Why the F-15EX, a modernized non-stealth aircraft, sometimes costs more to purchase than a stealth F-35A, and whether the long-term savings justify this choice.
In summary
The debate over the price of the F-15EX pits two visions of modern combat aviation against each other. Designed as an updated version of a 1970s aircraft, the F-15EX has a unit cost that can exceed that of the stealth F-35A, a fifth-generation aircraft often considered more advanced. This raises a clear question: why invest up to $92–97 million in a non-stealth aircraft when an F-35A can be purchased for less? Proponents of the F-15EX point out that its expected service life of 20,000 flight hours, well above the typical 8,000 hours of an F-35A, and lower cost per flight hour could tip the economic equation in its favor over the long term. This article examines this apparent paradox in depth, in a demanding and realistic budgetary and strategic context.
Initial perception of fighter jet costs
The F-15EX Eagle II is often cited as an example of an aircraft that is more expensive to purchase than a modern stealth fighter. Recent data indicates that the unit production price (flyaway cost) of the F-15EX can range from ≈ $90 million to $97 million depending on the production batch, while the F-35A can be acquired for around ≈ $82.5 million for recent tranches of the program.
This situation is surprising because, traditionally, fifth-generation platforms such as the F-35 are associated with high development, production, and maintenance costs. The debate therefore revolves around an apparent contradiction: a modernized fourth-generation aircraft costs more to purchase than a fifth-generation stealth fighter.
What explains the evolution of F-15EX costs
Several factors contribute to the higher unit price of the F-15EX. First, the program has undergone complex industrial adjustments requiring an upgrade of the production line, which increases fixed manufacturing costs. Restarting a production line after years of inactivity entails significant expenditures in specialized labor and industrial investments.
Second, global economic conditions—inflation, supply chain disruptions, and raw material prices—have strained the costs of many weapons programs, including that of the F-15EX. These factors influence both the cost of components and the integration of modern electronic and electronic warfare systems, all of which are necessary for a contemporary fighter aircraft.
Finally, while production of the F-35A is mature with a high manufacturing rate (economies of scale), the F-15EX is still in the process of optimizing production volumes. This structural difference partly explains why, despite its modernization, the F-15EX has not yet achieved competitive unit costs.
A different approach to operating costs
The main argument of F-15EX advocates is not only about the purchase price but also about lifespan and cost of maintaining operational readiness. According to some estimates, the F-15EX airframe could reach up to 20,000 flight hours, which is nearly two to three times more than an F-35A, which is expected to reach approximately 8,000 hours.
This factor is decisive in long-term economic analysis. An aircraft that can fly longer without requiring complete replacement becomes, over a period of 20 to 30 years, potentially less expensive in terms of total investment. Furthermore, if the operating cost per flight hour of the F-15EX is lower than that of the F-35A, the cumulative difference can absorb the initial difference in purchase price.
Unofficial data suggests an average operating cost for the F-15EX of around ≈ $29,000 per hour, while the F-35A can reach, depending on the level of use and estimates, ≈ $30,000 to over $40,000 per hour of flight time.
Missions and operational relevance
The F-35A and F-15EX are designed for partially distinct roles. The F-35A emphasizes stealth and the integration of advanced sensors for operations in highly contested environments, aiming to reduce detection by enemy defenses. These capabilities, however, involve technologies that are costly to produce and maintain.
The F-15EX, on the other hand, is based on a proven platform, with significant external load-carrying capacity and an architecture already widely familiar to forces that have been operating variants of the F-15 for decades. This translates into relative ease of maintenance, better availability of spare parts thanks to logistical heritage, and existing industrial support.
For missions where stealth is not an absolute requirement—air superiority in a dominated space or long-range interception missions—the F-15EX can offer solid performance at a lower operational cost.
Criticisms and limitations of the economic argument
Despite the potential advantages put forward by supporters of the F-15EX, some observers believe that the comparative cost analysis is not entirely fair. While the F-15EX airframe has a longer service life, the complexity of the onboard electronic systems and the training requirements for crews mean that operating costs remain significant.
In addition, analysts point out that the economies of scale associated with the F-35 program—with thousands of aircraft ordered internationally—tend to gradually lower unit costs and logistical support expenses. Another criticism is that some estimates of the F-15EX’s operating costs are still based on data extrapolated from previous models, which may create bias in comparative calculations.
Finally, the total cost of ownership must include a realistic assessment of operational use scenarios, availability in the event of a crisis, and the ability to evolve in the face of future threats. The choice between a more stealthy or a more robust but visible fleet also depends on strategic doctrine, the geopolitical context, and national budget priorities.
The role of industrial and geopolitical choices
Decisions on whether or not to purchase platforms such as the F-15EX or F-35A are not limited to a simple comparison of costs. They reflect industrial, political, and strategic choices. A country may favor non-stealthy but robust aviation for territorial missions, while investing in stealth capabilities for external operations.
In addition, support for domestic industry, maintaining an industrial base capable of producing and maintaining advanced aircraft, and international partnerships influence the final decision. In this sense, the debate is not only economic: it concerns the long-term vision of an air force and its ability to adapt to evolving threats.
A nuanced perspective on the price of fighter jets
The apparent contradiction that an F-15EX may cost more than an F-35A to purchase is only part of a larger picture. Beyond the unit price, the cost analysis must include operating expenses, airframe life, logistical requirements, tactical adaptability, and strategic objectives.
In some contexts, favoring a modern but non-stealth aircraft such as the F-15EX may be the right choice for specific tasks. In others, investing in the stealth and advanced combat network integration of the F-35A can provide a decisive advantage. Decision-makers must carefully weigh these factors, while taking into account technological developments, budget constraints, and future deployment scenarios.
Live a unique fighter jet experience