Air Dominance???

[BigPapaDean]

https://www.facebook.com/u.s.militarychannel/videos/1271933092828886/?hc_ref=NEWSFEED

[KaptCrunch]

yes with 500 mile strike range

[TBB]

Gotta get the >XI< logo on one of them

[AyaqGuyaq]

Awesome footage. Thanks for the post, Big Papa Joe!

 

The F-16 is indeed an incredible aircraft, able to both bomb AND outturn a Mig-29 "Fulcrum."

 

Small, fast (Mach 2.2--impressive for a single-engine fighter jet), and agile. I love watching 'em perform during air shows at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER) in Anchorage.

 

Thanks again for the post, Big Papa Joe! Ayaq

Edited January 2, 2017 by AyaqGuyaq

[AyaqGuyaq]

Mr. Krunch, sir, that range is without "drop tanks," and is without aerial tankers with which they rendezvous on the way to long distances.

 

Say, "across the pond," for example.

 

The venerable F-14 Tomcat was faster, but the awesome F-15 Eagle is faster than both, with it's top speed of Mach 2.5.

 

American technology, you gotta love it.

 

That's why the Chinese and Russians are always trying to steal it.

 

Sadly enough, we have turn-coat frickin' Americans trying to sell it. No more firing squads, sigh.

 

Like M.C. Hammer used to sing, "Can't touch this!"

 

(In Yoda voice) "Strongest military in the world, we are."

 

I, for one, am proud to be American. Ayaq

[Bogleg]

The F-16 is a decent all around platform, but for any one specific mission type there are other tools in the arsenal that are better suited.  The AF has always tried to have a multi-purpose fighter.  The F-16 is, for example, a capable but not serious CAS platform, with short loiter times and a gun that isn't accurate by CAS standards nor as lethal as the A-10s GAU-8.  Over the past 16 years it goes without saying that for fixed-wing CAS the A-10 is the fighter of choice - .  Likewise for air interdiction missions the Strike Eagle is the superior platform.  It's a good weapon, but it has always tried to fill too many roles IMHO.  In the kinds of combat environments we have been involved in since 9/11 where we have enjoyed air supremacy it makes sense that airborne assets with longer loiter times are more important.  We haven't been involved in any kind of an aerial war, nor have we had to confront sophisticated SAM threats. 

 

In any case the way it's sounding right now, we should be doing an elephant walk with B1s and B2s.

[AyaqGuyaq]

"We haven't been involved in any kind of an aerial war, nor have we had to confront sophisticated SAM threats."

 

Huh? You forgetting about the Iraq wars, bud?

 

What da . . .

 

America and it's allies kicked some arse, with F-117 Nighthawks and Apache AH-64 attack helicopters taking out their early warning radar and "command and control" sites, etc. That paved the way for our fighter jets to enter the Iraqi's airspace to lay down some more arse-whooping against the poor fools trying to intercept them.

 

The onslaught was so terrible that the Iraqis flew their surviving Migs to Iran for safety. The Iranian government said "Thank you."

 

Lol.

 

With our AWACS (Air Force) and Hawkeye (Navy) planes in the air, the Iraqi planes didn't stand a chance, particularly against the F-15C Eagle, with it's superior radar and weapons and agility. Not to mention the 1 million dollars-worth of training that each pilot receives.

 

C'mon, now!!

 

The A-10 Warthog was designed to be a Russian tank-killer, only. The F-16 can drop bombs, drop opposing aircraft outta the sky, and--when armed with Maverick missiles--make tanks go "Ka-boom" on the ground.

 

Incidentally, I have particular affinity for the U.K. because we ALWAYS back each other's play.

 

That is all. Ayaq

Edited January 2, 2017 by AyaqGuyaq

[TheLastColdBeer]

Yeah, we have set the stage for air supremacy in all of our last conflicts. Wouldn't look good to lose a B2 to SAM because of poor planning. I miss the Tomcat. Saw one run the race course at Reno right with a F16. Amazing aircraft, and while carrying the Phoenix missle, a supreme fleet defence airplane. Going to be a shock when a carrier gets taken out by a wave of missles.

[AyaqGuyaq]

I'm with you on that, @@TheLastColdBeer. I miss the F-14 Tomcat, too.

 

The one and only time I saw one fly was about 14 years ago during an airshow here in Alaska.

 

Beautiful plane, and I love the "swing wings." As big as it is, it us surprisingly nimble.

 

And you are correct, sir, about the big ring of defense afforded by the Tomcat's 100-nautical-mile rangePhoenix missiles. The Tomcat could simultaneously target 6 enemy aircraft and have its 6 missiles streaking toward them at the same time. The Tomcat also had an incredible radar system.

 

The F/A-18 Hornet doesn't have that capability.

 

Alas, the F-14, with it's many parts, was difficult to maintain; e.g., it required 4 hours of maintenance for every hour it spent in the air.

 

The Hornet, with its "modular" design, requires less than half that.

 

The Tomcat is indeed one of my favorites. Ayaq

[Bogleg]

I don't consider The meager Air Force Iraq had a real air to air threat to the USAF. During the Gulf War they had a ton of SAM threats that our F4 pilots decimated. You make a valid point that I overlooked with the conventional battle in Iraq, but I don't see what that really has to do with the F-16. You even stated we used F-117 for interdiction missions and deep strike capabilities.

 

My perspective is of course skewed as a former JTAC.

 

FYI I've controlled both 14s and 18s. They suck hard for CAS. 20 minutes of loiter time and the Navy's bullshit "reasonable assurance" policy. I would take 16s over either any day if I needed warheads on foreheads.

 

All that being said, best flyby I ever had was by a 4 ship of 16s I controlled up in Utah.

[AyaqGuyaq]

Thanks for your service, @@Bogleg. Hat's off to you, sir.

 

I tried to join the U.S. Marine Corps when I was 17 so I could kill bad guys--Russians, mainly--during the height of the Cold War.

 

Wasn't accepted because of a perforated eardrum, which I had repaired later.

 

Got my MBA instead.

 

I'm still a Marine at heart, though. Ayaq