F-15 Eagles Win Big In Supersized Defense Spending Bill
Tactical airpower, and specifically the F-15E Strike Eagle and F-15EX Eagle II, are big beneficiaries of recently proposed legislation put forward by the Republican leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees. Of the roughly $150 billion in potential extra investments into defense, the spending package includes $7.2 billion set aside for tactical aircraft procurement and modernization.
It should be noted that the Democrats still have the opportunity to amend the bill before it is sent to the House Budget Committee, although the packaging of the deal under the 'reconciliation' process is designed to speed its progress and avoid a filibuster.
Of the $7.2 billion for tactical airpower, the biggest winner is the F-15EX, with this program earmarked to get an additional $3.1 billion 'to increase production.'
The F-15EX, which at this stage of its career is primarily an air superiority platform, was approved for full-rate production in June of last year. Most recently, the Air Force had said it wants to buy 98 F-15EX aircraft, although the numbers have been subject to various changes throughout the life of the program.
The 98-aircraft fleet is just about sufficient for five operational squadrons of 18 aircraft, plus a handful of training and test aircraft. Previously, there were plans to cap the number of F-15EXs at 144 jets.
We have reached out to the Air Force for clarity on the wording in the bill, since it's not immediately clear if the funds allocated are for additional aircraft production, beyond the 98, or whether they will be used to accelerate production of the aircraft already in the program of record. The unit cost of an F-15EX has been pegged at between $90 and $95 million in recent years. If the money in question is strictly for more airframes, it would buy between 32 and 34 jets, but funds for additional personnel and infrastructure would also have to come from other sources.
In addition to being good news for the F-15EX, the proposed spending plan includes $127.46 million 'to prevent the retirement of F–15E aircraft.' What exactly this entails is immediately clear, as the annual defense policy bill, or National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), for the 2025 Fiscal Year, which was signed into law in December 2024, already blocked the retirement of any F-15Es Strike Eagles until October 1, 2027, at the earliest. That came in response to an Air Force plan to retire 119 of its 281 F-15Es, or roughly half of the Strike Eagle fleet, by Fiscal Year 2028, which quickly proved to be controversial, to say the least.
The Fiscal Year 2025 NDAA does make exceptions for 'individual F-15E aircraft that the Secretary of the Air Force determines, on a case by case basis, to be no longer mission capable and uneconomical to repair because of aircraft accidents, mishaps, or excessive material degradation and non-airworthiness status of certain aircraft.'
Additional funding could help the Air Force pay to maintain the F-15Es it is now legally required to keep in inventory, or avoid divesting individual jets it might otherwise decide are too costly to keep flying. It might also allow the service to upgrade and sustain the aircraft beyond 2027.
The F-15Es that had been on the chopping block were the surviving examples powered by the older Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-220E turbofan engines, with the remaining 99 aircraft being equipped with more powerful F100-PW-229s.
As far as the Air Force is concerned, it needs to retire older F-15Es to help free up resources for its future modernization plans, but lawmakers have been concerned about dwindling numbers of available tactical aircraft if this were to happen.
At the same time, the F-15Es are arguably the Air Force's most in-demand tactical jets thanks to their highly desirable blend of speed, range, payload capacity, crew size, and other capabilities. Furthermore, with the F-15EX entering service primarily in the single-pilot air-to-air role, there's no like-for-like replacement in the pipeline.
In the meantime, work continues to upgrade the F-15E, with the most significant recent development involving the installation of a sophisticated new radar warning and electronic warfare suite, the AN/ALQ-250 Eagle Passive/Active Warning Survivability System, or EPAWSS, which you can read more about here.
Aside from funds for the F-15EX — the Air Force's newest in-service fighter — and the well-established F-15E, the newly proposed spending package also adds funds for next-generation airpower programs. Both the F-47 crewed sixth-generation fighter and the Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) drone program get more funds to accelerate development and production: $678 million and $400 million, respectively.
The Navy's sixth-generation fighter, the F/A-XX, also gets a boost from lawmakers, with another $500 million to accelerate that program.
In terms of older assets, the bill on the table now also allocates just over $361 million to prevent the retirement of older block F-22s. Like the F-15E, the F-22 has long been threatened with axing a portion of its fleet as the Air Force seeks to prioritize other programs.
In the past, the Air Force has argued that upgrading its 32 older Block 20 F-22s — almost a fifth of the current Raptor fleet — would be prohibitively expensive, but this proposal has been met with notable pushback. Last summer, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) made clear its concerns about the Air Force's plans to discard those older F-22s in a report that we discussed at the time.
Beyond tactical jets, the proposed legislation includes $4.5 billion to help accelerate the B-21 Raider stealth bomber program. There has been growing talk in recent months about potentially increasing purchases of the bombers beyond the current program of record for 100 aircraft. This also follows Northrop Grumman's disclosure earlier this month of a $477 million loss on the B-21, which was described as 'largely relating to higher manufacturing costs.' The company announced a nearly $1.2 billion loss on the Radier last year, which was blamed on a combination of 'macroeconomic disruptions' and 'higher [than] projected manufacturing costs.'
Elsewhere, the bill includes $440 million to increase C-130J production and $474 million to increase EA-37B Compass Call production. Finally, lawmakers propose to allocate $160 million to accelerate nacelle improvements for the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft.
Returning to the F-15EX and F-15E portions of the reconciliation bill, there remain questions about exactly how these funds will be used. In particular, there is a lack of clarity about F-15EX production numbers and how long a portion of the F-15E fleet will be protected from retirement. Overall, however, lawmakers have firmly made their position clear when it comes to the continued utility of the two closely related tactical air assets.
Contact the author: thomas@thewarzone.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Entrepreneur
2 hours ago
- Entrepreneur
Sustainability in Business: Lessons from the Food and Beverage Sector
The future of sustainable business in the Middle East lies in partnership — with suppliers, regulators, and communities alike. Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own. You're reading Entrepreneur Middle East, an international franchise of Entrepreneur Media. In today's business landscape, sustainability has evolved from a corporate buzzword into a fundamental expectation. Across the Middle East, where economic growth and urban development are accelerating, businesses are re-evaluating how they operate — not only to remain competitive, but to be responsible stewards of the environment. The food and beverage (F&B) sector is particularly well-positioned to lead this change. With high energy demands, supply chain complexities, and significant packaging and food waste, the industry carries both a large environmental footprint and a powerful opportunity for impact. Drawing from experiences within one of the world's largest quick-service restaurant brands, this article explores how sustainability practices can be integrated into core business operations in a region as diverse and complex as the Middle East. The focus is not on promotion, but on practical strategies and challenges — and how companies can begin or deepen their journey toward environmental responsibility. Why Local Context Matters While global sustainability frameworks offer a helpful foundation, regional adaptation is essential. In the Middle East, climate, infrastructure, and policy differ widely between countries — from water scarcity in the Gulf to rapidly urbanising centres in the Levant. Businesses must tailor their strategies to reflect these realities. For example, energy use is a key area of focus, especially in hot climates where cooling systems are essential. Understanding and optimising HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) systems is not just a technical detail — it's a business imperative. Similarly, innovations like low proximity hoods in kitchens can reduce overall energy consumption significantly when implemented at scale. Investments in energy-efficient equipment, such as LED lighting and high-efficiency refrigeration, might seem minor in isolation. Yet, when adopted consistently across locations, they contribute meaningfully to both environmental impact and operational cost savings. Three Core Pillars of Sustainable Practice Sustainability efforts in the F&B industry often centre around three main pillars: environmental responsibility, responsible sourcing, and waste reduction. Each presents its own challenges and opportunities in the Middle Eastern context. 1. Environmental Responsibility Adopting energy-saving technologies, exploring renewable energy sources like solar (particularly in high-insolation regions such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia), and conserving water through low-flow fixtures and efficient cleaning practices are becoming standard in many progressive operations. 2. Responsible Sourcing Local procurement reduces emissions tied to transport while supporting regional economies. Businesses are increasingly working with suppliers who meet standards not only for quality, but also for ethical labour practices and environmental impact. Rigorous auditing and supply chain transparency play a key role in maintaining accountability. 3. Waste Reduction and Recycling The F&B sector produces large volumes of waste — food scraps, packaging, and single-use materials among them. Inventory control systems, food donation programs, and in-store recycling can help mitigate this. In some regions, composting is also gaining traction, despite infrastructure challenges. Challenges and Opportunities in Implementation Implementing sustainability measures in the Middle East comes with complexities. Regulatory environments vary, and upfront costs for green technologies can be a barrier. Infrastructure for recycling and renewable energy may be inconsistent across markets. Yet, these challenges also open the door for innovation. Businesses willing to invest in energy solutions or engage with local suppliers to build capacity often find long-term gains — both financially and reputationally. Moreover, as consumer awareness around sustainability increases, demand is growing for businesses that can demonstrate real action, not just intention. Looking Ahead: A Call to Action Sustainability is not a destination but a continuous process. As governments across the region introduce more robust environmental policies and incentives, there is growing momentum for businesses to step up. The future of sustainable business in the Middle East lies in partnership — with suppliers, regulators, and communities alike. For the F&B industry in particular, every decision — from equipment to packaging, sourcing to staff training — holds the potential to shape a more resilient, responsible business model. The companies that succeed will be those that not only adapt to change but help lead it.
Black America Web
2 hours ago
- Black America Web
Redistricting: Majority Black Voting Maps Rejected In Louisiana
Source: Mario Tama / Getty One of the most innocuous yet insidious ways voter suppression rears its head is through redistricting, a process by which a state legislature draws up voting maps along political lines. Despite a federal judge finding that their current legislative map violates the Voting Rights Act, Louisiana lawmakers have rejected a new map that would've included eight new, majority Black districts. The Louisiana Illuminator reports that Bill 487 and Bill 488, which would've redrawn the legislative maps for the Senate and House of Representatives, respectively, were struck down in a 9-6 and 9-5 vote that fell along party lines. The current maps were drawn in 2022 and utilized census data from 2010, despite the fact that the state's Black population has only increased over the last decade. Black voters make up a third of Louisiana's population, but the current voting maps only have one majority Black district. Rep. Edmond Jordan (D-Baton Rouge), ithe chairman of the Louisiana Legislative Black Caucus, authored both bills. He explained the changes were necessary to address a ruling by a federal judge last year that found the current map disenfranchised Black voters. 'By us not upholding our obligation and redrawing these maps … I think it sends a signal that we are unwilling to do so,' Jordan told his fellow legislators. 'Rather than wait on the court to come up with a decision, I think it's incumbent upon us to get ahead of that and maybe draw these maps and show the court that we're willing to comply with Section 2' of the Voting Rights Act. The Republican opposition explained that they didn't feel the need to update the maps as the ruling is currently under appeal, and they believe that the courts will rule in their favor. They also brought up concerns that the new district lines would require current elected officials to move in order to still represent their district or possibly have to run against another incumbent to maintain their seat in the legislature. Jordan understood those concerns but stated his priority was giving Black voters an equal voice in determining who represents them. 'What we're trying to do is attempt to unpack and uncrack these districts so that they would comply with Section 2,' Jordan said. Source: Juan Silva / Getty From the Louisiana Illuminator: Packing is a type of gerrymandering that forces a large number of voters from one group into a single or small number of districts to weaken their power in other districts. Cracking dilutes the power of those voters into many districts. Jordan's plan would have added new majority Black House districts in Natchitoches, Lake Charles, Shreveport and Baton Rouge, and Black Senate districts in Baton Rouge, Shreveport and Jefferson Parish. In what can only be described as saying the quiet part out loud, state Republicans added that they found Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act to be outdated. For clarity, Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act prevents any voting law or measure 'which results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.' Considering that they're actively using legislative districts to curb the power of Black votes, it's clear Section 2 is still a necessity to maintain voting rights within majority Black communities. Redistricting is always a partisan affair, with the legislative map being drawn by whatever party has power. Far too often, though, the redistricting efforts by state Republicans are largely built around minimizing Black voting power to keep Republicans in office. This isn't only an issue in Louisiana, as several states have drawn legislative maps that explicitly undermine Black votes. Redistricting plans in the state of Texas are also facing legal challenges due to allegations of racism. There's an ongoing fight in Texas's Tarrant County over redistricting plans that several state legislators believe violate the Voting Rights Act, and there's currently a federal case underway against the Texas state government over its 2021 voting map that was believed to have 'diluted the power of minority voters.' One of the worst offenders is Alabama, whose redistricting efforts have been deemed racist by federal judges several times. State Republicans have said that if they don't receive a favorable ruling in their appeal on the decision, they won't update the voting map until 2030 to avoid federal oversight. There is nothing more on brand for the modern GOP than having a temper tantrum when being told to be less racist. If anything, this is a reminder that in America, the boring, procedural racism is often the worst kind. SEE ALSO: Poll Shows Companies Maintaing DEI Intiatives Have Better Reputations MIT Becomes Latest University To Back Away From DEI Initiatives SEE ALSO Redistricting: Majority Black Voting Maps Rejected In Louisiana was originally published on Black America Web Featured Video CLOSE
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump's tax bill has a long way to go in the Senate as Republicans mull major changes
Republican leaders spent months carefully crafting the 1,038-page megabill advancing President Donald Trump's agenda, engaging in grueling negotiations and backroom dealings to unite competing GOP factions just enough to squeeze the package through the House. Now, several of those provisions that ensured its passage could be on the chopping block. The Senate is set to begin consideration of Trump's 'big beautiful bill' as Republican leaders scramble to finalize the massive budget framework before the Fourth of July. But Republican senators — including Utah Sens. Mike Lee and John Curtis — are unsure about some of the contents, warning some provisions go too far while others don't go far enough to reduce the nation's deficit. 'There are solid victories in the bill,' Lee said in a statement to the Deseret News. 'But in its current form, the (Big Beautiful Bill Act) won't pass the Senate. It simply doesn't do enough to address the government's spending crisis. But we can make it better.' One of the most controversial provisions tucked into the budget resolution is language repealing clean energy tax credits that were passed in the Inflation Reduction Act under the Biden administration with only Democratic support. That language was demanded by a group of fiscal conservatives in the House who threatened to vote against the full package if it was not included. However, some Republicans have been wary to fully repeal the green energy tax incentives, arguing it could raise utility costs for all Americans. Curtis is among those pushing to preserve some of those clean energy policies, particularly those dealing with nuclear energy, net-zero emissions, battery storage and more. The first-term senator has long centered his climate policies on clean energy solutions, suggesting earlier this week he will push for those changes as the Senate considers the bill. 'My friends in the House kind of called me up to say, 'Listen, we're counting on you to fix it,'' Curtis said at an event in Tooele last week. 'So I think even many of them knew that what they sent over did need some work, and that's now our job in the Senate to put our stamp on that and have it speak for our will.' 'And I think if I have anything to say about it,' he added, 'I'll make sure that we're taking into account our energy future.' On the other hand, Lee has previously suggested he wants a comprehensive repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act, telling the Deseret News it should be overhauled 'lock, stock, and barrel.' 'There are some simple ways we can improve the bill,' Lee said. One way is to 'end Biden's politically motivated subsidies under the so-called 'Inflation Reduction Act' and end the Green New Scam once and for all.' While the two Utah senators have competing visions for the future of green energy tax credits, the pair have similar views on how to address proposals paring back government spending to reduce the deficit. Both Curtis and Lee have pushed for deeper spending cuts and reforms to certain government programs. While Republicans have vowed not to slash necessary benefits under Medicaid and other welfare programs, Curtis has repeatedly urged lawmakers to engage in conversations about reining in fraudulent spending. If not, the senator has warned, drastic cuts will be necessary in the future. Lee has also been vocal about searching for deeper spending cuts in the budget framework, arguing it does not go far enough to reduce the deficit. Those calls have been echoed by some fiscal hawks in the House, who say they are counting on the Senate to implement deeper spending cuts they couldn't secure with their slim majority. Another key deal that was made in the reconciliation package is an expansion of federal deductions for state and local taxes paid, also known as SALT. That provision was demanded by blue-state Republicans who threatened tanking the package if it wasn't included. Republican leaders offered to increase the current deduction cap to $40,000 — up from the current $10,000 limit — for individuals who make $500,000 or less a year. That cap would then increase by 1% every year over the next decade and remain permanent after that period. However, that increase may not be met with open arms in the Senate — and Lee is already hinting at its removal. 'Right now, it unfortunately contains big SALT cap increases, which are basically subsidies for high-tax blue states paid for by hardworking families in Utah and the rest of the country,' Lee said. Another provision that could find itself on the cutting room floor: a debt ceiling increase. The debt limit is the total amount of money the federal government is authorized to borrow in order to pay off existing obligations, tax refunds, interest on the national debt and other payments, according to the Treasury Department. House Republicans tucked a $4 trillion debt ceiling increase into the budget resolution to avoid a default later this summer, arguing that by doing so, they would strip Democrats of the chance to use the impending deadline as leverage to attach some of their own policies. However, some Republicans are staunchly opposed to a debt limit increase in any fashion. 'I think the problem for conservatives is they lose their high moral ground. These will be their deficits,' said Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who is currently opposed to the package. 'These will be GOP spending bills, GOP deficits, and there is no change in the direction of the country.' House GOP leaders are pleading with their counterparts in the Senate not to make changes to the massive reconciliation package, warning any edits could tank the megabill before it even makes it to Trump's desk. Meanwhile, the president is telling the Senate to 'make the changes they want' — sending mixed messages as Republicans consider alterations to the budget framework advancing policies on the border, energy, national defense and tax reform. Some of the hard-to-convince lawmakers hope their stubbornness will ward off any of their Senate colleagues from making drastic changes, noting the drawn-out process in the House should deter them from doing so. 'I think after seeing how painful of a process this is and how difficult it is to get anything through this side, I think that will send a strong message in the Senate that you can't really change it,' Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., a member of the Freedom Caucus, told the Deseret News.
