F-14s against an F-16 and F-15 strike package

Agreed, it will never be a fair fight but how would the F-16 match up against the ... ?
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

m

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 694
  • Joined: 01 Jan 2011, 23:40
  • Location: NL

Unread post31 Mar 2012, 00:02

1st503rdsgt wrote:Internationally, I've always gotten the impression that the F/A-18 only wins customers who are put off by the cost of the F-15, but still need a little more than what the F-16 has to offer. Israel doesn't really fit into that bracket.


And how much of a export success the F18 really has been in all these years?

Basically the F18 is a design from the sixties (N-300), evolved in the P-530 cobra > YFF17
Introduced in 1983 as F18.

Exported Hornets, not that many numbers, to only seven countries. Plus one country the F18 E/F, only 24 till so far exported.

F18 Hornet:
Australia, Canada, Switzerland, Finland, Spain, Kuwait, Malaysia

F18 E/F:
Australia

Expected Australia, the F18E/F will be a temporarily solution.
Switzerland: Gripen E/F. Canada: F35. Finland and Malaysia interested in the F35, Spain: F35B? Kuwait:?
Belgium:? (When they decide for replacement of the F16, probably the F35).
Brazil: Rafale ? (After the deal with India, Dassault probably has a very good change to win this deal)

Prospects, exporting the F18, are not that good.
Offline

redbird87

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 176
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2007, 20:00

Unread post23 Aug 2013, 03:37

madrat wrote:Its times like these I'm surprised that Israel hasn't opted for F/A-18's so that they could fly clandestine missions out to the middle of nowhere only to be seen flying impossibly far missions. (Obviously with the plausible deniability intact of its ally that allowed it to refuel aboard ship.)



The thing with the defense of Israel, is that the country is very very thin abreast. Enemies taking off from Syria, Egypt, and Jordan can penetrate Israeli airspace a few minutes after taking off. So, Israeli air defense aircraft need to be able to go ballistic and gain high altitude VERY quickly when scrambled. This is the forte of the F-15 and to a lessor extent the F-16, and not the F/A 18.
Offline

awsome

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 168
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2008, 03:11
  • Location: vancouver

Unread post24 Aug 2013, 16:28

discofishing wrote:Who says Israel is going to use F-16s and F-15s?



Israel has subs.... why not a cruise missile strike. It would be much simpler and avoid the risk of tangling with any Iranian aircraft or SAMs.
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2346
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post24 Aug 2013, 22:11

The RAAF F/A-18Fs are not a stopgap, despite inital claims. They are ordering 12 EA-18s (Confirmed March 2013) and probably 12 more F/A-18Fs.

As for F-14 vs F-15; The Iranian F-14s have TCS for which is an early FLIR/OLS system. This would make it significantly easier to detect/identify the F-15 and other jets in the strike package. On the flip side, the F-14 doesn't carry AIM-120 AMRAAMs, only AIM-7, AIM-9 and AIM-54 Phoenix.

It would be a mistake to conclude the Iranians are not developing newer missiles, perhaps with Russian assistance for the F-14.
http://www.armedforces-int.com/news/ira ... nched.html
Offline

Siesta

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 351
  • Joined: 02 May 2004, 06:18

Unread post25 Aug 2013, 21:35

.. lets take a look at this engagement..

January 6, 1999 - About 10:15 a.m. yesterday (2:15 a.m. EST) two Iraqi MIG-25s illuminated, or targeted, two U.S. Air Force jets patrolling the "no-fly" zone southeast of Baghdad near the town of An-Nukhayb. In response, the U.S. planes, based at Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia, fired one Sparrow missile and three AIM-120 Amraam missiles. The precision-guided missiles missed their targets when Iraqi pilots "turned sharply and beat a hasty retreat out of the 'no-fly' zone," said Bacon.

About 15 minutes later, when two other Iraqi MIG-25s dipped below the southern "no-fly" zone's 33rd parallel, two Navy F-14 Tomcats from the aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson, aware of the incident that had just occurred, fired two Phoenix missiles, the Navy's only long-range air-to-air missiles. The planes were near the town of Al Kut southwest of Baghdad.
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1421
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post25 Aug 2013, 21:56

What is the likely hood the IDF could get some of their old F-4Es in running condition and conduct a strike, painted in IAF markings?
Offline

asianviper

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 29
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2008, 18:20

Unread post26 Aug 2013, 10:44

awsome wrote:
discofishing wrote:Who says Israel is going to use F-16s and F-15s?



Israel has subs.... why not a cruise missile strike. It would be much simpler and avoid the risk of tangling with any Iranian aircraft or SAMs.



That could also be an option. The Israeli Navy has 4 Dolphin class submarines that could provide them with that option as well The Dolphins are equipped with sub launched cruise missiles that have either a conventional or nuclear warhead.
That said It would be interesting to find out the anti cruise missile capabilities of the Iranian forces to actually be able to intercept these missiles. Im sure the air defence radar coverage over Iran isnt complete.

My personal feeling would be an Israeli air force strike package just to make a point to Iran that this is what we can do to you.
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1421
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post28 Aug 2013, 01:57

Lets just get SUPER crazy with the strike thing! Here's the plan.

1. Borrow decommissioned carrier from USN
2. Disguise it as a hybrid tanker/cargo ship and remove island
3. Upgrade 10 F-4Es with all the latest OTS avionics and paint them like IAF Phantoms
4. Upgrade the F-4Es structures to something comparable to an F-4S and then beyond so they can operate from flattops
5. Get IDF pilots carrier qualified and trained on other relevant things
6. Buy V-22s for CSAR and refueling support
7. Sneak into Iranian airspace, bomb the nuke stuff at night
8. Land back on carriers and put Phantoms below deck at night
10. Sneak out at night.
11. Write novel of events 20 years after they happen

PEACE OF CAKE!!!!
Offline

neurotech

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2346
  • Joined: 09 May 2012, 21:34

Unread post28 Aug 2013, 07:19

discofishing wrote:Lets just get SUPER crazy with the strike thing! Here's the plan.

1. Borrow decommissioned carrier from USN
2. Disguise it as a hybrid tanker/cargo ship and remove island
3. Upgrade 10 F-4Es with all the latest OTS avionics and paint them like IAF Phantoms
4. Upgrade the F-4Es structures to something comparable to an F-4S and then beyond so they can operate from flattops
5. Get IDF pilots carrier qualified and trained on other relevant things
6. Buy V-22s for CSAR and refueling support
7. Sneak into Iranian airspace, bomb the nuke stuff at night
8. Land back on carriers and put Phantoms below deck at night
10. Sneak out at night.
11. Write novel of events 20 years after they happen

PEACE OF CAKE!!!!

What would be more likely is a Israeli KC-135 tanker pretending to be an airliner with F-16s in tight formation. This could confuse radar into thinking its a single large jet and the fighters could fly long range with tanker support.
Offline

hb_pencil

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 870
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2011, 21:50

Unread post29 Aug 2013, 09:30

m wrote:
1st503rdsgt wrote:Internationally, I've always gotten the impression that the F/A-18 only wins customers who are put off by the cost of the F-15, but still need a little more than what the F-16 has to offer. Israel doesn't really fit into that bracket.


And how much of a export success the F18 really has been in all these years?

Basically the F18 is a design from the sixties (N-300), evolved in the P-530 cobra > YFF17
Introduced in 1983 as F18.

Exported Hornets, not that many numbers, to only seven countries. Plus one country the F18 E/F, only 24 till so far exported.

F18 Hornet:
Australia, Canada, Switzerland, Finland, Spain, Kuwait, Malaysia
.


In the 1980s the F/A-18 offered a far better out of the box multirole capability than the F-16. That's why the CAF chose it in 1981: according to our evaluation, it wasn't even close. The cost figures, at least in the 1980s, was pretty even. Considering the problems with the early -200, the cost argument even skews to the Hornet.

Politics and interoperability played a major part in initial selections. European Participating Governments was a consortium created to facilitate the introduction of the F-16... those were the original NATO partners (DK, NL, DK, NR), who also cooperated closely with the USAF. The other early adopters went to the F/A-18: Australia, Canada and Spain. I suspect that as you go to the 1990s, the cost and capability arguments turn towards the F-16.

Israel chose the F-16 early, before the F/A-18 was available in 1978. Afterwards it just made sense to keep buying the same due to commonality issues,
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2793
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post29 Aug 2013, 13:20

hb_pencil: That's also what Finland found out when selecting new fighter aircraft in early 90's. F/A-18 C/D Hornet was found out to have very economical lifetime costs and it offered most capability of the candidates we considered and tested (JAS-39 Gripen, Mirage 2000-5, F-16 Block 40 and MiG-29). Especially the radar, EW suite and weapons system were found out to be the best and most mature. With F404-GE-402 EPE engines the performance is very good indeed and acceleration is excellent. Of course for Israel F-16/F-15 combo was very good

For Israel vs. Iran scenario there are also some MiG-29As in Iranian service, but unless heavily upgraded would be more of a nuisance than really dangerous threat. Of course even obsolete fighter aircraft can be somewhat dangerous in right circumstances, but I don't see Iranian Air Force as a serious threat for the potential IAF strike package. Now if they had F-14Ds with up-to-date weapons, things would be slightly more challenging.
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1421
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post29 Aug 2013, 22:46

neurotech wrote:
discofishing wrote:Lets just get SUPER crazy with the strike thing! Here's the plan.

1. Borrow decommissioned carrier from USN
2. Disguise it as a hybrid tanker/cargo ship and remove island
3. Upgrade 10 F-4Es with all the latest OTS avionics and paint them like IAF Phantoms
4. Upgrade the F-4Es structures to something comparable to an F-4S and then beyond so they can operate from flattops
5. Get IDF pilots carrier qualified and trained on other relevant things
6. Buy V-22s for CSAR and refueling support
7. Sneak into Iranian airspace, bomb the nuke stuff at night
8. Land back on carriers and put Phantoms below deck at night
10. Sneak out at night.
11. Write novel of events 20 years after they happen

PEACE OF CAKE!!!!

What would be more likely is a Israeli KC-135 tanker pretending to be an airliner with F-16s in tight formation. This could confuse radar into thinking its a single large jet and the fighters could fly long range with tanker support.


What happens if they have to strike multiple sites at the same time? What happens if one of those F-14s, by chance, had a working AAX-1 TV Camera under the nose? Would be hard to tell the difference between an IDF Phantom and an IAF Phantom. An airliner with a boom hanging on the back end? Not so much!
Offline

wilder_bill

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 03 Dec 2006, 07:20

Unread post01 Sep 2013, 14:35

This is a pretty comprehensive look at the subject from 2009
Things have become a bit more complicated since Osirak.
As far as the F-14, I would find it highly unlikely they would not have a plan to minimize that threat.
On the whole though, an awful lot would have to go right to pull it off.


http://csis.org/files/media/csis/pubs/0 ... keiran.pdf
Offline

awsome

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 168
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2008, 03:11
  • Location: vancouver

Unread post07 Sep 2013, 12:42

How about using a highly modified tanker? Install an elevator and a flat deck . At 1500 ft would you need catapults? Sail right up to the coast, launch at night, hit your targets, then fly home with tanker support part way.
Previous

Return to F-16 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests