No More New Fighter Aircraft Types?

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 15:40:18 -0700, (Harry
Andreas) wrote:

In article , Scott Ferrin
wrote:

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 12:58:05 -0700, (Harry
Andreas) wrote:

In article , Scott Ferrin
wrote:

If (and this is a very big IF), the F-22 should collapse, then a
better choice for all-wx, day/night ground attack is another buy of
F-15E

Being actively considered, with upgrades

The super eagle is as dead as Gephardt's political career, but a
transfer of
F/A-18E avionics might be possible from the other St Louis Congressional
District.


If by saying "super eagle" you mean this thing with the new wing and
various stealths mods you're right. Building a Stirke Eagle with the
latest electronics and an APG-63 (or even 77) AESA and HMS is
completely doable though and a far better choice than any Hornet. Put
in a couple of those -132s the Block 60 F-16s get and it would be even
better.

The USAF will NEVER buy Block 60s.

What I meant was if the F-22 is cancelled one of the things that could
be put into new Strike Eagles are the -132 engines *that are in* F-16
Block 60s.

Sorry. I mis-read your statement.

Even better though would be the more powerful engines both
P&W and GE have tested with 3D nozzles. Still scratching my head as
to why they were both virtually ignored by any potential customers.

Probably money (acquisition cost) and money (lots of flight test hours)
Is flight test still $1M per flight hour? Last I heard it was.



I was wondering if a 37k F100 costs that much more than a 29k one.
But you're right on the flight test thing that's for sure. An F-15
with 2 37k engines and 3D nozzles would probably handle a bit
differently :-)