Should the F-15 Be Rebuilt, is a Spitfire better?

[The Inspector]

Why not restart Spitfire production? I'm certain Jack Roush would love the income from building newer, improved MERLINS (can we say that and not have to face RR's lawyers?)
The Dept of Homeland Security always sends F-15's or F-16's out to intercept people flying along in their 93 MPH 172's, maybe a Mk 24 would make more sense in those situations, as it could actually slow down to close the speed of the average 172 instead of going past like John Force in the final round
Shortly after 9/11 the Oregon ANG was dispatched to investigate a 'bogey' near PDX. Off they go at Mach 47 zooming and booming and scaring the hell out of half of Multnoma County for 45 minutes while the unknowing 'target' continued to putter along in his late 40's, BRIGHT RED STINSON Voyager until he reached Troutdale where he landed and hangered his airplane. I think it was the next day he heard about the ruckus and called to tell OANG that he might be the guy they were looking for.

As Carlos Mencia says; DEE-DE-DEE!

[Christer]

The USAF needs to buy a real high perormace effective multi role fighter like the Eurofighter Typhoon, apparently it is making mince meat of the F-22 in 'unoffical' engagements.

Why buy a multi-role fighter when you already have dedicated attack aircraft? The Eurofighter is multi-role because Britain can't afford to have too many specialized aircraft. The F-22 exist to win air superiority...period.

And the day the Typhoon can take that away from it is the day I'll eat Kelly Johnson's shorts.

Well, can the US afford it? With the huge national debt (growing by the minute) in mind, it seems to me like the US keeps up appearances by loaning money abroad. Maybe it would be wise to start thinking "multirole".

Christer
(running for shelter)

[fritzthefox]

Well, the whole idea behind the JSF/Raptor program is the same as the thinking behind the F-16/F-15 program...one inexpensive, all-purpose multi-role aircraft for the masses, and a handful of high-priced, gee whiz air superiority machines to keep the skies clear for them.

The only potential pitfall I see to that strategy is that the JSF has a LOT of moving parts in a effort to make everyone happy, and may not prove to be as cost-effective as everyone is hoping.

The Navy has pretty much adopted the one-plane-to-rule-them-all mindset already, though. It will be interesting to see if the JSF can continue to satisfy those requirements for them. (Right now, the Super Hornet is doing just fine)

[Saville]

I was hoping someone would ask how a Spitfire could be superior to a modern F-15, but everyone seems pretty mellow today. The answer of course, is a Spitfire Mk V can, and has, landed on a aircraft carrier without a hook,(not a Seafire) or even a cable to catch it or a barrier to stop it. I don't think a modern jet can do that, except a Harrier! Of, course the Spit can also launch from the carrier without a catapult, but a lot of planes have done that.

Actually you make a good point. What we need to know is the number of General Aviation/slow plane intercepts are made as compared to, say, commercial or Biz jet intercepts. If enough GA intercepts are made, then why spend all that money on a Mach 2 intercept?

On the other hand, you now have to acquire some slower a/c, base them all over the place, provide spares, train ground crew etc.

I wonder if the Civil Air Patrol could take up some of that effort? At least the intercept - shootdown might be a legal issue.

Now as to which a/c ought to be used..well of course who wouldn't wantt o see a sky full of USAF Spitfires or Mustangs aloft doing actual work? And a government subsidized re-opening of the Merlin production line woudl be welcomed by many.

But on a mopre practical level:

If we were to select an a/c already in production to do this job, and not resurrect a WWII fighter production line, which would be suitable?

What intercept speed is necessary?

What range?

[Saville]

I was hoping someone would ask how a Spitfire could be superior to a modern F-15, but everyone seems pretty mellow today. The answer of course, is a Spitfire Mk V can, and has, landed on a aircraft carrier without a hook,(not a Seafire) or even a cable to catch it or a barrier to stop it. I don't think a modern jet can do that, except a Harrier! Of, course the Spit can also launch from the carrier without a catapult, but a lot of planes have done that.

Actually you make a good point. What we need to know is the number of General Aviation/slow plane intercepts are made as compared to, say, commercial or Biz jet intercepts. If enough GA intercepts are made, then why spend all that money on a Mach 2 intercept?

On the other hand, you now have to acquire some slower a/c, base them all over the place, provide spares, train ground crew etc.

I wonder if the Civil Air Patrol could take up some of that effort? At least the intercept - shootdown might be a legal issue.

Now as to which a/c ought to be used..well of course who wouldn't want to see a sky full of USAF Spitfires or Mustangs aloft doing actual work? And a government subsidized re-opening of the Merlin production line would be welcomed by many.

But on a more practical level:

If we were to select an a/c already in production to do this job, and not resurrect a WWII fighter production line, which would be suitable?

What intercept speed is necessary?

What range?

[Anowreck]

"The best defence of the country is the fear of the fighter. If we are strong in fighters we should probably never be attacked in force. If we are moderately strong we shall probably be attacked and the attacks will gradually be bought to a standstill. . . . If we are weak in fighter strength, the attacks will not be bought to a standstill and the productive capacity of the country will be virtually destroyed."

So said Air Chief Marshal Sir Hugh Dowding - essentially, it's numbers that count. So, taking in the idea of the Swiss Militia, every member of which keeps a gun at home, for the same price as repairing the F-15s you could probably build enough SE5As so that EVERY American citizen could defend his or her own airspace......just think, you could could get 200,000 fighters up just to defend the Harley D factory in Milwaukee (or better, the Miller brewery!) .

[Mudge]

YO Anowreck...YOU DA' MAN

I LOVE this idea:-
....essentially, it's numbers that count. So, taking in the idea of the Swiss Militia, every member of which keeps a gun at home, for the same price as repairing the F-15s you could probably build enough SE5As so that EVERY American citizen could defend his or her own airspace......just think, you could could get 200,000 fighters up just to defend the Harley D factory in Milwaukee (or better, the Miller brewery!).

Mudge the defender

ps
"...just think, you could could get 200,000 fighters up just to defend the Harley D factory in Milwaukee (or better, the Miller brewery!)."

Picture, in your mind, THAT scramble?

[RickH]

Before WWII the Swiss had a 250,000 armed civilian army. A Swiss minister was asked what would the 250,000 Swiss force do if confronted with 500,000 German troops. His answer ? Shoot twice and go home !!

[Bill Greenwood]

Now you guys are going, with some real and unreal ideas. I wonder what this Eurofighter looks like and how it's specs compare to an F-15, as well as a Raptor. By the way, do you know why it is called a Raptor? It is from the look of pure joy, of RAPTURE, that CEO of Lockheed gets when he thinks of how much money they are going to make off this program in the next few decades.!
As for slow civilian intercepts, if we send up a nice B-17, every unknown either flown by a warbird guy or at least any pilot whose soul has not turned entirely to kerosene is going to come over and join up for a looksee, we don't even need to pursue them.
To be serious for a moment, only briefly, my Uneducated guess is it makes sense to either make do with less F-15s, maybe some g limit for non combat, or do a repair program on the fleet.

[Randy Haskin]

Kill everything with a sledgehammer while they're out in the hall before they enter the room is the modus operandi.

I have fought the Raptor in the F-15E, and we were absolutely f*cking slaughtered.

[Mudge]

Randy..."slaughtered" or not. It had to be a hoot. You probably even worked up a sweat.

Mudge the envious

[K5DH]

If we were to select an a/c already in production to do this job, and not resurrect a WWII fighter production line, which would be suitable? What intercept speed is necessary? What range?

How about the A-10 Warthog? It can fly slow enough to avoid overshooting a slow-moving target like a light plane. It's incredibly agile. It can carry Sidewinder missiles. It shouldn't be difficult to equip it with a .50 machine gun in an underwing pod (the "Avenger" cannon would definitely be overkill). There are plenty of older Warthogs in storage at AMARC, and I have to believe that the high-time aircraft not deemed suitable for actual combat could still serve in a point defense intercept role here at home. Scatter them around the country, especially in areas that would be considered prime targets for terrorists in stolen Cessnas, so that range wouldn't be a problem.

Comments? (go ahead and flame me; I'm used to it!)

Dean the imaginative

[RickH]

Dean, from what I've read the A-10 is in great demand. Several new contracts have recently been awarded to build new wings, upgrade the weapons and avionics, and I think I read somewhere, new engines.

[Mike Bates]

Dean, from what I've read the A-10 is in great demand. Several new contracts have recently been awarded to build new wings, upgrade the weapons and avionics, and I think I read somewhere, new engines.

That would be the A-10C. The engines are still on the want list, will have to wait for money.

Maryland ANG A-10C


Mike

[Flashonyrsix]

If we re start spitfires, we'll also have to re start hurricanes so we'll have somethig to defend us while the spitfires are taking all the glory.

Norm