|
Originally Posted by Ninthace
(Post 12061135)
Right in the saucer.
|
A storm in the proverbial teacup….
|
And there is more burnt out US aircraft.
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/iran...-base-11282161 https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....40951e84a.jpeg https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....e43b3b0e6.jpeg |
Originally Posted by NutLoose
(Post 12061166)
|
Originally Posted by k3k3
(Post 12061106)
I was surprised to see the US aircraft so neatly parked in box to make it easier for the Iranians to hit them. Have they forgotten about dispersals?
The US only have/had 14/15 active E-3 aircraft. |
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
(Post 12061172)
The destroyed E-3 was not parked alongside other aircraft.
Spoiler
|
Originally Posted by Geriaviator
(Post 12060858)
@ artee
Listen colonial chappie, I'll have you know that Lord Hermer is British Attorney General and a Very Important Panjandrum in the UK government. He keeps us all right on international law and was mainly behind the UK's kind donation of the Chagos Islands plus a small donation of £35 billion to Mauritius to help smooth out past injustices imposed by England a few centuries back. It is reported that he is already planning strict measures on every possible woke legal procedure to delay any action whatever. These Iranians had better prepare for him to launch a very strong solicitor's letter warning the Iranians to cease and desist from blocking the Strait of Hormuz under penalty of severe writs being fired in their direction. |
I doubt the USAF is overly worried about losing a few 65-year-old KC-135s.
The E-3 AWACS is a different story... As k3k3 notes, they don't have many to start with, and IIRC, that $100 million price tag was when they were new (in 1980's money) - replacements will be much, much more. |
It’s what you get when you think you are invulnerable. Just look at the parking.
Worryingly though is taking out Iranian comms has side effects Overnight, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian issued a statement apologizing for attacks this past week against neighboring countries, claiming that some attacks were carried out independently by regional commanders without directive due to loss of communication, further stating that the Temporary Leadership Council has ordered a halt to attacks on these countries unless their territory is used to attack Iran. |
Originally Posted by NutLoose
(Post 12061185)
Overnight, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian issued a statement apologizing for attacks this past week against neighboring countries, claiming that some attacks were carried out independently by regional commanders without directive due to loss of communication, further stating that the Temporary Leadership Council has ordered a halt to attacks on these countries unless their territory is used to attack Iran.
|
The entire USAF E-3 fleet is supposed to be retired by the end of the current decade. From reading online there appear to be 15 left in service from a fleet of 31 with the others having already been retired. The E-7 will be the replacement.
|
Originally Posted by Ronald Reagan
(Post 12061216)
The entire USAF E-3 fleet is supposed to be retired by the end of the current decade. From reading online there appear to be 15 left in service from a fleet of 31 with the others having already been retired. The E-7 will be the replacement.
|
Originally Posted by GlobalNav
(Post 12061225)
Considering the Air Force's recent lack of enthusiasm for the E-7, I hope they can pull E-3 replacements from the boneyard, or build their own E-2D.
I might be recalling this in the presumably different context of (iirc) GMTI, Ground Moving Target Identification capability. The point isn't that the E-3 turned out to be, uh, vulnerable indeed. The previous discussion as I recall it was focused on lack of stealth characteristics. In any event, if the Warning and Control System capabilities provided by the E-3 AWACS aircraft can actually be provided instead by space systems, one has to wonder to what degree are such space-based capabilities classified? In other words, losing an E-3's capacity might not be so significant but the reason why not isn't available in the public domain. |
Originally Posted by DogTailRed2
(Post 12060434)
Maybe I got that wrong. Can you use it to take out boats, planes and the like?
If you are an inanimate object then you should be very very concerned. In the military, you know you are an inanimate object if you wake up and find that you have been painted white. |
Israeli forces reportedly struck Iran’s Tabriz Petrochemical Plant tonight, setting the facility ablaze. https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....d6492edab.jpeg |
I seem to recall that the basis for canceling the E-7 program, which was stated by those favoring cancelation, was that space systems will provide (or already are providing) the capability. Plus, airborne platforms have become too vulnerable, they also said. I noted previously that they deployed at least 5 x E-2Ds into theatre nearly 2 weeks ago. https://www.pprune.org/military-avia...l#post12053734 |
Originally Posted by GlobalNav
(Post 12061225)
I hope they can pull E-3 replacements from the boneyard
I don't see that happening. |
Originally Posted by WillowRun 6-3
(Post 12061234)
The point isn't that the E-3 turned out to be, uh, vulnerable indeed. The previous discussion as I recall it was focused on lack of stealth characteristics.
|
FT: https://archive.is/20260330014146/ht...b-23b7884031f5
Donald Trump says US could ‘take the oil in Iran’ Donald Trump has said he wants to “take the oil in Iran” and could seize the export hub of Kharg Island, as the US sends thousands of troops to the Middle East. The US president told the FT in an interview on Sunday that his “preference would be to take the oil”, comparing the potential move to Venezuela where the US intends to control the oil industry “indefinitely” following its capture of strongman leader Nicolįs Maduro in January. The president’s comments come as the US-Israeli war against Iran has thrust the Middle East into crisis and sent the price of oil surging by more than 50 per cent in a month. Brent crude rose above $116 a barrel on Monday morning in Asia, near its highest level since the conflict began. Trump said: “To be honest with you, my favourite thing is to take the oil in Iran but some stupid people back in the US say: ‘why are you doing that?’ But they’re stupid people.” Such a move would involve seizing Kharg Island through which most of Iran’s oil is exported. Trump has been beefing up US forces in the region, with the Pentagon ordering the deployment of 10,000 troops trained to seize and hold land. About 3,500 troops arrived in the region on Friday, including roughly 2,200 Marines. Another 2,200 Marines are en route, while thousands of troops from the 82nd Airborne Division have also been ordered to the region. But an assault on the export hub would be risky, raising the chances of more US casualties and extending the cost and duration of the war. “Maybe we take Kharg Island, maybe we don’t. We have a lot of options,” Trump told the FT. “It would also mean we had to be there [in Kharg Island] for a while.” Asked about the state of Iranian defence on Kharg Island he said: “I don’t think they have any defence. We could take it very easily.”....... |
Ain't taking anything other than casualties. Strategic genius. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 15:37. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.