US F22 scares off Iranian F4

[cichlidfan]

The story itself probably didn't happen :)

 

Perhaps not, but this thread will probably never die. :P

[ENO]

Probably not but I'll tell you USAF and IRIAF would certainly benefit from scouring it for ideas as to how to conduct their operations in the future.

[Pilotasso]

This also means that Raptor was guided by AWACS datalink not by constant use of it's onboard radar which would probably scare Phantoms away ot at least warn them of Raptor's presence in the area.

 

Yet again Raptor's APG-77 radar was engineered to counter planes like Flanker and Fulcrum which work in similar fashion and have similar RWR sensitivity as Iranian F-4s...Single radar paint from APG-77 should detect a 1m^2 target at 100 miles so a single "ping" every 2 or 3 minutes for the real time update is all it took to make an intercept.

 

whatever it was AWACS or F-22 illuminating the target the F-4 would never know. Its threat panel would not be able to sent the electrons in the air. LPI remember?

[countto10]

The story itself probably didn't happen :)

It was a stealth story. Nobody saw it coming.:lol:

 

 

Probably not but I'll tell you USAF and IRIAF would certainly benefit from scouring it for ideas as to how to conduct their operations in the future.

What I learned from this is to always fly under enemy fighters to check their weapons load and give them a potential energy advantage.

[EtherealN]

You fail to note that iranian F4s are not "enemy" fighters. Iran is not at war with the US.

 

VID and visual threat assessment is standard roe there: you have to be REALLY sure about the necessity before attacking someone you are not at war with. (And indeed, VID has been a frequent ROE requirement even in some wars.)

[countto10]

You fail to note that iranian F4s are not "enemy" fighters. Iran is not at war with the US.

 

VID and visual threat assessment is standard roe there: you have to be REALLY sure about the necessity before attacking someone you are not at war with. (And indeed, VID has been a frequent ROE requirement even in some wars.)

Kind of renders stealth redundant then.

[EtherealN]

Incorrect.

 

It actually makes stealth even more important; it allows you greater room to get in a desired VID position without the bogey or their radar sites knowing what you are doing, reducing the risk exposure that comes from a VID ROE.

 

Also, part of the job for stealth planes is to ensure that no-one will want to actually fight a war with you, since they'll know you will take air superiority (or strike ground targets with impunity). And in the event of a full-scale shooting war (say, US vs Iran) the VID ROE might not be in place at all, as well, of course. It is usually conducted in theaters where the enemy has a considerable air disadvantage (for example numerically), where "shooting whatever looks to not be friendly" carries a significant risk of accidently popping some stray businessjet or airliner etcetera.

 

EDIT: Also, there is nothing in a VID that necessitates that you sacrifice energy advantage. You don't have to fly fingertip with a bogey to see if they are indeed bandits. ;)

[countto10]

Only if they're blind and stupid.

[EtherealN]

Please do elaborate.

[countto10]

Only if the enemy has no passive detection means and is trained to the level of a '90s Iraqi helicopter pilot.

[EtherealN]

Why would passive detection means help?

 

F-22 does not need to have radar on to know where you are. ("Datalink")

Indeed it even does not need to have radar on to launch radar-guided missiles. (Same goes for Gripen, Eurofighter, Rafale, F-35, some variants of F-15 and F-16 and probably a few others.)

[countto10]

Why would passive detection means help?

Stupid question.

 

F-22 does not need to have radar on to know where you are. ("Datalink")

Indeed it even does not need to have radar on to launch radar-guided missiles. (Same goes for Gripen, Eurofighter, Rafale, F-35, some variants of F-15 and F-16 and probably a few others.)

That greatly limits the range to the point where stealth is no longer stealth though. You are no longer stealthy inside 20km.

[GGTharos]

You can launch on a datalink target as if you were launching on own radar target ... where do you get all this stuff?

 

That greatly limits the range to the point where stealth is no longer stealth though. You are no longer stealthy inside 20km.

[ENO]

Yeah- it was time for him to go the way of old yeller... that debate was exhausting.

[GGTharos]

It was a banned user's clone. The debate had nothing to do with the ban - it was circumvention of rules - just so we're clear. :)

[CypherGrunyev]

In other news... I still don't find it a victory for either side. Kinda like bringing a Challenger II to a knife fight. Nothing happens and some kid on the Internet whines about it :)

[ENO]

It was a banned user's clone. The debate had nothing to do with the ban - it was circumvention of rules - just so we're clear. :)

 

 

Incandescently! Either way it's win win.