Super happy fun times up north:
Two F-15E Strike Eagles maneuver to bomb a ground target during a training flight April 20 over Alaska. The F-15Es are assigned to the 90th Fighter Squadron at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska, which traces its history back to August 1917. An array of avionics and electronics systems gives the F-15E the capability to fight at low altitude, day or night, and in all weather. The F-15E at Elmendorf AFB will soon be replaced by the F-22 Raptor.
An HC-130 Hercules refuels an HH-60G Pave Hawk helicopter April 17 during a combat search and rescue training mission Red Flag-Alaska 07-1 at Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska. The helicopters are assigned to the 210th Rescue Squadron Det. 1. Both photos courtesy of the US Air Force.
Ahhhh Red Flag. Gives me warm fuzzies.
Although I’m not quite sure why we’re replacing Strikes with Raptors. I thought we dropped the F/A designator, with the understanding that the Raptor wasn’t particularly well suited to the ground attack role.
Replacing F-15c’s with the -22 makes perfect sense. But our vaunted Strike Eagles?
Great pics, John! A few months ago I was flying in a Beech King Air from Anchorage to Emmonak in western Alaska. There were 3 groups of 5 F-15s each flying near us, heading out for exercises in western MOAs. They sure looked good, passing us at the 2 and 10 oclock positions in formation, precision vapor trails. A sight to see.
From what I understand (sorry, no links to back this up) the AF is desparate to justify the F-22 and make it “multi-role” when it was designed for only air superiority. It has an internal weapons bay that they can shoe-horn a 1,000 pound bomb in, but nothing larger. This could be playing into the desire to use it to replace the Mudhen (that and the hen is getting a bit long in the tooth).
The F-35, again from what I understand, is a better platform all around in terms of multi-role capability, but I don’t think it was considered to replace the Mudhen.
Regardless, neat pics (in spite of one of them having Eagles in it!).
As an air dominance fighter, the F-22 is envisioned by the USAF to defeat enemy air and surface to air threats (supression of enemy air defenses [SEAD] — SAMs). It can internally carry 2 1,000lbs JDAMS (along with 2 AMRAAMS and 2 AIM-9 Sidewiders), and is being fitted for 8 250lbs as well. With the F-117 going away, the F-22 also becomes a stealthy deep-penerating air-to-ground platform capable of hitting high value or time-sensitive targets. And when stealth isn’t an issue — when operating in a permissive, sanitized environment or to do a “no-fly” zone, keep watch/keep the piece sortie, the Raptor can carry external weapons as well under the wings. So the net is the F-22 will replace the F-15, the F-15E and the F-117.
The F-35 is designed to be, as Kevin suggests, an all around mutli-role fighter which will replace the F-16, the F-18 (less Superhornet) and the AV-8B. It is supposed to replace the A-10 eventually, but that is a little hard to conceive since the F-35 won’t have the Warthog’s crowd-pleasing Gatling gun.
The F-35 also won’t have the survivability of the A-10. A few shrapnel hits in its plastic wing and a low-g turn will do the rest to rip it right off.
Pray tell the Air Force won’t be THAT dumb to replace what is probably the finest CAS bird around today with a plastic stealth plane.
That would be on the level of Army stupid.
I’m in navigator school to fly in the backseat of those gorgeous Strike Eagles! Why must I see these pictures now!? I still have well over a year until I climb in…
Great pics though!
I imagine the squadron will be shifting from an attack to an AD mission. The mudhens will probably end up in some lucky Guard squadron.
As to the F-35 replacing the A-10, you didn’t hear this from me, but the only reason the A-10 needs armor plating is because it’s so slow you might as well paint it green, give it rotors, and stick “ARMY” on the side. I could be wrong, but I think the attack pilots are going to appreciate the new thrust to weight ratio.
The F-22′s primary air-to-ground role will likely be as a double-digit SAM killer.
The A-10 is getting a new lease on life and will be around for a while longer. Besides the advantages already mentioned, the A-10 can fly slow and low, which makes it far superior in the CAS role to a fast-mover.
Hey, who wrote the caption for that first pic? There’s a remarkable lack of air-to-ground ordnance visible, for two a/c maneuvering to bomb a ground target!
Air Force website, Steve.
It’s part of a larger conspiracy, I’m sure.
your right, I see no BDU’s or any ordinance at all for a mud strike.
The strike Eagle will be around for a long time to come. It has a harder airframe than the C&D mod. The 22 is like a Navy ballistic missle sub, it is trying to find a job in the post cold war era. When I was assigned to the test wing in the mid 80′s we were doing evals with the 15E and it has capabilities that will carry it on for another 30 years. I remember when they said the F4E would be gone by 1980, it flew on.
With the end of the cold war, I used to make fun of the Lockheed engineers, imagining them shoving a Mk83 in the F-22 weapons bay with crowbars, and exclaiming “Look, we’re multi-role! Please don’t cancel the program!!!” Now that the aircraft is operational, I’ve developed a grudging respect for its capabilities though. Its integrated sensor suite, the AESA’s inherent capabilities as a High Power Microwave weapon, the plane’s LO features and (limited) internal payload (2×1000 lb class weapons, or 8×250 lb SDB’s like greg mentioned) make it a very capable SEAD platform, a mission we could never convince the Eagle mafia to pick up with the retirement of the F-4G. If the F-22 does become dedicated SEAD in PACAF, what will my old wing at Misawa do, and can they go back to the old “MJ” tail code instead of the ridiculous “WW”?
While it can carry big ordinance under the wings, using the F-22 as a bomb-truck is kind of like delivering pizzas in a Ferrari… you’re not using the vehicles’ strengths to your advantage. Going after bunkers, or other targets requiring a 2000 lb class weapon (or bigger), would be a task better suited to the legacy fighters, or the F-117 for a “day one/wave one” attack. The gap between the F-117 retirement and the F-35 to replace it in this role is the only thing making me uncomfortable in all of this.
I also love the A-10, though it’s spent its life as the red-headed stepchild in the AF family. The F-35 will replace it, but it will do so using different tactics and weapons. The F-35 won’t survive “down in the mud” for long it’s true (few aircraft would, which one reason why Desert Storm was mostly fought by the AF above 10,000′), but conversely, the A-10 would have a tough time providing CAS in an environment of double digit SAM’s. With the A-10 coming up for re-winging, they should be around for another 10-15 years, which I consider a good thing. Different tools for different environments.
The “WW” tail letters were the 57th fighter wing at Nellis in the 80′s. The tail letters were never for the base it was the wing designation. When i was at Elmendorf in the 70′s our Phantoms had “FC” on the tail. (Fu@*ing Cold!)
The A-10′s speed and loiter time make it the prefered CAS bird. F-16′s are sexy, but their “one pass, haul ass” mentality is not that of a true CAS pilot.
The A-10 followed in the traditions of the A-1 Skyraider (another FINE mud-mover in an Air Force that only seems to like fast and sexy). The strengths of the A-1 continue in the A-10 and could only be suitably replaced by a similar aircraft.
The F-35 will simply be NO substitute.
Mustang,
Were you 43rd or 18th at Elmendorf?
My father flew with the 43rd in the 78-81 time period.
I was in the 21st MMS and then in the 43rd weapons loading 77-80. Worked out of hanger 18 If I remember the hanger number correctly, It was the big black one one the far side of the base.
mustang, you’re close. The tailcode changed from “MJ” when the wing was designated the 432nd FW to “WW” when it became the 35th FW. The 57th Wing at Nellis had (and still has) the tailcode “WA”. The 35th FW had previously been located at George AFB, where it flew F-4G’s, and before that F-105G’s. I’ll admit though that the 70′s were a little before my time, and they may have moved tail codes around back then. The story I got from the rumor mill after I left Misawa was that the new Wing-King had flown out of George in the F-4G days, and knew that when that base closed in ’88, the “WW” wasn’t being used. With Misawa transitioning from Block 30 to Block 50 (with the HTS), he apparently got all nostalgic for the Wild Weasel mission and tailcode. This after our weapons guys had beaten into our heads for years that the Block 50, though much more capable a SEAD platform than the Block 30, was not as capable as the older F-4G’s. Though the change in wing designation was actually made by the then CSAF Gen McPeak, the rumor continued that the wing commander had a hand in it. I guess nostalgia wins out over common sense (or the whims of an O-7 and an O-10 win out over the teachings of O-3′s and O-4′s.)
This was the time when McPeak had decided to reorganize the AF to preserve unit designations with more “heritage”, the 432nd FW became the 35th FW. Apparently the 432nd’s record as the second highest scoring MiG killers in Vietnam (as the 432nd TRW) wasn’t heritage enough.
Not that I’m cynical about either point.
Getting back on topic for a second, with the Mudhens being replaced by F-22′s, anybody know who’s going to be left to drop large weapons (like AGM-130′s) in PACAF?
blotto, your right I had a brain fart. WW was at George the Wild Weasals. Nellis was “WA” for the 57th wing which had F4′s F15,16′s and F111 and F5′s when I was at Nellis in 80-82 , I was in the 474th fighter wing 429th sq. on F4-D’s.
The Strike Eagles will be around for a long time, Your right the 22 cant carry a large munition unless the have external capabilitys, which I doubt. Plus a 15E can fight it’s way in and fight its way out.