F22 Deployment in Middle East

[Ananda]

The F-22's main role in the conflict would be to detect and shoot down Irans short and medium ranged cruise/scud missiles in the boost phase after they are launched in retaliation.

No other aircraft has the stealth to stay close enough and the speed to get into a launch position to perform this mission.

Block 50 Viper, Shornet, and F-15E can handle Cruise Missiles even lingering above their launch sites just fine. After all when you already got the airspace domination, Stealth is not really the big concern. The Scud and other ballistic missiles can be more appropriately handle by PAC-3 or Standard Block 3.

Sure the F-22 can perform the job better (for cruise missiles). However my point is, for Iran situations it's not necessary has to be done by F-22. In such the move on basing F-22 in the region is more as signal rather than an imminent Air Invasions to Iran.

 

[ADMk2]

Yes you're smoking..



http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/air-force-aviation/f-22-secrets-revealed-4021/

They'll have some facility to shoot down subsonic cruise missiles if they happen to be relatively close to the launch sites. The handful of F-22A's sent to the UAE clearly aren't be sent there for such a purpose however.

If you think a non-specifically equipped fighter is an anti-ballistic missile capability then you are dreaming. They couldn't manage it in 1991 with total air dominance and vast ISR coverage and they haven't launched program after program since then to try and address it because the F-22A can already do it...

 

[rcsribby]

Yes the F-22 can carry a pair of 1000lbs JDAM's or 8x SDB's. What it can't carry are the 2000lbs JDAM's with BLU-109 or BLU-116 penetrating warheads that are going to be needed to penetrate heavily fortified and hardened positions, let alone the GBU-28 type weapons that are going to be needed to go truly deep into the ground after the targets that are of main interest, notably Iran's nuclear facilities.

That's why the F-22A for all the love certain adherents have for it, will have nothing more than a sideline gig at best in such an operation. It may get the chance to shoot down a couple of 35 year old Tomcats or 30 year old MiG-29's, 40 year old F-4's or 45 year old F-5's and it may drop an SDB or 2 on a SAM site, but the main aim of such a mission (if it occurs) will be to destroy the nuclear facilities.

A few shot down F-4's and MiG-29's may excite some people. That ain't the mission though...

F-15E's, F-16C's, Hornets, Super Hornets and the heavy bombers will be carrying the strike load to actually achieve the mission, as usual...

That is why I mentioned the B-2, which was recently fitted for a new class of "super bunker busters" which are much larger and heavier as well as being satellite directed.
The F-22 with increment 3.1 modifications add a synthetic aperture radar (SAR) capability to the fighter's Northrop Grumman APG-77 radar, plus electronic attack, better geo-location capabilities to find enemy radars and the ability to carry eight 113kg (250lb) small diameter bombs (SDBs), for use in pairs against four ground targets.
Introduction of an SAR mode will assist during the manual targeting process, which is an improvement over the previous Increment 2 configuration's use of two 454kg Joint Direct Attack Munition satellite-corrected, inertially guided bombs against individual targets.
The US would never send F-15E's, F-16C's, Hornets, Super Hornets into Iran on a first strike, but they would send in F-22s & B-2s. The Iranian air defenses would have to be entirely destroyed in order for us to send those aircraft into Iran. You F-22 haters will eventually have to eat crow , because there are going to be ( if we've learned anything from history) times in the near future where the F-22 will be called on to do things that no other aircraft can do. That is go in highly contested airspace and take out air defenses and FIGHTERS to gain air supremacy and allow other airplanes such as the F-15E & F-18 E/Fs to operate.

 

[Cadredave]

That is why I mentioned the B-2, which was recently fitted for a new class of "super bunker busters" which are much larger and heavier as well as being satellite directed.

You mean fitted for MOP which have gone back in for redevelopment so they can go deeper and hopefully penetrate the underground facilities.

The F-22 with increment 3.1 modifications add a synthetic aperture radar (SAR) capability to the fighter's Northrop Grumman APG-77 radar, plus electronic attack, better geo-location capabilities to find enemy radars and the ability to carry eight 113kg (250lb) small diameter bombs (SDBs), for use in pairs against four ground targets.

Well those Block 3.1 aircraft are still in Alaska and are not the aircraft deplyed to the UAE, your right about its capability it is impressive.

The US would never send F-15E's, F-16C's, Hornets, Super Hornets into Iran on a first strike, but they would send in F-22s & B-2s. The Iranian air defenses would have to be entirely destroyed in order for us to send those aircraft into Iran.

The US will send all its assets as part of a system each plane will be use its strength to compliment the whole system, you forgot about the Growler, AWACs etc.

You F-22 haters will eventually have to eat crow , because there are going to be ( if we've learned anything from history) times in the near future where the F-22 will be called on to do things that no other aircraft can do.

No one on here is a F22 hater if you come on here and make ridiculous claims then be prepared to be taken to task for those claims, on this site are many who have made the Defence force a living in all the services also are the civilians who have had a hand in designing or procuring these systems we are not fan bois, read and learn from those who have a very good understanding of how strike packages are put together.

That is go in highly contested airspace and take out air defenses and FIGHTERS to gain air supremacy and allow other airplanes such as the F-15E & F-18 E/Fs to operate.

The fact is as of today they havent gone in anywhere its been those Gen 4/4.5 jets that have done exactly what you have stated in Lybia, GW1/GW2 and did a fantastic job as well their (F22) time will come but its not now at the moment.

 

[ADMk2]

That is why I mentioned the B-2, which was recently fitted for a new class of "super bunker busters" which are much larger and heavier as well as being satellite directed.
The F-22 with increment 3.1 modifications add a synthetic aperture radar (SAR) capability to the fighter's Northrop Grumman APG-77 radar, plus electronic attack, better geo-location capabilities to find enemy radars and the ability to carry eight 113kg (250lb) small diameter bombs (SDBs), for use in pairs against four ground targets.
Introduction of an SAR mode will assist during the manual targeting process, which is an improvement over the previous Increment 2 configuration's use of two 454kg Joint Direct Attack Munition satellite-corrected, inertially guided bombs against individual targets.
The US would never send F-15E's, F-16C's, Hornets, Super Hornets into Iran on a first strike, but they would send in F-22s & B-2s. The Iranian air defenses would have to be entirely destroyed in order for us to send those aircraft into Iran. You F-22 haters will eventually have to eat crow , because there are going to be ( if we've learned anything from history) times in the near future where the F-22 will be called on to do things that no other aircraft can do. That is go in highly contested airspace and take out air defenses and FIGHTERS to gain air supremacy and allow other airplanes such as the F-15E & F-18 E/Fs to operate.

Mate wake up to yourself. The US Sent AH-64 Apaches on the first "strike" mission in the Gulf War, up against a much strong air defence system (at the time) then Iran posses (in relstive terms) today. The appropriate tool for the mission is chosen by air power professionals who meticulously plan these things.

If the F-15, F-16 or F/A-18 or F-22A is deemed to have the most appropriate capability for the task at hand it will be chosen.

No-one here is an F-22A "hater" but a strike on Iran is fundamentally a job. A professional approach is to select the most appropriate tool for said job and for all the F-22A's capability, air to ground strike is it's weakest capability. Most in-service aircraft possess a stronger capability in air to ground than does the F-22A and therefore they are most likely to be used.

The F-22A if it plays a role at all in such an operation would be to assist the actual strikers via escort / offensive counter air taskings.

I'm sorry if that doesn't seem "sexy" enough for you but that's the way it is.

 

[jack412]

IMO people are reading too much into this deployment. Same thing several mnths back when 3 CVNs just happened to be in the same proximity to one another as part of their regular patrol cycles.

I'm with you on this one, if there was a strike envisaged there would be that many assets deployed, a half dozen f-22 wouldn't just be the focus.

 

[RobWilliams]

Mate wake up to yourself. The US Sent AH-64 Apaches on the first "strike" mission in the Gulf War, up against a much strong air defence system (at the time) then Iran posses (in relstive terms) today. The appropriate tool for the mission is chosen by air power professionals who meticulously plan these things.

If the F-15, F-16 or F/A-18 or F-22A is deemed to have the most appropriate capability for the task at hand it will be chosen.

No-one here is an F-22A "hater" but a strike on Iran is fundamentally a job. A professional approach is to select the most appropriate tool for said job and for all the F-22A's capability, air to ground strike is it's weakest capability. Most in-service aircraft possess a stronger capability in air to ground than does the F-22A and therefore they are most likely to be used.

The F-22A if it plays a role at all in such an operation would be to assist the actual strikers via escort / offensive counter air taskings.

I'm sorry if that doesn't seem "sexy" enough for you but that's the way it is.

Well said, that man!

Looking at Wiki (i know, i know), it appears that roughly half an hour later some 20odd F-15Es made a strike, so it appears that it's not neccesarily only the 'LO' platforms that could penetrate a relatively advanced air-defence

Even then in the role of escorts etc it probably wouldn't "grapple" with enemy fighters realistically anyway, at least, that's my thought on it.

On a different note, i'm an F-22A fan,

 

[colay]

I'm with you on this one, if there was a strike envisaged there would be that many assets deployed, a half dozen f-22 wouldn't just be the focus.

Yes, we'll know something is up when pizza deliveries to the Pentagon spike suddenly. That would probably be a more reliable indicator,:

 

[rcsribby]

You mean fitted for MOP which have gone back in for redevelopment so they can go deeper and hopefully penetrate the underground facilities.



Well those Block 3.1 aircraft are still in Alaska and are not the aircraft deplyed to the UAE, your right about its capability it is impressive.



The US will send all its assets as part of a system each plane will be use its strength to compliment the whole system, you forgot about the Growler, AWACs etc.



No one on here is a F22 hater if you come on here and make ridiculous claims then be prepared to be taken to task for those claims, on this site are many who have made the Defence force a living in all the services also are the civilians who have had a hand in designing or procuring these systems we are not fan bois, read and learn from those who have a very good understanding of how strike packages are put together.



The fact is as of today they havent gone in anywhere its been those Gen 4/4.5 jets that have done exactly what you have stated in Lybia, GW1/GW2 and did a fantastic job as well their (F22) time will come but its not now at the moment.

Why do you assume to know who i am , i have served in the service and i now hold an FAA A&P license to work on airplanes which i have done for the past 20 yr.s . I think it's time to replace 30 yr old aircraft with an airplane (F-22) that has not been given a chance to prove itself. Mr Gates was ask to send the F-22 to Iraq and Afghanistan but would not he did not want to because he had a personal grudge with former Airforce generals , whom he told that he would see personally that would not go past 183 jets , congress overruled with a purchase odd 4 additional jets. I don't like the jet because it's a new expensive toy for flyboys to brag to their girlfriends about, I like it because we need to replace the F-15 and the F-35 will not do that, and because i care about the troops in the Field who haven't had to look up in the sky in over 70 years and wonder if they are going to get strafed. I want it to follow the proud record that F-15 and pilots have worked hard to turn around from the F-4. Do know what shape we would be in now if we had only bought 187 F-15s all those years ago, I hate to think! The new F-15SE is quoted as costing $100 million according to Boeing's website. That is before you spend money on stealthy external fuel tanks and any IRST system they may develop for it. It does not make sense to try to extend the F-15 for a few more upgrades when you can start with a system that was getting better and cheaper with each jet that came off the production line, and at the end was costing around $140 million each. Yes i agree that it has a long road of upgrades to go but that is what you do with these jets that's what we have always done. The code is still being written for it , it is not an easy thing to do that's what make us great,and a great nation. All jets go through upgrades let's start with a platform that was designed better than any other platform to do just that with open architecture. This CRAP that Mr. Gates was trying to feed the American people about no " overkill " that we need to be on par with other nations, is against everything we stand for , and everything we have worked for in the past several hundred years. And then, the Russians and Chinese come out with stealth prototypes, and most experts agree that the SU-30MKI has surpassed the F-15 in capabilities, It's more maneuverable , it has an IRST system a new AESA radar coming soon. The SU-35 is coming , the eurofighter and Rafael French jet claims to be better than F-15. It is time to retire it with it's record intact, and keep the traditions of the USA moving forward.

 

[rcsribby]

Well said, that man!

Looking at Wiki (i know, i know), it appears that roughly half an hour later some 20odd F-15Es made a strike, so it appears that it's not neccesarily only the 'LO' platforms that could penetrate a relatively advanced air-defence

Even then in the role of escorts etc it probably wouldn't "grapple" with enemy fighters realistically anyway, at least, that's my thought on it.

On a different note, i'm an F-22A fan,

Stick your head in the sand "MATE" and act like the F-15 is going to be good forever. Why did the Brit.s get rid of the Tornado for the Eurofighter, because they we moving forward ! Did you see the Eurofighter flying around Libya with a load out of air-air missiles ... No! it was carrying Lazar guided bombs.
If Iran has SA-3s and SA-4s like they claim , I as an AMERICAN would want B-2s,F-22s and pilot-less aircraft to go in first. I just want us to more forward like the Brit.s have done, that all I am saying. It is in the interest of America and it's Allys to be the strongest we can be, there are many ,many people that don't want that to be so.

 

[RobWilliams]

Stick your head in the sand "MATE" and act like the F-15 is going to be good forever. Why did the Brit.s get rid of the Tornado for the Eurofighter, because they we moving forward ! Did you see the Eurofighter flying around Libya with a load out of air-air missiles ... No! it was carrying Lazar guided bombs.
If Iran has SA-3s and SA-4s like they claim , I as an AMERICAN would want B-2s,F-22s and pilot-less aircraft to go in first. I just want us to more forward like the Brit.s have done, that all I am saying. It is in the interest of America and it's Allys to be the strongest we can be, there are many ,many people that don't want that to be so.

I'm not saying the F-15 "will be good forever" and didn't elude to that at all in my post so i don't know where you got that from (or where you got the "MATE" attitude from either), the point of my post - which you clearly missed - was that IF LO platforms were absolutely neccesary to penetrating a relatively strong air defence (like with Iraq), you'd have thought that strategic planners would have used LO platforms to perform the first strikes, which they didn't.

Just to make it clear, I'm not saying that the F-15 will be good forever, i'm not saying that the F-22A is in some way a rubbish concept nor am I "sticking my head in the sand", i'm just being realistic. If it is felt that the F-22A is absolutely vital to the task (which it doesn't appear to be) then go ahead and use them, all i'm saying is that it doesn't look neccesary, i'm sorry if that somehow offends you but there it is that Iran doesn't appear to be the F-22As proving ground. Also i'm sure the professionals who plan these things probably base decisions on more than "well they MIGHT have this".

It's like trying to open a Walnut, you get the task (opening the Walnut), evaluate what tools you have and then select the most appropriate to get the job done. Sure, whilst a sledgehammer may open the thing, you still pick the nutcracker because it's the most appropriate tool to achieve the best result (cliche example but it's the idea that counts).

Also, I'm curious as to how 'the Brits have moved on', as good as I think the EF is, i'd rather have an F-15E in the skies for A2G, but that's way off topic.

 

[rcsribby]

Well said, that man!

Looking at Wiki (i know, i know), it appears that roughly half an hour later some 20odd F-15Es made a strike, so it appears that it's not neccesarily only the 'LO' platforms that could penetrate a relatively advanced air-defence

Even then in the role of escorts etc it probably wouldn't "grapple" with enemy fighters realistically anyway, at least, that's my thought on it.

On a different note, i'm an F-22A fan,

You don't think i know that, i do my homework "Mate" ! I also know that LCDR Scott Speicher was lost in an F/A -18 on that first night, many think to an Iraqi Mirage F-1 some say to a SAM ,we will never know, either way he was targeted and shot down. The stealth F-117s that went in were not seen and therefor not targeted. It makes a big difference just ask LCDR Scott Speicher's wife and family.

 

[Marc 1]

Did you see the Eurofighter flying around Libya with a load out of air-air missiles ... No! it was carrying Lazar guided bombs.

There are many things that are off base with your assumptions rcsribby. The point you have made here is just one of them.

Ask yourself WHY the EF was loaded for A2G work. I for one did not hear the skies over Libiya were swarming with Mig-23's trying to shoot down the Nato air fleet. I also understand that the UN approved tasking was to offer air support to the rebels - Nato being used as the hammer to help even up the battle (insurgents armed with light weapons and the occasional captured tank versus a standing armour equipped army).

So do you think that TASKING had anything to do with this?

 

[RobWilliams]

You don't think i know that, i do my homework "Mate" ! I also know that LCDR Scott Speicher was lost in an F/A -18 on that first night, many think to an Iraqi Mirage F-1 some say to a SAM ,we will never know, either way he was targeted and shot down. The stealth F-117s that went in were not seen and therefor not targeted. It makes a big difference just ask LCDR Scott Speicher's wife and family.

Should point out you replied to my original comment twice (rather than my last reply to the first one)

Don't be so childish, I do realise it makes a difference and it's juvenile to try to make me out to be a person who doesn't give a flying crap about people dying.

Any military attack is a calculated risk, and it was calculated that the risk of using the aircraft they chose for the strikes they projected was worth the potential gains, you expect them to ONLY use F-117s or B-2s for every strike until every potential A2G threat is neutralised to it's entirely safe to send other aircraft in?

 

[Bonza]

Stick your head in the sand "MATE" and act like the F-15 is going to be good forever..

I'm sick to death of people like you coming on here and acting like fifteen year olds whenever someone disagrees with you. Enjoy your holiday and don't hurt yourself rushing back. If you do, expect to provide some evidence of your claims to service.

 

[ADMk2]

Stick your head in the sand "MATE" and act like the F-15 is going to be good forever. Why did the Brit.s get rid of the Tornado for the Eurofighter, because they we moving forward ! Did you see the Eurofighter flying around Libya with a load out of air-air missiles ... No! it was carrying Lazar guided bombs.
If Iran has SA-3s and SA-4s like they claim , I as an AMERICAN would want B-2s,F-22s and pilot-less aircraft to go in first. I just want us to more forward like the Brit.s have done, that all I am saying. It is in the interest of America and it's Allys to be the strongest we can be, there are many ,many people that don't want that to be so.

In case you're still reading this, Rafale's made the first strike during the Libya operation and went in prior to B-2's, Growlers, unmanned aerial vehicles (that were publicly reported on) AND F-15E's. F-22A's didn't even show up.

Again, pick the right tool for the job. No-one serious has ever accused the Rafale of being especially "stealth" but it was still able to penetrate and survive in the face of operational (non-suppressed) Libyan air defences.

Low observable aircraft will undertake such missions with less risk, true but that doesn't mean they are the ONLY way to undertake such missions, nor that they are necessarily the best choice for every possible contingency.

 

[Lostfleet]

I read this article today about F-22 , I didnt know the pilots had the right to refuse the type of aircraft they flew ( I just thought they were assigned ).

Military whistleblowers express fears about F-22 safety - CBS News

Anyway, I honestly dont know the strategic and tactical advantages or disadvantages of F-22s in the gulf, but their deployment there will at least provide a lot of great photographs with desert backgrounds,

 

[ADMk2]

I read this article today about F-22 , I didnt know the pilots had the right to refuse the type of aircraft they flew ( I just thought they were assigned ).

Military whistleblowers express fears about F-22 safety - CBS News

Anyway, I honestly dont know the strategic and tactical advantages or disadvantages of F-22s in the gulf, but their deployment there will at least provide a lot of great photographs with desert backgrounds,

Yep, let's hope the Eric Palmer types over there know their composition, negative space and rule of thirds eh?

 

[Air Force Brat]

I read this article today about F-22 , I didnt know the pilots had the right to refuse the type of aircraft they flew ( I just thought they were assigned ).

Military whistleblowers express fears about F-22 safety - CBS News

Anyway, I honestly dont know the strategic and tactical advantages or disadvantages of F-22s in the gulf, but their deployment there will at least provide a lot of great photographs with desert backgrounds,

Actually I had mentioned in one of my previous posts that some USAF pilots had opted out of the F-22, preferring the F-15, probably lots of reasons, but just more inherant trust in the F-15, a very well developed and still quite capable aircraft. This problem with the F-22 has everyone stymied and is a black mark, but I would remind everyone that the F-18 had similar issues with its OBOGS, resulting in two fatalities, it is just culturally more acceptable for US mil to voice their concerns these days. My Dad was offered the left seat in B-52s, but chose to remain in the C-130 as an IP, lest you think he was playing it safe, he served with MacVSog, flying one of the USAFs first blackbirds, an aircraft that later became known as the Combat Talon, but which were known at that time as "rivet yards". They were equipped with the Fulton recovery system, and a terrain following radar, that as I recall was designed for the F-4. We lived on Okinawa, later to Sewart AFB in Tennessee, and finally to Little Rock AFB, where the Tactical Training Wing is still located.

 

[Gremlin29]

I read this article today about F-22 , I didnt know the pilots had the right to refuse the type of aircraft they flew ( I just thought they were assigned ).

Pilots always have had the right to end their flying careers. These are Virginia National Air Guard pilots, the majority of which are part timers aka have "day jobs" outside of the military. As a Captain and a Major both are likely to have served long enough to have fulfilled their committment and could resign from the Guard at the time of their choosing. Since their unit is just starting to convert to the F22 their day jobs just might not make it possible/convenient for them to go to the Q course (they may not be F22 qualified yet) and subsequent training.

I wont question their motives as they may have legitimate concerns however something doesn't sit right with me that they are on 60 minutes voicing their concerns in uniform. Either they received permission from the Air Force to do so or they just ended their military careers. I would find it hard to believe the Air Force gave them permission to do so but then again I don't know the back story.

Pilots don't simply get to "choose" what they fly. Many are offered choices, some are happy with those choices and some are not. I find this story odd and think there's more to it, time will tell.