XBradTC

By

XBradTC

·

Combat Debut of the F-22

Via Aviation Week The U.S. Air Force’s most expensive fighter, the twin-engine F-22, has finally attacked a target during a combat deployment. A pilot flying the Lockheed Martin Raptor attacked an Islamic State (IS) target early Sept. 23 in a successful engagement, says Lt. Col. Edward Sholtis, a spokesman for Air Forces Central Command. This…

Via Aviation Week

The U.S. Air Force’s most expensive fighter, the twin-engine F-22, has finally attacked a target during a combat deployment.

A pilot flying the Lockheed Martin Raptor attacked an Islamic State (IS) target early Sept. 23 in a successful engagement, says Lt. Col. Edward Sholtis, a spokesman for Air Forces Central Command.

This is an ironic debut for the fighter, which was criticized for decades as a costly boondoggle in air-to-air dominance technology. The addition of ground attack came only after years of development as an afterthought.

One doubts that was a target set no other platform could strike. On the other hand, the Air Force is tired of hearing critics complain the F-22 is too expensive to risk in combat.

Tags:

  1. JJAK

    The Admin and our allies aren’t currently interested in striking regime targets, apparently including the IADS, which rules out SEAD for conventional strike assets. With those operating conditions in place stealth aircraft and cruise missiles become the default options, so Syria became the F-22 debut.

    Frankly the operations since the F-22 came into service didn’t call for its use. Whatever PR lumps the AF took at the time, it was the right call to choose other platforms for those missions and they should be applauded for making a professional call when someone in the command chain could have forced the F-22’s use. Realizing the F-35 won’t replace the A-10 in many tasks isn’t the only expression of selecting the correct capability for the mission.

    That said, the AGM-88 on one of the F-16s in this video suggests we’re ready to do SEAD missions if we have to – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahLNOzFVsHk

    Like

  2. xbradtc

    The Israelis have had no issues countering Syrian A/D. They can violate their airspace with near impunity. Mind you, using F-22 on certain targets to mitigate risk from Syrian A/D, enroute to ISIS targets, might be justifiable, but hardly a strict necessity. Absent using F-22 as a dedicated DEAD platform, it’s not really what you think of as a strike aircraft.

    Like

  3. JJAK

    The AF, to its detriment, focused almost completely on stealth platforms over tactical EW a while ago (but that’s a long, separate discussion), so that’s where AF planning is going to go for a solution. Israel, lacking stealth, has maintained a strong EW capability and will operate from that mindset. Navy air would’ve done the mission more like the Israelis, but didn’t get this target (maybe to give the F-22 it’s first blood, maybe not).

    But you’re right, the F-22 isn’t really the right tool, however the stike aircraft that is supposed to cover these missions is currently stuck in development hell

    Like

  4. Esli

    As a CGSC student several years ago, the lone USAF pilot in my class admitted that the USAF Det at Leavenworth had given them a 30 minute block of instruction on how to defend the F22 from its critics, just in case the subject came up. One of the bullet points was that now it could deliver air-to-ground ordnance (albeit very small amounts).

    Like

  5. Quartermaster

    It was built as an air superiority fighter, not a mud mover. It can carry a small amount of ordnance, but only because someone insisted.

    Like

Leave a comment