-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Epic Fury aircraft loss & damage
- Thread starter Llarry
- Start date
The result of:
1. a department of defense run by obsequious sycophants with a strange affinity for large groups of men doing pushups together
2. a congress that, out of fear of its own constituents, neutered itself
What do you mean Congress wasn't informed? The CRS report that is linked literally includes a link to the DoD IG report that was delivered to Congress.
Are you saying that this unclassified report (both the inital DoD IG report, and the later CRS report) are underreporting the actual losses?
BTW - the only thing that appears missing from the DoD report is a listing of the intentional destructionn of the 2 MC130s that were stuck in the sand during the CSAR OP. No idea why they aren't there (maybe they are included in a classified version), by the time the report was issued all the OPSEC reasons and optics reasons hide the info were long gone
Are you saying that this unclassified report (both the inital DoD IG report, and the later CRS report) are underreporting the actual losses?
BTW - the only thing that appears missing from the DoD report is a listing of the intentional destructionn of the 2 MC130s that were stuck in the sand during the CSAR OP. No idea why they aren't there (maybe they are included in a classified version), by the time the report was issued all the OPSEC reasons and optics reasons hide the info were long gone
The structure of the report repeatedly notes things like “multiple articles reported” or “articles citing,” rather than noting a DoD report or CENTCOM statements. It may just be lazy writing, but when I read things like that it indicates that either Congress is relying on news reporting to determine losses, or CRS is too lazy to get their information from the source.
you may have missed it, in the first paragraph the bold text links to the source doc
The Department of Defense (DOD, which is “using a secondary Department of War designation,” underExecutive Order 14347 dated September 5, 2025) on September 14, 2026, published a Lead InspectorGeneral (Lead IG) Report to the United States Congress on Operation Epic Fury (OEF), which assessed certain equipment losses relating to operations against Iran between April 1 and June 30 (the bold text is the link)
which links to this doc published by DoD IG - https://media.defense.gov/2026/Sep/09/2003993626/-1/-1/1/OEF_Q3_JUN2026_FINAL_508 SECURE.PDF#page=20
The DoD report only includes date through 6/30, and the CRS adds things that occurred afterwards, some reported by CENTCOM, others attributed to "articles" or "reports". There will be another report published early November with Q4 data through end of September
The Department of Defense (DOD, which is “using a secondary Department of War designation,” underExecutive Order 14347 dated September 5, 2025) on September 14, 2026, published a Lead InspectorGeneral (Lead IG) Report to the United States Congress on Operation Epic Fury (OEF), which assessed certain equipment losses relating to operations against Iran between April 1 and June 30 (the bold text is the link)
which links to this doc published by DoD IG - https://media.defense.gov/2026/Sep/09/2003993626/-1/-1/1/OEF_Q3_JUN2026_FINAL_508 SECURE.PDF#page=20
The DoD report only includes date through 6/30, and the CRS adds things that occurred afterwards, some reported by CENTCOM, others attributed to "articles" or "reports". There will be another report published early November with Q4 data through end of September
Congress is aware. The question is whether they'll pony up the money (and taxes) to pay for replacing our losses and rebuilding our reserves, or if they make it the next guys' problem. Jokes on them, not raising taxes may get them reelected but they'll have to explain to their constituents why the bases around them are shutting down.
The MQ-9 community is in real danger of not having the tails we need to execute existing operational and initial training needs. We're at a "pick one, we can't do both anymore" moment.
The MQ-9 community is in real danger of not having the tails we need to execute existing operational and initial training needs. We're at a "pick one, we can't do both anymore" moment.
Why do I think you’re about to eat your own seed corn?
Something something "feed MQ-9s to the IRGC" something something "now USAF is crying".
It's unmanned, just have FAM-1 be over target. The lack of determinism will confuse the enemy.
I'm honestly interested in how the ALR discussion goes for the unmanned communities. While I'm sure there are a number of scenarios that are planned to be one way missions, the way Iran and its proxies in Yemen have been shooting these things down over the past several years suggests to me that some of these losses were operating under what were thought to be benign/permissive conditions, then caught off guard by adversary capabilities or intent that did not match mission planning factors.
This is not true.
We need SIPR AW to explore further, but the asshats running comms for DoD are playing around with dates and declerations to leave some fairly important losses off that list....
Without getting too much into it, your assessment is fairly spot on. It doesn't help when you have the, "it's just a drone, not a real airplane, so it doesn't matter" attitude at the same time. That attitude is changing/has changed.
Is that driven by dropping the attitude of "there is no pilot so who cares" to well we just lost capabilities and have to deal with that?
Keeping it vague, it's, in part, driven by the fact that you don't have to be the Chinese to figure out passive detect/engage....