The Iranian Army’s air defense system shot down another US F-15 fighter jet as part of Iran’s response to the Zionist-American aggression.

  • ByteJunk@lemmy.worldEnglish
    211·
    24 hours ago

    I’m surprised how we’re not seeing Chinese AA systems randomly show up across Iran.

    Not officially supplied by China, of course - sold to some neighbour, and mysteriously and “illegally” moved to Iran, along with some Chinese passer-by to monitor the systems performance against real American combat aircraft.

    Especially against the F-35s, I assume they’d want to collect data.

    • TheObviousSolution@lemmy.caEnglish
      6·
      15 hours ago

      There famously have been and there has been ample news about them. Right now they are getting mocked because they could not stand up to the latest and greatest in the US military arsenal, but they also had to knock them out first and employ suitable modern stealth and electromagnetic warfare to take them down first. China is very much training up on that data, specially with the possibility of weakened US forces unable to address possible future attempts at Taiwan.

      • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        10·
        14 hours ago

        At this rate they might be able to soon convince Taiwan to join them out of their free will to protect against American aggression.

    • kreskin@lemmy.worldEnglish
      341·
      1 day ago

      Maybe. Although the US government lying about literally everything is standard operating procedure so we cant be sure either way. Getting our news from a magic 8 ball toy would be more accurate than US government statements.

    • paraphrand@lemmy.worldEnglish
      365·
      1 day ago

      I heard someone suggest they are claiming friendly fire on the first ones to lessen the embarrassment of being taken out by the enemy. So that’s just conjecture.

      Anyone think that is plausible? They said back during recent conflicts the US would do similar things to save face.

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        533·
        1 day ago

        It’s possible, though I don’t think it’s likely.

        Generally speaking, USAF doctrine heavily emphasizes SEAD (Supression of Enemy Air Defenses) deploying in concert and close coordination with any sort of non-stealthy strike mission, in the interest of minimizing the risk of combat losses - and by all accounts, the USAF is very fucking good at SEAD (having developed the concept - also known as “Wild Weasel” sorties - back in the Vietnam War, after USN and USAF began taking significant losses to Soviet/Vietnamese SAMs, and refining it a lot since, both in terms of tech and doctrine).

        For strike planes to be caught flat-footed like that, I would expect that they were out of range of any possible Iranian SAMs, and thus were not in the mindset of constant vigilance, and moreover their SEAD support was probably not either (or had split off to land at another base altogether).

        Also: if the shootdown was from a Patriot, their RWR (basically: “what radar is looking at me”) was probably saying it was a friendly radar, and the pilots may have even thought the Patriot (or similar non-Russian system) was giving them cover from something they didn’t see, and they reacted late as a result.

        Thus, I do think that the blue-on-blue explanation is likely accurate - especially considering it was three F-15Es, and not just a single one-off shoot down. IMO, someone (not Iranian) was running air defense in the area and didn’t properly check their deconfliction and IFF.

        Edit: actually, it appears it was probably a Kuwaiti F/A-18. And as the article points out, if the pilot used Sidewinders, there would be zero warning, as the seeker is passive. However, I’m pretty sure standard loadouts are for a pair of heat seekers and the remaining pylons loaded with AMRAAMs… so that would only explain two of them. We’ll hear more about this in the coming days, most likely.

        • AnyOldName3@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          5 hours ago

          The article is a bit untrustworthy as it keeps switching between Hornet and Super Hornet, even though they’re different planes, and an expert would know that.

        • scarabic@lemmy.worldEnglish
          2·
          14 hours ago

          I think you addressed who is better equipped to actually shoot down American planes - do you also have an opinion on whether the administration would prefer to credit friendly fire over enemy fire in order to save face? I’m really not sure it saves any face. And wouldn’t command want us to be outraged by the enemy killing our pilots?

            • scarabic@lemmy.worldEnglish
              1·
              13 hours ago

              Can you help men understand it? A friendly fire incident sounds a lot like incompetence. How does that play better than an actual combat death from fighting the enemy we went to fight?

              • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                3·
                13 hours ago

                I mean… it is incompetence, but it’s incompetence/process/doctrinal failure on the part of the Kuwaiti Air Force, not the USAF. Which is the only thing KegsBreath would give a shit about in this context.

                • scarabic@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  2·
                  13 hours ago

                  Okay so if the friendly fire is a from an ally, you can throw that ally under the bus.

                  Would the same apply if it were American friendly fire? Does it still save face then?

        • paraphrand@lemmy.worldEnglish
          22·
          1 day ago

          Thanks for the reply. With this administration, its easy to assume the truth about anything is being bent.

            • postmateDumbass@lemmy.worldEnglish
              4·
              1 day ago

              I could easily see there having been an order to not share flight plans with our allies.

              Stupid, but entirely possible given curcumstances.

              • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                3·
                23 hours ago

                And that sort of crap would absolutely harm deconfliction efforts between the US and allied forces, and increase the likelihood of this sort of thing happening. So yeah, I would not be shocked to eventually learn that that played a big part here.

      • mlg@lemmy.worldEnglish
        6·
        1 day ago

        If that were the case, Iran would have claimed the air kills which afaik they haven’t.

        Iran did claim to shoot down an F-35 last year which was an obvious lie, so I wouldn’t really put too much weight on this claim.

        That being said, an F-15 is more plausible of a target against some hidden SAMs. Even Iraq shot down a prrtty decent handful of aircraft during the gulf war, despite losing their airforce in a matter of hours just because they had a crap ton of SAMs on the ground.

        • anton@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          3·
          21 hours ago

          Iran did claim to shoot down an F-35 last year which was an obvious lie, […]

          So Iran is behind the F-35 ejecting it’s pilot in a thunderstorm and flying away?
          I thought it was just trying to get out of South Carolina.

      • humanspiral@lemmy.caEnglish
        8·
        1 day ago

        Kuwaiti army may not have approved of F15 sorties. Bases were supposedly evacuated and not to be used for military operations, so another explanation, is the memo to the contrary not getting to everyone needed.

    • Gates9@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      39·
      1 day ago

      Do you also believe that two jets “fell” off the carrier deck of the USS Harry Truman last year?

      • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        19·
        1 day ago

        Yes, because that’s a thing that can happen in carrier ops. While uncommon, it is absolutely possible. Mistakes and equipment failures happen, and carrier ops tend to be very unforgiving.

        I get being skeptical about shit the regime says, seriously, and generally speaking I’m right there with you. But you should also try to understand more about the intricacies of these sorts of things before immediately assuming it’s a cover up or whatever.

        Edit: and here is my explanation of why I think the first 3 F-15s that were downed were actually blue-on-blue engagements, and not cover for something else.

  • Trilogy3452@lemmy.worldEnglish
    661·
    1 day ago

    No location, no reference to the “other” shoot downs. Feels like someone’s twitter account level of journalism

    • Threeme2189@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      142·
      24 hours ago

      That’s exactly what it is. They didn’t even shoot down previous ones, that was a different country altogether.

    • humanspiral@lemmy.caEnglish
      1114·
      1 day ago

      One of the few uncensored news agencies. It is an IRGC claim. There are specific IRGC claims about important targets in Israel, that Israel could rebut by showing intact airports and nuclear plants, but even though there are significant missile hits in Israel, they show a scattering of supposed civilian damage. If relying on western news, you would have thought Ukraine was winning all along.

      Denials may be made independent of truth.

      • Trilogy3452@lemmy.worldEnglish
        111·
        1 day ago

        I think we’re talking about different things. I expect some basic pieces of information when publishing any facts, and there are none. There’s just a hint on the timing (date of the article/post) but not much else

  • perestroika@slrpnk.netEnglish
    25·
    1 day ago

    Since the claim originates from an Iranian news agency and there are currently no photos of wreckage, I would wait for additional confirmation, but the publisher of the news is Yemeni (they are allied with Iran) so they would likely not wait.

    This is certainly possible, everything that flies can be shot down and F-15 is not the hardest of them, as some guy in Kuwait accidentally proved when dots on his radar got too confusing.

  • Dicska@lemmy.worldEnglish
    484·
    1 day ago

    First F-15: “it was friendly fire”. Second F-15: “shoots down another F-15”.

    Great title, BTW: it shows again that ‘US’ is somewhere it definitely shouldn’t be.

    • nocturne@slrpnk.netEnglish
      312·
      1 day ago

      We cannot even take care of our own citizens, we should not be wasting money on senseless aggression across the globe.

      • Kalon@feddit.onlineEnglish
        192·
        1 day ago

        It’s a lot of work to distract people from the president raping children.

        • GuyIncognito@lemmy.caEnglish
          91·
          1 day ago

          It’s not just to distract from the president raping children, it’s also because Israel has the pictures and videos of the president raping children

        • Tollana1234567@lemmy.todayEnglish
          1·
          24 hours ago

          yup also to out anymore high profile politicians, ceos. ONE OF israels former politician, barak was raping people at epstein island.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.worldEnglish
        212·
        1 day ago

        we should not be wasting money

        Every time I hear someone complain about how much money this is costing, I picture that bloody backpack from the girl’s school we bombed.

        The American value of human life must be net-negative at this point.

        • Miaou@jlai.luEnglish
          2·
          13 hours ago

          All the mainstream “opposition” outlets talking about the 6 poor US soldiers who died, as if these consenting grown up men are victims and not perpetrators, without even mentioning all the Iranian civilian death… I guess 9/11 only killed a dozen freedom fighters

        • driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.brEnglish
          9·
          1 day ago

          EPA already accounts as the value of Americans life as 0, it’s understandable that the military accounts for non Americans as negative value

        • kreskin@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          1 day ago

          It its any small comfort the US government doesnt value American citizens lives either.