Posted on 03/27/2007 4:18:08 AM PDT by saganite
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates The U-S Navy has launched its largest show of force in the Persian Gulf since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Two aircraft carriers are leading the way, backed by more than 100 warplanes flying simulated attack maneuvers off the coast of Iran.
The exercise comes just four days after Iran's capture of 15 British sailors and marines who Iran said had strayed into Iranian waters near the Gulf. Britain and the U-S Navy have insisted the British sailors were operating in Iraqi waters.
A U-S Navy commander says the maneuvers were not organized in response to the capture of the British sailors, nor were they meant to threaten the Islamic Republic, but he wouldn't say when the exercises were planned.
The warships will stay out of Iranian territorial waters, which extend 12 miles off the Iranian coast.
Imagine? If you were the NYSlimes and it fit your agenda, you would not say " I imagine..." You would print, " a U-S commander says, Hey Iran, make our day... punks"
It already is in the wrong hands.
Just for fun and to see if just one can take out their entire air force. Think of the savings in jet fuel alone.
Exactly how many ground attack missions has the F-15C carried out? Zero. Think about that one a bit.
The F-16 is not being replaced by the F-22. The retiring of F-16 squadrons is coincidental. The F-35 is the replacement for the F-16 and it is designed for F/A.
The F-22 can certainly carry a small load of JDAM or SDBs internally, but mounting external weapons negates its stealth.
Iran has very little capability to resist a conventional air assault by our fourth-generation aircraft. There is no doubt that the F-22 would do very well, but do we really want to risk having a damaged airframe turned over to Russia or China?
Until there is a reason to employ the F-22 over hostile territory, I don't think we should.
Excuse me???
F-15's do NOT attack targets on the ground???
It was F-15's in the first Gulf War that hit a bunch of British tanks and personnel carriers and killed 15 Brits!!
Even the F-117 hit ground targets!
If I wanted to take Iran down in very short order, I might want to precede the B-2/JDAM attacks with a few dozen cruise missiles that have stealth capability. But, of course, we don't have any of those...
It was the F-15E Strike Eagles that attacked ground targets. They are specially modified Eagles designed for bombing and have 2 crewmwmbers. These are the only F-15's assigned to the attack role. All others are air superiority.
The F-117 has indeed attacked ground targets since that is it's one and only role. It's not a fighter even with that F in front of the 117. By the way, the F-117 has been removed (or is still in the process of being phased out) from the inventory. It's obsolete.
I understand, my original point was that we no longer have single mission aircraft of that size as military policy, we have multi-mission fighters. Even the F-15E is 15 to 20 years old now, right?
That would mean the F-22 and F-35 would be multimission, not just air superiority
I don't think the Air Force will ever risk the F-22 in a ground attack role. There isn't going to be as many as the Air Force wanted and they are just too valuable as air superiority fighters. I don't know if you've followed the results of air to air tests against other fighters but a two ship of F-22's is enough to take out nearly a squadron of anything out there. The only limit to their capability is the number of missiles they can carry.
The F-35 is designed specifically for ground attack. It can function in the fighter role well enough to defend itself against most comers. I understand your point about these planes being multi mission but they will only do that in rare instances. There is no way for instance that the Air Force is going to deploy its F-22s to the Middle East to undertake attack missions. There are already more than enough assets for that job.
But that is like bragging about the F-14 Phoenix system: carry 6, lock on to 24 total carried on other aircraft with you, fire and forget...poof goes Ivan!
I dont know how many people would have sent just 2 F-14's with 4 A-6's against a squadron approaching them. At any range.
Even the F-14 was used in attack mode on occasion.
I wont argue that the F-22 is intended to be THE air superiority fighter, just that it will be doing more and quite likely as a first strike fighter, not just air to air
Well I just don't know how to put it any other way. You're wrong.
As for the F-14, it made a nice big radar target. You can't see the F-22. You can't hit what you can't see, especially when the F-22 has had you in his sights since you took off.
you missed my point about the system itself.
nevermind
You've left off the "C". No F-15C's ever hit any ground targets. The F-15E is a highly modified F-15 intended specifically for strike operations.
Of course the F-117 hit ground targets, as it had no air-to-air capability at all, what else would it do?
Cruise missiles are generally undetectable by ground stations because they fly below the line of sight of the radar. We program the course and altitude to ensure this. There is very little need for cruise missiles to be stealth. SAC took did develop them, but those were longer range missiles that required high altitude flight.
They are both multimission, but the F-22 has a very limited strike capability. All capabilities are not equal. That's why the F-22 is not being purchased in the same numbers as the F-35, which is to primarily perform the attack mission.
The F-15B/C has always been functionally able to drop bombs, so its technically multimission as well. But it has been kept in the air-superiority mission, while F-16 has shouldered the attack mission. Additionally, the USAF bans the F-15E from participating in its air-to-air competitions, because they want the aircrews to focus on ground attack.
My original point was that there is no reason to risk the loss of the F-22 technology with regard to an attack on Iran. If you already have a 2 lb. hammer to crack a peanut, there's no reason to go get the sledgehammer.
The F-14 required extensive changes to be able to hit anything with a bomb. (I'm sure some Tomcat driver will want to argue, but I've witnessed the scattering of bombs). It only became effective once precision ordnance capability was added, and it was never upgraded to be able to carry weapons such as HARM, Harpoon, SLAR-ER, or Maverick. For most of its service life, it was strictly air-to-air. Because of this, they became mainly a waste of deck space once air superiority was attained. Multimission capability should always be designed into fighters for this reason.
With the B-2, F-35, and cruise missiles, I predict it will be a very long time before the F-22 is used as a strike platform.
Good Points.
I humbly concede. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.