Challenge : Contest air superiority from F-15C
- Thread starter Khanzeer
- Start date
I was more thinking hundreds with cluster bomb anti-runway warheads would make up for that, especially as the AWACS/tankers are not going to fit into HAS and will likley mostly/all be sitting on a single base at start of the war as you get to start it and upkeep will make having one hub in peacetime very attractive to As treasury (probably shared with your national airline home hub?).
Last edited:
SsgtC
Banned
No, the CEP of SCUD varies from a low of 50 meters to a high of 3 kilometers. And the 50 meter CEP is not available until 1989, seven years after this scenario. Assuming the Soviets let Country B buy the newest version of the SCUD, the SCUD-C, it has a CEP of 700 meters. Unless you're planning on using a Nuke, you're not closing an airbase with em.
Edit to add: it's possible that B only buys SCUD-Bs. They have a CEP of 450 meters, but only half the range of the C (300km verses 600km).
The -23 and -25 aren't exactly known for their maneuverability. Your best bet is trying to get outside the fighter's radar acquisition cone. Or get out of range by turning tail and running like hell.
You bet.
IF?
The initiative is with "B" in this scenario and if they can pull off a "Six Day War" kind of strike on the airbase(s?) supporting the Tankers and AWACS it's as good as over.
The OP does not adequately describe the "political situation" between "A" & "B". Is "A" on a war footing and prepared/expecting an immanent attack?
If this is the case, then it changes the tactical situation "B" is facing.
If "B" has the "drop" on "A" (a la Six Day War), and has decent intel?
Then "A" is in a world of hurt.
36 (I'm a little more pessimistic about fleet size vs. maintenance) F-15's standing @ 5min. QRA is one thing (supposing a "war is immanent" situation).
1 AWACS airborne and the other two @ QRA; maximum effort QRA on the Tanker fleet is also supposing a realization that war is coming.
OTOH?
4 F-15's QRA (2 per Squadron.; standard NATO peace time SOP) and another 8 (4 per squadron; again SOP) on "15 minutes" (pilots on station, A/C on standby; whether they're armed and ready to hit the runway depends on the situation). The rest of the fleet on 4 hour recall for war duty); 1 AWACS airborne (one more on 15 min. and the other likely in maintenance) with a couple of Tankers QRA is another thing altogether.
If "A" is in a standard NATO state of readiness then they are going to have serious problems, if "B" goes at them hardcore.
I spotted it, at the least. Had you included the Lightnings it would've been a dead giveaway.
However, if it's Saudi v Iraq in 1982, there's two other parties with a strong interest in what goes on and ability to influence matters: Iran and the US. Neither would treat Iraq kindly. I'm presuming there's no Iran-Iraq War in this scenario, though.
Riain
Banned
The weakest link is the 3 awacs, not enough to sustain 1 in the air 24/7 for more than a couple of days. If one of those is damaged or destroyed the aew coverage becomes even more patchy.
Personally I would avoid direct combat with the F15 fleet until their force multipliers have been degraded. Stripped of this support it becomes much easier to overwhelm the F15 squadrons.
Personally I would avoid direct combat with the F15 fleet until their force multipliers have been degraded. Stripped of this support it becomes much easier to overwhelm the F15 squadrons.
Khanzeer
Banned
I thought the onboard radar of f15 is enough for autonomous operations
The mig25 could directly threaten the awacs although mig31 is far better suited for it
SsgtC
Banned
Theoretically, the APG-63 can be a poor man's AWACS. But it doesn't have near the coverage that a Sentry would provide. An F-15 can monitor it's assigned sector. An E-3 can cover the entire battle space and direct fighters as needed instead of just having the fighters burn holes in the sky pointlessly.
I have heard many stories regarding the Saudi air force
They had superb equipment - excellent ground support in having many Western contractors mainly ex-USAF and ex-RAF running the show
The only deficiency was the fleshy bit between the Ejector seat and the controls - this left a great deal to be desired even as late as the 1991 Gulf war apparently.
SsgtC
Banned
From people I've talked to and accounts I've read, Saudi pilots are very much a mixed bag. Some are your typical Middle East "couldn't fight your way out of a wet paper bag" pile of dog crap who only got their position as a political appointment, while others are some of the best fighter pilots in the world. I believe it was a USAF instructor who said that the two best and the two worst pilots he ever met were Saudis.
Last edited:
Riain
Banned
It sort of is, but that's a very inefficient way of doing things. Semi-independent guided my ground or airborne search radar is better, at the very least it tells the F15s where to search and that their backs are clear to do so. Without this general situational awareness the F15s are much more liable to ambush and defeat in detail.
A good analogue is the gradual gaining of air superiority by the US over Nth Vietnam. While people focus on the sexy fighters probably more important was the deployment of 5 EC121 to Saigon in 1965, Red Crown cruisers to Yankee Station in 1966 and 7 EC121 to Thailand in 1967 giving the US radar coverage over much of Nth Vietnam.
Khanzeer
Banned
ive read the mirages shot by saudis during gulf were they not basically set up by USAF to help saudis bag a couple of kills?
saudis trained in USA i assume so some of them must have been very good , but most of those sent were probably not on merit but political connections
Khanzeer
Banned
It sort of is, but that's a very inefficient way of doing things. Semi-independent guided my ground or airborne search radar is better, at the very least it tells the F15s where to search and that their backs are clear to do so. Without this general situational awareness the F15s are much more liable to ambush and defeat in detail.
A good analogue is the gradual gaining of air superiority by the US over Nth Vietnam. While people focus on the sexy fighters probably more important was the deployment of 5 EC121 to Saigon in 1965, Red Crown cruisers to Yankee Station in 1966 and 7 EC121 to Thailand in 1967 giving the US radar coverage over much of Nth Vietnam.
so would country B not try to focus all their 50+ foxbats to attack the 3 sentrys on day 1 ?
no matter how many foxbats perish this would be worth the effort ?
Riain
Banned
Only 1 sentry would be in the air at any 1 time, with the other two based well back from the patrol area and well protected.
I would use the Mig 25s on anti-E3 work certainly, but I doubt a day one massed wave is the best tactic. Mach 2.5+ shadow boxing with the E3, tying up at least 1 F15 sqn to protect it, might be the way to go on day 1 & 2, ensuring the E3 is orbiting a bit further back from the border rather than giving support to offensive operations and leaving the other F15 squadron having to deal with all the other threats.
At some point there will come a time when one E3 isn't on station, perhaps maintenance and transit times don't match leaving a window of opportunity for the Migs to strike. That's the time to go after the F15s en masse. Its also the time to mount a strike against the E3 base.
I would train my air force to fight using a mixed flight of MiG-25 and MiG-21. The Foxbat will act as eyes for the Fishbed. Once both sides launch their BVR missiles the F-15 pilot is trained to use F-Pole maneuver to keep distance with maximum radar azimuth. The Foxbat will match this with maximum azimuth while the Fishbed close in at full speed to get WVR and force the F-15 to break radar lock. While those two dogfight it out, the Foxbat positions itself for another BVR shot.
SsgtC
Banned
Hell no. IIRC, even the SPY-1 with AEGIS system can only see about 200 miles (current estimate, actual figure is classified), and then only for targets at high altitude.