backtop


Print 33 comment(s) - last by roadhog1974.. on Jul 12 at 6:49 PM


F-15SE

Internal weapons bay  (Source: Boeing)
Boeing and South Korea expected to enter deal for F-15SE Silent Eagle

If Boeing is able to secure an export license for the F-15SE "Silent Eagle" jet, the company plans to offer it to South Korea and other interested clients.

Boeing and South Korean officials have communicated about a possible deal over the past 12 months, but Boeing has had to wait until the F-15SE's low-observable jet stealth technology is evaluated.

The U.S. contractor believes its fighter jet is ideal because it's customizable and can support larger digital cockpit displays, AESA radar, newer radar absorbent coatings, and other features unavailable in older aircraft.

The expected price tag of the F-15SE is about $100 million, but can changed depending on the technology and hardware installed.

The country reportedly "has asked for information on Silent Eagle so now we've applied for the [license] and we hope to get that before the end of the month," said Brad Jones, Boeing F-15SE program manager, in an interview.  "As soon as the export license is provided, then I can provide [marketing] information to a country."

The aircraft was publicly introduced in 2009, and some military analysts believe it could help fill a possible fighter gap.  Boeing was unsure if it would offer the F-15SE to other nations, but South Korea first asked in late 2009 -- Boeing filed the necessary paperwork in early 2010, and expects to receive approval to sell the aircraft.

It's not uncommon for South Korea, Japan, Britain, and other U.S. allies to receive U.S. fighter jets in exchange for money and other forms of compensation -- but the U.S. government must approve of any deals before they're completed.

The aircraft is a technological step ahead of U.S. jets in use today (save for the F-22 Raptor), but still doesn't compare to the F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) from Lockheed Martin.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Fighter gap?
By FITCamaro on 7/9/2010 8:11:31 PM , Rating: 3
Are you fucking stupid?

The federal budget is around $3 trillion dollars. Around $500 billion of that is the defense department. And we haven't even started this monstrosity of a health care bill yet.

The rest is trillions in entitlements. Things that the federal government has no power to do under the constitution. Unlike raise and keep a military.


RE: Fighter gap?
By bigdawg1988 on 7/10/2010 12:54:51 AM , Rating: 2
You mean like Social Security and Medicaid? Good luck trying to get rid of them, although they actually don't contribute to the deficit. We actually borrow from SS to pay for other things.
The defense and homeland security is more like $782b and does contribute to the deficit. Needs to come down some, but figuring out exactly where seems to be the problem. The other poster isn't stupid, just very ignorant. I'd rather build a few more F22s and wait until the F35 is really ready than to speed up production of something that may not be effective.


RE: Fighter gap?
By sinful on 7/11/2010 8:50:05 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
The rest is trillions in entitlements. Things that the federal government has no power to do under the constitution. Unlike raise and keep a military.

I know! Social security is pure entitlement spending. Why, you pay money in, and then one day you get it back out! If that's not entitlement spending I don't know what is!

It's nearly as bad as those "entitlement" 401K and "IRA" programs that people pay into for years and then make withdrawals from!


"Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes … known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.… No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.

— James Madison, Political Observations, 1795


RE: Fighter gap?
By gamerk2 on 7/12/2010 9:25:54 AM , Rating: 1
Under Regan, with the rise in tensions with the Soviet Union, Defense spending rose to 10% of GDP.

Today, defense spending is 20% of GDP.

Look, that type of spending is simply not sustainable, period.

As for SS, its paid for by seperate taxes, and politicians were all to happy to borrow from the fund for years. Its an entirely paid for program, which can remain solvent with several minor changes [politically unpopular though...]. As for Medicare/Medicade, those programs may be government run, but they still operate within the free market, so the same price problems we deal with are still in effect. [Hence why I badly wanted a Public Option; the price problem hasn't gone away...]


RE: Fighter gap?
By monkeyman1140 on 7/12/2010 10:11:36 AM , Rating: 3
There was a country that tried to maintain such a huge military for no real reason, it was called the Soviet Union.

I guess we haven't learned the lesson.


"This is about the Internet.  Everything on the Internet is encrypted. This is not a BlackBerry-only issue. If they can't deal with the Internet, they should shut it off." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki