing Strike Eagles, he says.

The target market includes South Korea, Singapore, Japan, Israel and Saudi Arabia, Jones says. The first likely customer is South Korea, which is looking for two new fighters, including its F-X Phase III program, which calls for 60 aircraft in the F-15 class.

South Korea’s Agency for Defense Development is also pushing for a KFX program, which calls for about 120 domestically developed stealth fighters. Jones says coproduction of stealth materials would be subject to U.S. government review and a tough case to sell.

Japan and Saudi Arabia are also looking for new F-15-class fighters. And if the Silent Eagle were sold to the Saudis, Israel likely would want a chance to buy the aircraft too to maintain balance of power in the Middle East.

Boeing’s willingness to integrate indigenous systems, such as electronic warfare suites, onto the Silent Eagle is an option that could be of interest to these customers – especially Israel. Israeli industry was recently rebuffed by U.S. officials unwilling to add foreign EW systems under the F-35 development program.

The weapons-carrying fuel tanks, which are affixed to the aircraft with two bolts, and can be removed within about 2.5 hours. Reinstalling the original fuel tanks restores the F-15 to its nonstealthy configuration, which is capable of hauling more and larger weapons, including anti-ship missiles.

The Silent Eagle prototype is based on F-15E1, the program’s flight test aircraft. To date, it has been outfitted with the conformal tanks and the canted tails, which are for demonstration only and not structurally integrated. The actual canted tails would be added later if a customer requested them. Stealth coatings and engine intake blockers have not been added.

Jones says Boeing hopes to begin flight testing the weapons-carrying conformal tanks on the aircraft in the first quarter of next year. Design work on the Silent Eagle concept began in September last year in response to feedback from F-15 customers, he says.


Pictures here:

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

The F-15, the plane that won't die

Interesting. Could find a role with the USAF as a replacement for legacy F-15 (A-D) in the reserves and ANG. Especially if F-22 production ends.

Is it four, or eight AIM-120s that Silent Eagle can carry in stealth configuration?
Another question is - whether existing F-15s can be modernized in that way?

"Each tank will be configured to hold two air-to-air missiles, including the AIM-9 and AIM-120 or a combination of the two"

To me it sounds that max is two Amraams per tank.

Are there two tanks? Forgive my ignorance, I've seen the picture and read the text, just want to check.

yep, one on each side.

Interesting indeed. I wonder, can those new CFTs be bought and installed on existing F-15s to reduce their signature? Granted, current F-15s with the new CFTs may not be as stealthy as the SE, but at least it will reduce their RCS, yes? I'm thinking of all those countries that recently bought new and improved F-15Es (e.g., SoKor, SA, Japan [?], Israel [?]). Probably saying "WTF?!? A new one already?!? Dammit!"

Last month I was working on a project proposal for our company with a recently retired USAF pilot with nineteen years in the service flying F-15s and the F-117. I inquired as to his viewpoints on continuing F-15 production in conjunction with, or in lieu of, the F-22. His strongly stated opinion was that F-22 production should get absolute priority since the F-22 is the only aircraft we have in our hands right now, or in the pipeline, which clearly could maintain its competitive edge over the next several decades.

"Silent Eagle" Uhh.. let me guess, its one those tired hulls from ANG stock, but minus the engine?

This ain't the Russian Mig-29 contract to Algeria ya know.

according to the article :



Looking at the pictures, looks like they've angled out the tail-fin's more are well.

Gotta say, given the design with the intakes etc, how much of an RCS reduction is likely?

oops. I didn't see the retrofit kit part. Man, I think it's reading-impaired day for me today! Must be all that residual rage the past few days....

If politics would not play such a big part in weapons programs, I would fully agree with you.

I want my wing pylons back please.......
The nerve of them....turning a beautiful bomb truck into a past-it-prime air superiority fighter......

"Silent Eagle", it sounds like an advanced way of breaking wind.....and don`t get me started on the "Growler"...

Ouch! You hurt his boyfriends' game.

It sounds like a wet dream from the imagination of Dale Brown. In actual fact I think he predicted it, in 'Day of the Cheetah'.

Might supercruise in such a clean configuration but I wonder what the utility is.

Seems to be just a jazzed-up, semi-stealthy Strike Eagle.

It would be intereresting to get a somewhat realistic effectiveness and lifecycle cost comparison regarding one of these and a F-35.

Also it would be interesting to see it develop so that the CFTs head over the fuselage as well and the lower CFTs offer more space for weapons...Would it be possible to stick say 4 SDBs and two AMRAAMS into one pod then?
What about low-RCS "wing pod bomb bays"? Something like that old British prop bomber had... How was it... Vickers Wellesley was it?

Is that a fair price they're asking?

Is there a naval version planned?

Boeing is just casting about for ways to keep the F-15 line open for a while longer. It's actually been open longer than I would have imagined (thanks to all the export orders). I suppose it's not a bad run for an aircraft that first flew in 1972 or 1973 (?).

If so, then hopefully it will be armed with six 50-cals. It would be an adequate armament.

Zakk, Christian: ROTFL!

*sniff* those were the days hehehe

Yeah, a fitting successor to the F-4.

Curious, would the F-15SE be inferior to the Typhoon in any serious area?

Pretty much. Yet modernized F-15s are still very deadly aircraft. This F-15SE may be no match for a F-22A but it would be among the next best things.

Does anyone know if it has thrust vectoring in some form?

Nice to see my favorite plane live on.

Is internal weapon carry enough to bring the frontal RCS down to Typhoon level or below? Even if so, it still has lesser payload and, with external stores, far bigger frontal aspect RCS. Of course who knows what the application of stealth materials will do, but until they do it that's just speculation.

Still I get the feeling that this proposal is indeed aimed specifically at competing against the Typhoon in the Asian markets.

It depends.

The radar should be better then CAPTOR. The defensive aids suite better or similar. Flight chracteristics would see EF leading the fight at high speeds as well as low speeds.
RCS depends. Frontal RCS should be better on EF; all around stealth could be better on the F-15SE. Range is better on the SE.

But then you could apply stealth coatings to Typhoon and add the AESA antenna to CAPTOR. I would say the F-15SE could be close to a Tranche 3 Typhoon, but Typhoon has more growth potential left.

Or Chōhei Kanbayashi imagination who's 'Sentō Yōsei Yukikaze' novel had the wet dream F-15s in 1984, five years before 'Day of the Cheetah.'

Hav there ever been any interest in the thrust vectoring NASA tech demonstrator from the late 80's? The one with the massive canards.

I would imagine that would probably go down better that this. Or better yet combine the two!

IIRC Typhoon already has some stealth coatings and an AESA radar is in the works.

For close to $100 million a plane it would make more sense for the USAF at least, to order more F-22s. As for other nations not cleared for the F-22, they might be reluctant to engage in multi-billion venture for an aircraft designed in the late 60s early 70's.

Out of curiosity - what makes you say this? "Better" is a rather wide term to be applied to something as complicated as a radar - better in power output, off axis performance, detection range against a 1m2 target, tracking ability - or reliability and maintainability (and hence availability)?

It's like saying "What's the best tank" - it depends...

They've not mentioned a new radar, or funding for Raytheom's RMP - so that means APG-63(V)3, which you'll notice, is still using the (v)1 radar processor and systems design of 1990s vintage.

This is significant, because if you look at the sell sheet, they use the arguable term of increased "operational performance" - yes, it will scan faster, and maybe have some new modes, but it's still got the same maximum available processor power - rather than "performance". There are huge advantages in reliability and maintainability in the transition from APG-63 to (V)1 to (V)3, don't get me wrong.

In these enlightened times, the effectiveness of a radar comes in large part from the processing power applied to the raw RF returns. 1990s processing power would put it on a par with a Tranche 1 Typhoon. If it gets RMP (essentially an APG-79, but it hasn't been funded yet), it's looking at mid-2000s technology, which would put it on a par with CAESAR rather than CAPTOR

Done to death back in the early '70s. Congress tried to shove the F-15N down USN's throat when the F-14 started getting (more) expensive.

I was being sarcastic about an old poster who used to argue for the F-15N.

A good looker indeed. Interesting to learn that BAE supplied the DEWS though. I thought Boeing closed down the production line for the Eagle a few years ago, but aparentely not..

Somebody tried to argue in favor of that concept? Even without looking into what the Navy said, the F-15 has the looks of something you should never try to operate from a carrier.

Orders from S. Korea & Singapore have kept it open.

A member called pfcem. Had a thing about 8-inch guns for fire support, 50-cal guns for fighters, everything chinese was a M-109 copy, navalized F-15s, Merkava unbalanced and only good for Israeli terrain and multi-coloured sentences. And so on and so forth. A truly stubborn little Sparkyesque bastard. There was some truly epic threads.

I miss those days.


Not worser than the A-4 Skyhawk or A-5 Vigilante IMO.

Besides the late, unlamented pfcem, Congress really did try to get the Navy to navalize the F-15. They finally got the point across that all it would have been a dog, due to the additional weight of navalizing. The same drill was run on the F-16, same results.

"I was being sarcastic about an old poster who used to argue for the F-15N." Christian Lupine

Ah. My bad. Somehow, I don't remember pfcem's F-15N argument; the others, only too clearly.

Video of the conformal bomb bay doors.

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewl...tealthy-f-.html

That second Amraam coming out from underneath the aircraft looks a bit creepy to me..

it looks very slow ,at least in comparison with what i recal seeing the f-22 do.

He occasionally disrupts a couple of other fora.

Does he? What fora? It would be fun reading.

I am bored so i just did a search.

http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/...les.html?page=3

familiar topic?