" F-22 Raptor- F-15C Eagle team " Topic

This would be interesting to game out. The "Raptor-Eagle team" versus Iranian F-14s and Mig-29s. Does anyone know if the Iranians use their F-14s and Mig-29s in "teams"? Robert

"Iran's air force has strike aircraft, although these are largely outdated U.S.-built F-14 Tomcats bought during the days of the shah. They have some Russian-made MiG-29s as well."

"In April, the Pentagon deployed an unspecified number of Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor strike jets, the most advanced operational fighter in the world, to Al-Dhafra airbase near Abu Dhabi, capital of the United Arab Emirates.

Al Dhafra is being used by U.S. Air Force KC-10 aerial tankers along with U.S. surveillance aircraft, including the venerable U-2 and the unmanned Global Hawk.

At about the same time, the Air Force deployed 20 upgraded F-15C Eagles of the 104th Fighter Wing of the Massachusetts Air National Guard to an undisclosed base in the Central Command area of operations.

Military sources say the Boeing F-15s are either at Al Dhafra or the large U.S. air base at Al Udaid in the Gulf emirate of Qatar. Al Udaid also houses Central Command's forward headquarters.

The F-22s and the 104th's F-15s are believed to have been training to operate together in the air-to-air fighting role, tasked with eliminating the Iranian air force's fighter squadrons.

"The Raptor-Eagle team has been honing special tactics for clearing the skies of Iranian fighters in the event of war," reported David Axe of Wired.com, which specializes in military weapons systems.

Axe noted that the "U.S. dogfighting armada" assembling in the Arab monarchies on the gulf's western shore that face Iran would likely operate in small groups, using silent electronic exchanges of data to "wipe out the antiquated but determined Iranian air force" with state-of-the-art missiles systems.

The U.S. air assets would provide a "significant dogfighting presence" in the gulf, Axe noted.

The F-22 has been deployed to the Pacific theater several times but has yet to make its combat debut since it was declared operational in 2005. But for all its vaunted combat capabilities, the aircraft's been plagued a serious flaw in its oxygen generating system that has caused some pilots to lose consciousness."

link

The F-15 is probably a better fighter than the F22! There are more of them and they are a proven design! Maybe the USAF is mixing them together to try and use the F22's alledged stealth capability to set ambushes etc? However with the B2's stealthyness being undermined by the British Army a few years ago very easily only really the F-117 has been proven to be truly stealthy..

F117 was regularly detected by British Rapier batteries as well.

arch, the F-22 is VASTLY superior to the F-15. they regularly chop them up in exercises here in the US. Really no comparison in capability.

the reason they are teaming up is numbers, pure and simple. Not enough F-22s to do the job quickly.

The F-15C/F-22A teams would outclass the F-14A/MiG-29 teams. Iranian F-14A's are obsolete, and the MiG-29's are well behind in the avionics/electronic countermeasures/software department. Also, we have AWACS and centralized datalink while they rely on old GCI stations that can be taken out of the picture easily.

Iranian F-14's still use the powerful AWG-9 radar, but they no longer have AIM-54 Phoenixes that can outreach our missiles. Although they scored kills of Iraqi MiG-21s, MiG-23s, MiG-25's, SU-22's and Mirage F1's during the Iran-Iraq war, they also lost a Tomcat to a MiG-21 early in the war and a couple to Mirage F1EQ-6's, the latter operating in teams when Iraq developed tactics to counter the Tomcats.

Spare parts may be a concern for the F-14 in a war. Iran's aircraft industry can provide some, but during the Iran-Iraq war they were also supplied by Israel, which I assume no longer does. It was believed that their Tomcat fleet may have been upgraded or life-extended by the Soviets.

Expect the IRIAF including its Tomcat fleet to be decimated within days in any war with the USAF.

Sounds like the F-15's have finally been equipped with datalink, which should help with the job, so they can get real-time targeting, silently, from either AWACS, or each other, to engage their enemy.

So, you can have one or more jets turn on their radars, and then have the others fire their missiles from other positions, without being detected, unless they are in the radar range of their enemies. No doubt, these shooters will be engaging the Iranians from the side, or rear, to make that detection unlikely, and their RWRs won't detect them, since they don't need to turn their radars on to locate their jets.

1960's era tech, finally being installed, 50 years later. The Saab Viggens had this capability quite some time ago.

"However with the B2's stealthyness being undermined by the British Army a few years ago very easily only really the F-117 has been proven to be truly stealthy.."

Source please? I've never heard that. I've heard F117 was undermined and that was why it was retired so quickly, but I've not heard of the same with B2 or F22. They use very different approaches to stealth.

You can bag on the F22's air systems (which are looking more and more to be caused by the g-suit design and not the oxygen system at all), but in all trial matchups, it has stood head and shoulders over all rivals. It hasn't yet been tested in combat, and I realize that's a different animal all together, but so far the F22 has so far proven to be very capable.

From what I've read, older, long-wave radars are better at detecting stealth aircraft than those with shorter wavelengths.

An F-22 can and does regularly tackle 6+ F-15s and comes out the winner. Part of it is computer assisted avionics which might eventually be retrofit to F-15s but it has stealth and slip capability when flying (can literally side slip and do other maneuvers in flight) Armament is another factor. But in tests, the F-15s were "lit up" before any visual confirmation they were being engaged by the F-22.

The problem here as with many other threads on these types of topics is that everyone focuses on plane vs. plane capabilities. In reality, most Iranian aircraft will be lucky to get off the ground due to Tomahawk strikes at the airfields. Those that do get airborne will have little idea of what is going on due to massive jamming and the degradation of the Iranian GCI system, making them easy targets for the Raptors, Hornets, and Eagles which will be directed in by AWACS and JSTARS.

"The F-15 is probably a better fighter than the F22! "
Ummm…No. The last article I saw in regards to the F-22's performance in exercises was that they had a record of 102-3 against F-16s, F-15s, and F-18s. One F-16 at a Red Flag exercise got a F-22 when it crossed his sights and one of the new F-18G Growler EW aircraft got one when it used its jamming gear to create a "hole in the sky" and snuck up on one. They regularly pit six F-16s or 15s up against one F-22 just to make it fair.

Hehehehe… He said 'Growler'.

I found this article very informative. And it does mention ,
" Note that an EA-18G aircraft has managed a radar-guided missile kill on an F-22 in combat exercises, so it can be done. Again, stealth isn't invisibility." I did find funny this statement from a as an "Australian exchange pilot" offers his impressions:

"I can't see the [expletive deleted] thing," said RAAF Squadron Leader Stephen Chappell, exchange F-15 pilot in the 65th Aggressor Squadron. "It won't let me put a weapons system on it, even when I can see it visually through the canopy. [Flying against the F-22] annoys the hell out of me."

link

Robert

And I wasn't aware of these limitations though,
"Limited Weapon Set: Qualified weapons for the F-22 are limited: short-range AIM-9 Sidewinder and medium range AIM-120 AMRAAM air-to-air missiles, and the JDAM family of bombs including the GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb glide weapon. An F-22 can carry up to 8 GBU-39s, or 2 GBU-32 JDAMs. None of its internally-carried strike weapons are powered, and radar-killing missiles like the AGM-88 HARM/AARGM aren't even on the drawing board as options. Key ground-looking radar modes are just being integrated, and important additions like wider field side-looking radar arrays and helmet-mounted sights will not appear until and unless future Block 30/ Block 40 upgrades are funded.

Low Usefulness in "Small Wars": The F-22 lacks key systems for engaging the kind of small, fleeting targets that characterize modern counter-insurgency warfare. Its ground-looking SAR radar mode and GPS-guided weapons offer some options, but it lacks the built-in optics and laser targeting possessed by attack helicopters, UAVs, and the F-35.

The GBU-53 SDB-II or GBU-54 laser JDAM could eventually give it some moving target capability, in cooperation with ground forces. Even so, the question is whether F-22 deployments in Small Wars scenarios make sense. The longer-term question is whether deployment of any of America's future F-22/F-35 stealth fighters, with their high purchase costs, high operating costs, and low endurance compared to UAVs, makes sense in "small wars" scenarios. Even deployment of previous-generation fighters has been open to legitimate question, given cheaper and more effective manned fighter options like A-10Cs and EMB-314 Super Tucanos."

Source please? I've never heard that. I've heard F117 was undermined and that was why it was retired so quickly, but I've not heard of the same with B2 or F22. They use very different approaches to stealth.

F117 retired quickly? Not really. Thing had been operational for 10 years before the US even admitted it existed, and then operated for about 10 more years. 20 years of life out of a tactical airframe is pretty impressive, actually!

What makes the B2 and F22 so different in terms of stealth is that the computer program that was used to predict their RCS was better: it could handle curved shapes. The F117 was designed in the mid 1970s, when computers didn't have the power to handle complex shapes. That's why the F117 is made from simple flat shapes. The F22 and B2 use the same concepts, but they can fly better because of the more aerodynamic shape.

I have no doubt the F-22 will be made into a bomber, even if it adds $100 USD Million to the cost of each airframe to do so.

Of course, a $10 USD Mil, vs. $500 USD Mil CAS jet would be better, from a funding standpoint (and for the taxpayers I might add), but that minor detail will be glossed over in the effort to pad Lockheed's bottom line…..

Surprising that it hasn't been thought of an option. Especially the AGM-88 HARM/AARGM. Robert

Perhaps too much thought is being placed on UAVs for CAS in the Future? Robert

The source is the BBC!!! Coverage of the Farnborough Air Show--B2 flew over --Squaddie with hand held radar--"LOOK BIG PLANE IN SKY!!!" My Uncle wa there on a trade stand and the USAF had to ask the British to stop tracking the B2 as it was getting annoying!!

I'm not sure what you are talking about archstanton73. Are you saying that someone tracked a B-2 while it was flying at an airshow with a hand held radar gun? Robert

i could be wrong
i think that handheld radar was setting off the b2 defensive threat warning systems

I've certainly heard a story of a stupid cop in the US getting his handheld radar gun 'smoked' by a B1's jammers.

I've read a report in … think it was Armada International that a British Rapier crew claimed to have tracked a B2 at a distance of ~7 miles or so at one of the Farnborough airshows.

What people neglect to mention or just don't realize is that the B2 drops bombs from more than 10 miles out!

Setting off the Threat Warning System would make sense . Robert

I did find these statements over on the Sino Defence Forum

"As for anti-stealth radar, there was an incident during 1996 Farnborough air show, where BAe (British Aerospace) was showcashing their Rapier SAM system. During a B-2 fly-by, BAe techs used the Rapier SAM's (Blindfire Rapier system?) new radar and IR tracker to show that it can detect, track, and lock-on to stealth aircraft.

A fly by is done at about 1,000ft from the ground. That is probably how close you have to be to actually detect, track, and lock on to a B-2. Not very useful in combat. It also helps if you know where to point (bearing) your radar at the exact moment the B-2 is at its closest.

B-2 use "radar reflectors" around friendlies in order to avoid mid air collision. One example of this use is during mid air refueling. In all likelyhood, this "Radar Reflectors" were on during this airshow. "

link

As has been said, the B2 being detected at Farnborough is a total red herring, as such aircraft do indeed carry devices as a safety measure, to allow them to be tracked in controlled airspace. However, RAF Rapier units did track (and film) F117s under operational conditions during exercises in the States, some years before anyone in the RAF knew what they were.

The tall story about traffic cops setting off aircraft defensive measures is as old as the hills and the nationality/aircraft type changes every time it is told. Aircraft defensive measures are generally very dangerous to be around, need to be armed like a weapon system and will only be armed in strictly controlled circumstances (such as over firing-ranges or in air combat manoeuvre training areas, or in operational sorties, which can include things such as VIP flights).

Indeed, the RAF Police routinely conducts 'speed traps' for military aircraft in the UK, using Blindfire radar, to ensure that minimum height limits and maximum speeds are being adhered to in low-flying areas. If the myth were true, there would be chaff, flares, lasers and ECM raining down on a weekly basis.

"However, RAF Rapier units did track (and film) F117s under operational conditions during exercises in the States, some years before anyone in the RAF knew what they were."

Where can I read about that Mark? Robert

The tall story about traffic cops setting off aircraft defensive measures is as old as the hills and the nationality/aircraft type changes every time it is told. Aircraft defensive measures are generally very dangerous to be around, need to be armed like a weapon system and will only be armed in strictly controlled circumstances (such as over firing-ranges or in air combat manoeuvre training areas, or in operational sorties, which can include things such as VIP flights).

Yes, they are extremely dangerous. Which is why the Jammers are usually on manual control, and chaff/flares are rarely carried.

The full story was that there was a nice spot at the McDonald's parking lot close to the end of the flightline at Ellsworth AFB, and Deputy Joe liked to park his cruiser there and track the B1s as they climbed out.

This set off the radar warning receivers in the B1s, and the USAF saw it as an attempt to discover classified information (flight data like climbout speeds). Because the B1 has a really fancy radar detector, the guy in back knew exactly what type of radar was illuminating them. He then reported this information up his chain of command to the Base commander.

The Base commander writes a pretty nasty cease&desist letter to Podunk Police.

Deputy Dummy tracks another set of planes taking off, which leads to a 'cease and desist… or else' letter.

The third time Deputy Dummy clocks a plane during it's takeoff roll, the base commander had given orders that the onboard jammers were to be warmed up, set to full power transmit on the traffic radar frequency, but to only transmit if Deputy Dummy clocked planes again.

That poor hand-held receiver got hit with enough EM energy that it burned the circuit boards. Probably 10,000x it's output power was directed back at it.

I do like tis explanation,

"The radar "detectors" used by military aircraft are designed to let the crew know when they are being tracked, or "locked up" by a radar site.

There are basically two types of radar methods. The first is when a radar is in search mode. This is best shown by the ever popular radar antenna going around in circles. While newer radars don't use moving antennas, rather using electronics to steer the radar beams, the idea is the same.

When a target is found, and it is determined to be hostile (use of IFF systems, target behavior, intelligence information, etc.) the radar is switched from search to illuminate mode.

In illuminate (and different terms may be used, but the idea is the same) the radar energy is focused on the target or targets. This means the radar signal that the aircraft is getting warned about suddenly jumps greatly in strength.

This is known as "locking on". This is what the electronic countermeasures (ECM) and radar warning devices look for.

By the way, locking on is considered a hostile act, and even if no missile is fired, it can be assumed that one will be on the way soon. Thus generally an aircraft that has been "locked up" may return fire. This can take various forms, such as High Speed Anti Radar Missiles (HARM), gun attacks, cluster bomb attacks or any number of other weapons.

However all of these require flight crew input, none are "automatic".

As far as speed radar is concerned, while it might be picked up by an aircraft's ECM suite, it will not be perceived as a threat since the radar does not have the capability to "lock up". Speed radar just gives back a speed reading, and the ECM won't see that as a threat.

Additionally, as pointed out above, military aircraft fly in civilian airspace all the time, and can be armed (even in the USA, while enroute to firing ranges or other missions), and the crews know quite well that they will be tracked by radar.

It would be considered bad form to destroy air traffic radar simply for tracking air traffic.

This is just a "machines will kill us if we aren't careful" idea that has no basis in reality."

link

Even the Vietnam-era 'radar detectors' I read about in Thud Ridge would tell the pilot or WSO when they were being tracked and by what type of radar.

Not 'locked'. 'tracked'.

"Limited Weapon Set"
"Low Usefulness in Small Wars"

That's because they haven't bastardized it into a ground-attack plane (yet). It's an air superiority fighter.

Personally, about the only air-to-ground I would want on an F22 is HARM or his cousins. If you blind the air defenses, it's a lot easier for those heavily-laden, utterly unstealthy A10s to work.

I was thinking the same thing about the HARM . Robert

"I'm not sure what you are talking about archstanton73. Are you saying that someone tracked a B-2 while it was flying at an airshow with a hand held radar gun? Robert"

A hand held radar unit from the RAF--tracked both IR and normal radar signal from B2--IF the B2 was a stealthy shape/materials/engines then the RAF wouldn't have been able to track them!
The B2 isn't as stealthy as the F117 but as a Flying Wing design is so efficient that it is a good payoff for not being as stealthy…

The B2 is still 200 feet wingtip to wingtip. You cannot get a case of NO return signal, even the WW2 search sets could track building clouds and air masses.

It's just that the returning signal is far, far lower than something that big 'should' be.

"A hand held radar unit from the RAF--tracked both IR and normal radar signal from B2--IF the B2 was a stealthy shape/materials/engines then the RAF wouldn't have been able to track them!"

And at what altitude was it tracked at and how far away? I think IMO that "Stealth" means not being detected at long distances am I right? And at an airshow an aircraft would be much closer and with any countermeasures turned off. Robert

Still doesn't bode well for true stealth! Especially as a hand held radar is a lot less powerful than a "proper" radar suite! As said above the advantage of the flying wing design is efficiency/speed/agility rather than pure stealth!!

Ok when the B-2 does a flyby for air airshow or ball game there are almost always a t-38 or two flying with it. the reason for the t-38 is so that air traffic control can find the flight with the b-2 on radar. so perhaps it was the t-38 flying in company with the b-2 that was picked up?

Basically, the difference between an aircraft being tracked by or locked onto by a radar can be determined by the pulse repetition frequency (PRF). If the PRF suddenly spikes, you've just been locked onto. In Vietnam, we used an analog variant of the AN/APR-36 radar warning receiver.

The Iranians used their F-14s as mini-AWACs planes, back in their war with Iraq, to direct other fighters to intercept and engage them at close range.

They also used a number of Aim-54 Phoenix missiles.

I read all the time that they don't have any operational, or left, but imagine that is someone's pipe dream. I wouldn't be surprised to find they still have a number, of well cared for, and operational long-range AAMs.

Paired with the F-14s excellent radar, they will be a formidable foe, so hopefully they will be dealt with before they even get off the runway, should a conflict with Iran ever arise.

This thread certainly proves that wargamers like to talk regardless of whether they know anything or not.