Israel to attack Iran

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dexter Rutecki

A very detailed MIT analysis of a possible strike on Iran, and it clarifies that Israel has ways of solving the range problem--most probably by using their own KC-707 tankers over the Mediterranean. Kind of interesting, but too long for general interest: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/....7?cookieSet=1

---

Linky no worky.

Are they suggesting go through Turkey? Certainly a possibility. Turkey and Israel are open allies and exercise quite often together. Israel used Turkish airspace for the Syrian raid and got only a very very minor slap on the wrist from Ankara about it.

It would be more feasible through Turkey logistically, but still doubtful. Turkey has a very highly advanced radar network, so it couldnt pull off plausible denialibty very well.

and

Ankara would not want a really pissed off Iran.

edit- found the article i think, reading it now.
http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/...ec.2007.31.4.7

Go through here, and click on the PDF thing: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/...ec.2007.31.4.7

Over the Med??? Where the fuck do they exactly think Iran is located????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Balls

Over the Med??? Where the fuck do they exactly think Iran is located????

---

Shit tons (<- the official measurement i might add) of fuel is used up in takeoff and the initial climb when an aircraft is heavily loaded. By climbing to altitude, refueling there and then ingressing through Turkey it would give a little padding with regard to inbound fuel management. However, as it noted in the article, it is during the egress that it would be essential. Straight and fast out of Iran, over Turkey, hit the tankers, then land.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gripen

Noted, but what platforms were they using to do so? Highly doubtful they could escort said fighters to Iran.

Syria is also their backyard, ELINT isn't hard for them to come by. The Iranians have played with the US enough in the Gulf to be smart enough to be hiding true electronic signatures to a large degree.

Plus, the dispersion of the targets in Iran would prove large scale ECW limited. The dispersion would be a huge difficulty in itself. In order not to "wake up" air defenses prematurely the ingress and egress of the strike packages would have to be incredibly well orchestrated. Something that the aforementioned fuel management issues would reek havoc with.

I do think there are way Israel *might* deal with this, but I think I'll leave it at that for now.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ankf00

while true and an obstacle not to be easily dismissed, israel also has formidable EW capabilities. note that in the syrian raid, syrian capability was blacked out for a portion of time. and syria does have some of russia's best AA systems

---

Dude, Bekah Valley was what? SA-6s?. Flying against S-300s would make me shit myself. Simply "jamming" a Flaplid isn't exactly a fix.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PrankMonkey

Dude, Bekah Valley was what? SA-6s?. Flying against S-300s would make me shit myself. Simply "jamming" a Flaplid isn't exactly a fix.

---

There is still some controversy if Iran has SA-10 batteries or not, but yea.

Flying against a battery of them would not be fun. A near 200km range, against targets flying nearly 6,000mph (i.e. *possibly* ballistic missiles) and the ability to target cruise missiles, possibly even PGM's.

And the Flaplid is a very powerful radar and by all accounts tough to jam. (The US bought one and the Czech Republic has brought theirs to a few NATO exercises.)

Let us not forget Isreal has subs with cruise missles. The newest cruise missles have a 400 nautical mile range. Sitting at the top of the gulf they could take out air defenses with those missles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gripen

There is still some controversy if Iran has SA-10 batteries or not, but yea.

Flying against a battery of them would not be fun. A near 200km range, against targets flying nearly 6,000mph (i.e. *possibly* ballistic missiles) and the ability to target cruise missiles, possibly even PGM's.

And the Flaplid is a very powerful radar and by all accounts tough to jam. (The US bought one and the Czech Republic has brought theirs to a few NATO exercises.)

---

So how much is dependent on some young enlisted kid sitting behind a screen paying attention to what he is supposed to be doing and not surfing porn on the internet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AKPogue

So how much is dependent on some young enlisted kid sitting behind a screen paying attention to what he is supposed to be doing and not surfing porn on the internet?

---

bingo....

very
It all matters little what it can do if the person behind the controls can't.
But you know that:smile:

Getting hot in your neck of the woods yet?

Who says this attack has to come from the air?

The Israel army and intelligence is supposed to be the shit, so why couldn't they use a bunch of cash, a few truck bombs and a few missiles to take out a few important facilities and a few important people and call it good? Fight fire with fire.

Regardless, they'll need to shit or get off the pot while Bush is still in power.

Unlike Iraq, I think the element of surprise is not in their favor. The US will never refuel them or let them land in Afghanistan, otherwise we might as well do it ourseleves and do it right. The targets are spread out and hardened. Iran probably has legitiimate AA all over the place.

Cant see it being done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gripen

bingo....

very
It all matters little what it can do if the person behind the controls can't.
But you know that:smile:

Getting hot in your neck of the woods yet?

---

Uh yeah!!! Doesn't matter too much since I only have 11 days left. Then a break for awhile and hopefully the job I have lined up will come through. It is in this neck of the woods.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cono Este

Unlike Iraq, I think the element of surprise is not in their favor. The US will never refuel them or let them land in Afghanistan, otherwise we might as well do it ourseleves and do it right. The targets are spread out and hardened. Iran probably has legitiimate AA all over the place.

Cant see it being done.

---

If you want to put your life in the hands of some private sitting at a computer screen at 3am go for it. Otherwise ask the Soviet Union how hard it is to penetrate supposedly impenetrable airspace.

http://www.history.com/this-day-in-h...rticle&id=2681

I didnt sat it was impenetrable, I said an Israeli airstike wouldnt happen. Too far, too spread out. They probably have redundant facilities anyway. They would have had a better chance flying over Iraqi airspace, not coalition. Hard to do that without our permission, and a 1 way kamikazee mission without us refueling re fueling them over iraq aint their style.

I don't think it would be hard for Israel to get permission to fly over coalition airspace or get refueled with the current administration. The best equipment in the world is only as good as its operator. Right now whoever is sitting at some monitor on an AA system isn't really paying attention. Why because no one is expecting an attack. You try it real early in the morning and someone is paying even less attention. People only have a short attention span when nothing is going on so someone trying to sneak into a country when they are not expecting it wouldn't be that hard. We have done it countless times over the years as have the Israeli's.

Nothing is going to happen until after the elections unless Iran gets really bold. They might even get support from Obama if he pulls out a win.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/ar...w_of_fidelity/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

Are Summits IAF fighter pilot pajamas one piece with the built in feet and the long zipper?

---

Heh. That made me laugh. Summit is just a military and airplane nerd. Besides, he was raised as an Air Force (US) brat, so his dad brainwashed him into a life of airplane nerdism, just like my dad did to me!

That's summit on the right, taken right before bed time on a camping trip recently.
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/images/080415_idf.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

The number of aircraft the Israelis have with the range to hit these targets and provide support is probably not large enough to guarantee success with conventional ordinance.

---

Nonsense.

The IAF is fully capable of deploying deep-strike packages into Iran (or anywhere in the middle east) using F-16I's, F15E's, and their tanker fleet.

But I doubt it would be a single strike operation...but rather a series of strikes lasting 12 - 24 hours, or so.

They have approximately 324 F-16's, and about 25 F15E's. About 80 of the 16's are F-16I's. The I's have a very good combat radius even without mid-air refueling.

Also, I think the US would in fact grant Israel overflight, A/R tracks, and AEW platforms within Iraqi airspace.

-Astro

Quote:

---

Tehran has also threatened to retaliate against Israel -- believed to have the Middle East's only atomic arsenal -- and U.S. targets in the Gulf for any attack on Iran.

---

Israel attacks Iran, at which time Iran retaliates against US targets. That would be one huge mistake on the part of Iran.

-Astro

Iran does have biological and chemical weapon capability.

Where are you getting these 80 F-16I numbers? Last I heard they had 20-25.

PS sustained operations against Iran (instead of coordinated surprise strikes) mean that all of their IAD will be online and attentive... all their interceptors will be up and looking hard. This requires even more aircraft for EW, SEAD and air superiority. It also means no chance for plausible deniability for nations over which IAF aircraft will transit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

Iran does have biological and chemical weapon capability.

---

If Iran used chem or bio against Isreal, Iran would be a radioactive parking lot within a matter of hours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

Where are you getting these 80 F-16I numbers? Last I heard they had 20-25.

---

Janes Defence News. The IAF F-16I fleet was approximately 75 in March, and they have taken delivery of additional aircraft since then. Of course, exactly how many of them are actually FMC is unknown, obviously.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

PS sustained operations against Iran (instead of coordinated surprise strikes) mean that all of their IAD will be online and attentive... all their interceptors will be up and looking hard. This requires even more aircraft for EW, SEAD and air superiority. It also means no chance for plausible deniability for nations over which IAF aircraft will transit.

---

IMO, the target sets are too widely dispersed to wrap it in one single package.

I might be wrong, but I spent 22 years in the USAF...and a fair amount of time building air tasking orders out of the JAOC in Riyadh...so that's what experience I am basing my opinion on.

-Astro

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AstroPax

IMO, the target sets are too widely dispersed to wrap it in one single package.

I might be wrong, but I spent 22 years in the USAF...and a fair amount of time building air tasking orders out of the JAOC in Riyadh...so that's what experience I am basing my opinion on.

-Astro

---

I defer to your expertise, but do you really think they have the assets to get around the difficulties I mentioned militarily and diplomatically?

I mean... if so... I hope they git'r done...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AstroPax

Janes Defence News. The IAF F-16I fleet was approximately 75 in March, and they have taken delivery of additional aircraft since then. Of course, exactly how many of them are actually FMC is unknown, obviously.


-Astro

---

They have 102 ordered, don't know how many have been delivered, but 80 does seem a reasonable number. Last report was two deliveries a month.

Where are you getting the range numbers? I have never found a agreeable estimate for the I model, either (block 52/60) Greek, UAE or Israeli. Some say 2,000km some 1500 and one even at sub 1000.

Just two articles for food for thought. First one is a World Tribune article and second id the US Army War College paper they note.

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtri...ael_12_05.html

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute...les/PUB629.pdf (page 133 - 156 deal directly with this discussion)

Bear in mind this was written in late 2005 so thing shave changed a bit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gripen

Where are you getting the range numbers? I have never found a agreeable estimate for the I model, either (block 52/60) Greek, UAE or Israeli. Some say 2,000km some 1500 and one even at sub 1000.

---

Yeah, who knows. Looking at the things, they can hold some gas for sure. I'm not saying they can do it un-refueled. Maybe they can, maybe not. But Israel has tankers, so the radius of an I model is probably a mute point, as far as Iran is concerned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jer

It's called a joke there Yahoo Serious. You can't honestly tell me you've been posting here all this time and you still haven't seen The Big Lebowski? Really, Cliff, try to find some sort of sense of humor. That way you won't come off looking like a butthurt douche like you just did.;)

---

OK, maybe you're right.
Truth is I just saw The Big Lewbowski for the very first time a few weeks ago. I bought it based on the chatter on this here forum.
I'm going to watch it again. It's funny and all, but it seems more than that. Is it sad, too? I'm going to have to watch it again.