quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
Hoping it's fake news.

It’s not.

Unfortunately you can not do what we are doing over there in the volume we are doing it and not expect this type of thing to happen. Just not realistic. Prayers for them.

I assume the wreckage was found and destroyed.

"A U.S. F-15E fighter jet was downed over Iran and a crew member was rescued by American forces, U.S. officials told CBS News." Link

Lots of detail in this article, scroll down to the bottom for updates.

F-15E Down In Iran, Rescue Operation Ongoing (Updated)

The F-15E went down under unknown circumstances and U.S. combat search and rescue assets have been seen deep in Iran.

Thomas Newdick
Updated Apr 3, 2026 1:59 PM EDT

Iran’s armed forces claim that a U.S. fighter jet has been shot down over the country. According to Iranian state media, a U.S. F-35 was downed, although photos of the wreckage of a fighter on the ground point squarely to the aircraft involved being a U.S. Air Force F-15E Strike Eagle — provided they are legitimate...

UPDATE: See latest info on the loss of the F-15E over Iran and the ongoing combat search and rescue operation at the bottom of this post.


Complete article:

https://www.twz.com/air/photos...-an-american-fighter

I hope that they can find and rescue the 2nd F-15E crew member. I’ve seen reports that one was rescued.

Assuming both ejected safely and normally, how far away from each other could they have landed?

I expect many combat sorties are now at lower altitudes where small arms fire and Stinger-like missles come into play.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by AirmanJeff:
This is the Iraqi WMD argument all over again. This is the Vietnam war argument all over again.

No, it is not non-existent, never-was and never-will-be Iraqi WMD, and it is not false Domino Theory.

I would counter with the following quotes:

"We fight because we must fight if we are to live in a world where every country can shape its own destiny. And only in such a world will our own freedom be finally secure," - LBJ, April 1965

"The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder. We will meet that threat now, with our Army, Air Force, Navy, Coast Guard and Marines, so that we do not have to meet it later with armies of fire fighters and police and doctors on the streets of our cities." - GW Bush, March 2003

quote:

We are talking about a nation which openly vows to destroy the state of Israel and confesses- brags, even- to having enough material to make nearly a dozen nuclear bombs, and which has been working on ICBM technology and has made significant strides in that direction. Left unchecked, Iran would eventually have nuclear-armed missiles capable of reaching Israel and much or all of Europe, and they would use these weapons against Israel the first chance they got, because they are religious fanatics who think nuclear war would lead them to paradise.

The source of the idea that they have material to build X amount of bombs in two weeks has only come from a real estate lawyer/pro-Israel first turned US diplomatic negotiator - Steve Witkoff. This line has dated all the way back to 1992 (!) when Netanyahu said Iran was 3-5 years from building a nuke. Later, 2009, he said 1-2 years. In 2012, he said weeks. Now Witkkoff repeats the line and we're supposed to pretend he is an unbiased, honest source?

quote:

Though Israel has never admitted to possessing nuclear weapons, they certainly do possess such. Best estimates are somewhere between 80 to 400, and they have the capability to deliver these weapons via air or sea, in their Dolphin class subs, and once struck, Israel would retaliate with such force as to cause the deaths of millions of Iraqis, and then, all bets are off. The United States would be forced to become involved, and if Russia or China ally with Iran, the potential for global catastrophe becomes very real.

I agree but you could make this argument for any country that has nukes. The first person to use nukes will kick off Armageddon. North Korea also has nukes and even worse, they have the ability to deploy them globally.

I would also like to point out the irony here - Israel developed nukes secretly, without agreeing to any treaties, potentially using stolen materials and information from the United States (Numec case, Jon Pollard, Milchan, etc).

quote:

Forgive me for saying so, but anyone- and that includes members of this forum- who cannot see that President Trump's decisive actions against Iran are an absolute necessity, is stone blind. This is an investment in the future safety of not just the United States, and not just Israel, but the entire world. Open your eyes and try to imagine the devastating cascade of events which would alter our lives for the worse and forever, if Iran is not stopped. The Iranian regime is insane and they must be stopped. It's up to the United States and Israel. No one else has the capability, the courage, the foresight and the will to accomplish the task.

You could have made this argument in the 1980s, 90s, 00s, 10s, and now in the 2020s. Why now? They are that much closer to developing nukes? Did we not destroy this capability with Operation Midnight Hammer? Iran has funded terrorism that has killed Americans, there is no debate over that. But so have many bad actors over the years. Could we not say the same for...Russia? China? N. Korea? When do the wars for our safety stop, at what point are we safe enough is what I wondering.

And honestly it's hard to really debate this war - that was launched without congressional approval, without any stated objectives, without any support from our allies (except the "greatest" one, of course), and without the support of the of American public.

All this after a 2024 campaign which explicitly stated, in no uncertain terms, that this war would not happen. I will end with a few more quotes:

Donald Trump in 2024 - “You are not going to have a war with Iran with me as president.”

JD Vance in 2025 - “I certainly empathize with Americans who are exhausted after 25 years of foreign entanglements in the Middle East...but the difference is back then we had dumb presidents.”

Pete Hegseth in 2024 - “The foolishness with which we ricocheted around the world intervening, thinking it was in our best interest when really we just overturned the table and created something worse.”

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Assuming both ejected safely and normally, how far away from each other could they have landed?

Depends upon altitude and airspeed at ejection, and altitude at chute opening, winds and if the crew is conscious and able to maneuver, or has a "Newton" ride.

Even though the initiation can be varied by the "selector", it is mostly going to be sequenced, dual event and both leave the aircraft within a 1/2 second of each other. If high speed or high altitude (above 14,000 feet), the chute opening will be delayed by the drogue chute and the pilot will not be separated from the seat until stable.
At low altitude (500' or less) the seat/man separation will happen PDQ to ensure best chance of chute effectiveness.

If they are really haulin' the mail, they can be separated by 600' +- some feet from each other near Mach 1.

So they likely will be about 1/4 mile as an average.

Somebody has been watching Tucker Qatarlson.

quote:

Originally posted by AirmanJeff:
Iran has funded terrorism that has killed Americans, there is no debate over that. But so have many bad actors over the years. Could we not say the same for...Russia? China? N. Korea?

Your three examples already have nukes. As much as we would love to remove their ability to harm us, and as we know they are working hard to harm us non-militarily now, we can't use our military can we? Because as you stated, it would set off a nuclear WWIII.

The time to destroy a determined enemy is before he gets nuclear weapons.

Is there any other non-nuclear country on the planet that has caused as much death and mayhem as Iran? Is there any other country on the planet that has vowed to destroy us and bring on the End Times? If so, are they on the cusp of having nukes?

Why wouldn't we believe them when they make the claim they are days away from having enough weapons grade Uranium for 11 warheads?

What's in it for us to ignore them? Might they suddenly change their minds about sponsoring terrorism or destroying us?

quote:

Originally posted by old rugged cross:
Unfortunately you can not do what we are doing over there in the volume we are doing it and not expect this type of thing to happen. Just not realistic. Prayers for them.

Indeed. The sheer volume of missions flown and munitions thrown at them, this incident represent a tiny fraction of suboptimal outcomes as the cynical commentary about air-superiority is being parroted by the world's ignoramous' Here's hoping the second pilot can be pulled-out.

Meanwhile, out over the water
https://x.com/nicksortor/statu...139132664492130?s=20

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:
Here's hoping the second pilot can be pulled-out.

Gen Holt stated he has information suggesting they'll be picking him up tonight. Hope so.

Airman Jeff, you can tell yourself whatever you want; for example, that everything is going to be alright because you believe Israel doesn't have the bomb.

I've explained the reality of our situation, with no rationalizations, and no quotes with nebulous association to the matter at hand.

Iran has openly declared their goal to destroy Israel. This is not hypothetical; neither is their admission that they have material to build several bombs, and neither is their years-long research and development of long-range missiles.

This is reality. Left unchecked, Iran would eventually have nuclear armed missiles capable of reaching Israel and most or all of Europe.

You can prattle on about how such an "argument" could have been made in decades past. It doesn't matter, doesn't matter in the least. The Iranian regime is comprised of religious zealots- psychopaths, quite frankly- who have demonstrated time and again that they cannot be reasoned with and cannot be swayed from their clearly-stated goals.

I can't make you see any of this, but your inability to accept the stark reality of present circumstances changes nothing. To say that anything I've stated is merely hypothetical is the same as throwing a stone off of a tall building and claiming that it's merely hypothetical that the stone will hit the ground because it hasn't happened yet.

With things as they now stand, isolationism is tantamount to global suicide. You can't see it, for whatever reason. Perhaps you're like countless others who despise Israel and who have deluded themselves into thinking that we're trying to save only them. Or, perhaps you really and truly cannot comprehend the danger of failing to act to stop Iran. Whatever the case, your position on this matter is simply and completely wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:
Here's hoping the second pilot can be pulled-out.

Gen Holt stated he has information suggesting they'll be picking him up tonight. Hope so.

Crissake General, shut-up!

They apparently got him.

https://therightscoop.com/brea...re-rescued-and-safe/

quote:

Originally posted by sigmonkey:

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Assuming both ejected safely and normally, how far away from each other could they have landed?

Depends upon altitude and airspeed at ejection, and altitude at chute opening, winds and if the crew is conscious and able to maneuver, or has a "Newton" ride.

Even though the initiation can be varied by the "selector", it is mostly going to be sequenced, dual event and both leave the aircraft within a 1/2 second of each other. If high speed or high altitude (above 14,000 feet), the chute opening will be delayed by the drogue chute and the pilot will not be separated from the seat until stable.
At low altitude (500' or less) the seat/man separation will happen PDQ to ensure best chance of chute effectiveness.

If they are really haulin' the mail, they can be separated by 600' +- some feet from each other near Mach 1.

So they likely will be about 1/4 mile as an average.

Why do they still use the ancient parachutes that you can't control. There must be a decent reason. Something like they can handle a lower ejection or something. Otherwise why not use a modern chute that you can control where it's going. That way in an instance like this they can land much closer together or towards a safer direction.

quote:

Originally posted by 1s1k:
Otherwise why not use a modern chute that you can control where it's going.

How much training would that require?
Would such a chute be dangerous if the user could not control it properly?

I read that in WWII the British Special Operations Executive stopped having its agents make parachute jumps in training because so many of them were injured during the process and it just made better sense to hope that they would survive their one and only jump without practical experience.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
How much training would that require?
Would such a chute be dangerous if the user could not control it properly?

In flight training we did not parachute in the traditional sense at all. We did parasail and the descend under a parachute canopy into Pensacola Bay from about 100', but that was training on how to get out of and away from the chute in the water before it fills up, drags you under and drowns you.

There is a significant investment made to train military pilots, especially tactical jets pilots (way back when I was in the cost exceeded $1 million per student; I imagine it's significantly more now). The risk of injury parachuting is likely higher than any skill gained by the trainee in being trained. As the systems are automated anyway (drogue and main chute deployment, seat separation, etc.) there's little for the pilot to do after pulling the ejection handle other than doff the O2 mask, release the seat pan/raft if applicable, and prepare for landing.

I appreciate the maneuverability of modern sport parachutes, and military chutes do have steering lines that afford limited maneuverability if you remember and/or have time to use them. My preference in a post-ejection situation would be to get on the ground as quickly as possible vs steering around, etc. for all the world to see.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
They apparently got him.

https://therightscoop.com/brea...re-rescued-and-safe/

That link claims
“BREAKING REPORT: Both F-15 pilots are rescued and SAFE“
But further info only about the Warthog pilot.