Yeah they most likely took fire prior, and then US thoroughly demolished the site to prevent critical equipment's from falling into the hands of Iran, their counter measure systems for example would have been a price.
2026 Israel-US vs. Iran conflict [Military updates/News Only]
- Thread starter Phead128
- Start date
Yeah they most likely took fire prior, and then US thoroughly demolished the site to prevent critical equipment's from falling into the hands of Iran, their counter measure systems for example would have been a price.
If there were any don't expect to hear anything until some sneaky MIA report start floating arround many many news cycles away from now. This is what spec-ops guys are for
I believe the equipment was rendered inoperable by the Iranians and then destroyed by the Americans on the way back. “Stuck aircraft”? Yeah, sure lol.
It’s more likely the initial mission ran into trouble, and the backup already on standby moved in for extraction. The damaged equipment was then destroyed to prevent capture.
I guess I watch too many movies lol
Geolocation.
This spot is around 50 km south east of Isfahan, pretty big city. There's a rough airstrip, ~1.2 km long. Probably used that.
Pretty deep into Iran, and right next to a pretty important city.
Even if there are losses, it is impressive that they could do a successful infil/exfil op this close to a city. A well conducted operation.
This spot is around 50 km south east of Isfahan, pretty big city. There's a rough airstrip, ~1.2 km long. Probably used that.
Pretty deep into Iran, and right next to a pretty important city.
Even if there are losses, it is impressive that they could do a successful infil/exfil op this close to a city. A well conducted operation.
Last edited:
That is why they suffered those losses... It further calls BS on soft sand...
Not the most reliable source, but this story makes a lot more sense.
The HC-130J that was forced to perform an emergency landing inside Iran after being engaged by Iranian air defenses had its crew recovered and rescued by another U.S. Air Force HC-130J Combat King II during the CSAR operation for the second F-15E crew member. The U.S. Air Force subsequently destroyed the aircraft with follow-on strikes to deny Iranian forces access to its systems and wreckage.
The HC-130J that was forced to perform an emergency landing inside Iran after being engaged by Iranian air defenses had its crew recovered and rescued by another U.S. Air Force HC-130J Combat King II during the CSAR operation for the second F-15E crew member. The U.S. Air Force subsequently destroyed the aircraft with follow-on strikes to deny Iranian forces access to its systems and wreckage.
Both and have published articles on the CSAR operation that recovered the F-15E Strike Eagle WSO inside Iran.
A couple of interesting — but in all fairness tentative — tidbits and takeaways . . .
From the Air & Space Forces Magazine by Chris Gordon:
Aside from the rules of engagement and laws of war implications of such a protective perimeter, for MQ-9 Reapers to loiter over a more or less fixed position — presumably for an extended period of time and without any attrition — would only be plausible with highly effective suppression, if not outright destruction, of Iranian air defenses in the area.
MQ-9 Reapers can provide this sort of protective overwatch at altitudes beyond the reach of MANPADS, but where they'd still be potentially vulnerable to SAMs like the 358 a/k/a SA-67.
Therefore, the USAF likely deployed a significant number of airframes to hunt down self propelled air defense systems — including box trucks and what not suspected to be technicals — in support of this CSAR operation.
From The Aviationist by David Cenciotti:
If that's accurate, then the fixed wing assets that participated in this recovery operation likely landed on and took off from an ad hoc airstrip — like an austere dirt field that's flat, long and wide enough to support HC/MC-130 operations — rather than an actual "base" as the had suggested.
From the USG's perspective, the loss of two HC/MC-130 airframes — and whatever else — to enemy fire, "adverse terrain," or whatever it might have been was regrettable and costly. However, access to such an ad hoc — even if austere — airstrip is strongly preferred over dispatching a company+ of Rangers to secure a defended airbase by violence of action, which is close to impossible without casualties.
In short, this recovery operation was expensive, complex and risky — and by all reasonable standards an achievement — but not necessarily as "challenging and complex" as American officials are .
A couple of interesting — but in all fairness tentative — tidbits and takeaways . . .
From the Air & Space Forces Magazine by Chris Gordon:
Aside from the rules of engagement and laws of war implications of such a protective perimeter, for MQ-9 Reapers to loiter over a more or less fixed position — presumably for an extended period of time and without any attrition — would only be plausible with highly effective suppression, if not outright destruction, of Iranian air defenses in the area.
MQ-9 Reapers can provide this sort of protective overwatch at altitudes beyond the reach of MANPADS, but where they'd still be potentially vulnerable to SAMs like the 358 a/k/a SA-67.
Therefore, the USAF likely deployed a significant number of airframes to hunt down self propelled air defense systems — including box trucks and what not suspected to be technicals — in support of this CSAR operation.
From The Aviationist by David Cenciotti:
If that's accurate, then the fixed wing assets that participated in this recovery operation likely landed on and took off from an ad hoc airstrip — like an austere dirt field that's flat, long and wide enough to support HC/MC-130 operations — rather than an actual "base" as the had suggested.
From the USG's perspective, the loss of two HC/MC-130 airframes — and whatever else — to enemy fire, "adverse terrain," or whatever it might have been was regrettable and costly. However, access to such an ad hoc — even if austere — airstrip is strongly preferred over dispatching a company+ of Rangers to secure a defended airbase by violence of action, which is close to impossible without casualties.
In short, this recovery operation was expensive, complex and risky — and by all reasonable standards an achievement — but not necessarily as "challenging and complex" as American officials are .
Last edited:
+1 CH-47, how many MQ-9
Taghvaee's take on what really happened.