U.S. fighter jet shot down in Iran, search underway for crew

https://www.axios.com/2026/04/03/iran-us-fighter-shot-down

50•hypeatei•1h ago

Comments

wesselbindt•1h ago

The article says this is the first jet that was shot down by enemy fire this war, but this confuses me. Was the F35 that was downed a while back friendly fire or something? Are F35s not fighter jets?

hypeatei•1h ago

That one was damaged and managed to land safely, iirc. Depends on your definition of "shot down" I guess, but the pilot didn't eject, so...

malfist•1h ago

We have always been at war with Eastasia

ge96•1h ago

I thought the IR video of that showed it made the missile detonate before the missile hit, maybe shrapnel hit the jet

Then again idk the jet exhaust becomes more significant not sure if afterburner or damage

https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/1ry6ma2/f35_...

jeffbee•1h ago

That's how anti-aircraft missiles always work.

ge96•1h ago

In that video it seems like something shoots at the missile is what I'm saying from the F35

Someone said maybe a form of DIRCM

eqvinox•51m ago

You're talking about a single "dash" on the frame before it goes all white. First question, if it were a laser, would be what exactly are you seeing there? A laser from the side is invisible, there'd need to be dust there, or the air would need to have turned into plasma. I don't think either makes that much sense. Second question/problem would be… it would have failed/be malfunctioning because —

— pretty much all AA munition works by exploding in close proximity to the target and showering it in shrapnel. So this might even have "helped" the missle/shell against malfunction in its fuse. And considering that this is designed to work like that, and it's likely not the greatest quality work on the Iranian side, it's also possible that the thing is already exploding and just ejected some piece of intentional shrapnel (or unintentionally itself) early, ahead of the actual detonation.

Or the Iranians edited that "dash" into that one frame, it's not exactly like it's a reputable source and it's in their interest to confuse things. Maybe they want the US to believe that the countermeasures are malfunctioning and helping their attacks, so they turn it off…

ge96•48m ago

Yeah I was also thinking the the dash might be the missile itself

The single exhaust plume does become multiple on the F35 suggesting damage

MarkMarine•1h ago

The F35 was able to make an emergency landing in a gulf country. This one actually went down in Iran.

amelius•1h ago

"Flawless victory" is becoming sillier every day.

nathanaldensr•1h ago

Yep. It's just a lie.

IgorPartola•50m ago

It's called Operation Epic Fuckup for a reason.

jeffbee•1h ago

Large, sophisticated, expensive war assets like fighters and carriers are brilliant against literally cavemen like we've been going around fighting lately, but are quite useless against enemies with even slight technological progress. If this conflict continues we're going to see a lot of US assets in fragments.

hypeatei•1h ago

> If this conflict continues we're going to see a lot of US assets in fragments.

Yep, Iran recently destroyed a high tech radar plane ("AWACS") at a base in Saudi Arabia: https://www.nbcnews.com/world/iran/iran-war-attack-us-base-s...

jeffbee•1h ago

It's only "high tech" to the aforementioned cavemen. To everyone else it's a 707 you can't even get spare tires for any more, equipped with some truly obsolete technology aboard. I mean it has a mechanical waveguide for crying out loud.

paganel•59m ago

> equipped with some truly obsolete technology aboard.

So I guess the US won't have any issues replacing it at a cheaper cost (as far as I understood that one cost $500 million, give or take).

jeffbee•55m ago

The prototype E-7 cost $2 billion. It's a 737 with some radios.

eqvinox•40m ago

"On 22 March 2019, the UK Defence Secretary announced a $1.98 billion contract to purchase five Boeing E-7 Wedgetails"

Prototype price isn't really that meaningful

(Also it's a 767 not a 737, that was the E-3 I think.)

jeffbee•26m ago

You must be thinking of a different boondoggle, the E-767, which is the obsolete radar package from the E-3 bolted to a 767. The E-7 is a 737.

eqvinox•24m ago

Ah right, it's a bit confusing between the bunch of these.

Nonetheless the price tag was only $400M/ea E-7 for the UK in 2019 (usual later price shenanigans not included)

ModernMech•1h ago

It reminds me of a Age of Empires campaign I played at a LAN from a long while back, where the game went on for 20 hours and ended in a stalemate between an atomic age player and a very primitive age player. The atomic player had total control of the map, they were carpet bombing the entire thing with nuclear weapons. But they could only create them so fast while the primitive player was running around on horses, just surviving enough to prevent the other player from winning. The only reason the game ended was because I tripped over the power cord to one of the computers.

To me, that's what modern warfare looks like.

probably_wrong•50m ago

I don't remember Age of Empires having an atomic age?

eqvinox•44m ago

It was probably Rise of Nations or one of the other similar games.

webstrand•45m ago

Ah, you mean Empire Earth. I loved that game, it had a great soundtrack.

vbarrielle•34m ago

Sounds like it indeed. The balance was... interesting, a single tank could not win against a dozen cavemen.

ModernMech•33m ago

Right right Empire Earth! My memory is a little fuzzy it must have been 20 years ago.

Telemakhos•59m ago

When the first-tier hostile leadership structure was eliminated in the first day of the war, and only after a month do the surviving enemies finally manage to damage a plane so severely that it can't return to a friendly base to land, is "quite useless" an adequate and accurate description of the technology used to prosecute that war?

tokai•58m ago

A month after the president claims total air superiority over Iran and complete destruction of their anti air capabilities.

eqvinox•46m ago

Whether you have specific leadership or not doesn't matter much to (a) having to adapt to the enemy and learn what works, and (b) probability just doing its thing, more chances and so on, and (c) US leadership descending the oceans of stupidity all the way to the Mariana trench.

rbanffy•52s ago

> US leadership descending the oceans of stupidity all the way to the Mariana trench.

And they voted for this not only once, but twice.

br121•32m ago

It's useful in saving the pilot's life. With less advanced tecnologies, more pilots would have been shoot down. It's useful in targeted attacks, but they have proved themself uneffective (at least for now) as the new leadership is alined with the objective of the replaced one. It's close to useless when it comes to making the war cost-effective, which start being a relevant metric when the conflict start lasting too long. Of course the US has a bigger economy, so all the news about cheaper systems damaging or destroying quite expensive ones may still lead to a US victory, but a costly one for sure

rbanffy•1m ago

As the Soviet Union made us learn, you don’t need a big military victory to make your enemy spend themselves into defeat.

rbanffy•3m ago

When you decapitate a well organised military, all you achieve is installing a new enemy you know little about you can’t predict their actions and that now know they are fighting for their own survival.

Not the best place to be.

Americans seem to underestimate everyone else.

unholyguy001•56m ago

It’s mind boggling how wrong that statement manages to be in only two sentences. It’s like every word manages to be wrong multiple times

Hats off to you sir

davidcollantes•36m ago

OP sentences have issues, but I understood what they meant.

MarkMarine•1h ago

Military aviators train for this, being alone behind enemy lines (look up SERE school if you’re curious, one of the craziest training courses outside of special forces) and there is a special force just for aviator recovery behind enemy lines, US AirForce Pararescue. Hopefully they’ll get the aviators back quickly, the last thing our country needs is American hostages making this ridiculous war harder to stop.

tokai•1h ago

Prisoner of war, not hostage.

edit: I'm baffled by the amount of downvotes pointing out the objectively correct terminology can get. Its not a matter of opinion, military personnel captured by the enemy are pow no matter their treatment. A hostage, by definition, has been abducted.

spwa4•58m ago

That is assuming Iran holds itself to the Geneva conventions, which ... seems like an extremely risky bet to make.

Tadpole9181•57m ago

Especially after the double-tap on civilians and first responders the US just did on that bridge. Or the threat for no quarters from the secretary of defense. Or the threats to destroy critical civilian infrastructure for water or power.

empyrrhicist•51m ago

Or Hegseth running his mouth about exactly this issue...

nemomarx•56m ago

Prisoner exchanges are a pretty strong motivator for any group, even hardline ones. If the Taliban was up for exchanges I think the IRGC is pretty likely to want to keep prisoners for that too.

mothballed•52m ago

I would note ISIS put out some high res, professionally edited video of burning a (Jordanian?) pilot to death while inside a cage. Quite savage, but the propaganda effect is more profound than about anything else I've seen.

craftkiller•40m ago

Does the US have any prisoners to exchange? Wouldn't we need boots-on-the-ground to capture enemy combatants?

tjpnz•54m ago

Why wouldn't they?

nprz•54m ago

What has Iran done to show it would not uphold Geneva conventions?

thinkingtoilet•53m ago

The US doesn't hold itself to the conventions, why should the country it started a war of aggression with?

rbanffy•42m ago

If you throw away your principles because you are fighting an unprincipled enemy, you are no better than them.

thinkingtoilet•40m ago

There is no if. We've already done that. So yes, we are no better than them. So answer the question. Why would Iran follow conventions it's enemy that started a war of aggression is not following?

ofrzeta•33m ago

Becaus two wrongs don't make right. If they are smart they will stick to the convention.

saimiam•27m ago

It’s such a shock to the system to realise that “unprincipled enemy” referenced here is the US.

tenthirtyam•48m ago

They're going back to the stone age, remember? The Geneva convention wasn't around then AFAICR.

rbanffy•46m ago

Hegseth explicitly ordered to give the enemy “no quarter”.

n2j3•44m ago

We are expecting Iran to honour an International Convention when US and Israel have squarely shat on every convention's face, so to speak.

bz_bz_bz•22m ago

The person you’re replying to is very explicitly not expecting them to honor the International Convention…

MarkMarine•39m ago

It’s a “well, actually” and counter to the HN guidelines

tokai•24m ago

Only for someone breaking the guideline of "Assume good faith".

MarkMarine•15m ago

I didn’t downvote you, but a terse “well actually it’s prisoner of war” doesn’t really add to the conversation. Imagine doing that in person, you’d annoy everyone around you. If you explained why it’s distinct and what that might mean for downed crew I think it wouldn’t have been down voted

bobchadwick•18m ago

There's a significant difference between a hostage and a prisoner of war, and in this context that distinction seems highly relevant.

NickC25•15m ago

...but we aren't at war, according to the President and his secretary of Defense (war).

what a fucking mess.

lokar•1h ago

Do they train for a “no quarter“ conflict where injured or surrendered combatants are killed?

rbanffy•49m ago

Hegseth is not in charge of the Iranian military.

lokar•45m ago

But he did publicly declare his intention to commit war crimes.

MarkMarine•48m ago

No, we actually train to be tortured and held if caught, but everyone knows the risks before you take off. Captured marines or soldiers have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, we’re clear eyed about it.

croes•45m ago

And lied to about the reasons of the war.

Now they even lie about it being a war, while they claim they have already won the war, that isn’t a war.

bulbar•42m ago

... But conducted by the self proclaimed Department of War.

MarkMarine•40m ago

Every war since Korea, we’re very used to this.

uticus•1h ago

previous conversation at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47626347

jimt1234•1h ago

Seems relevant now: https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/07/18/424169549...

throw03172019•59m ago

I thought we blew up all their missiles and Navy? Back to the stone ages? Did they shoot it down with rocks? (Eye roll) /s

vkr2020•49m ago

Fred Flintstone style!

npn•57m ago

the last time US wanted some country to reset back to Stone Age the same thing happened. turn out those aircrafts are not undefeatable at all.

dmix•50m ago

It's pretty normal for planes to go down in a war. They've flown 5000+ sorties, it's a pretty huge accomplishment this is the first one lost over Iran. Especially considering all of the last decade's speculation about how tough attacking Iran would be.

You'll never be able to fully suppress all of their manpads. Even if you destroy the bulk of their air defence network.

josefritzishere•55m ago

This is the dumbest, most pointless military conflict in American history. There is nothing plausible to win, but we can conceivably lose everything. A pyric victory is among the most favorable outcomes. We are led by corrupt imbeciles. I can only hope the outcome includes regime change for the U.S.

karp773•53m ago

Why didn't Iran use its capability to take down enemy jets for an entire month?

karp773•49m ago

Downvoters, care to explain?

Seriously, it's been sitting on this for entire month and now, all of a sudden, rolled out antiaircraft defense? What's going on?

shigawire•43m ago

Because it obviously doesn't have the capability. Similar to how the US has no capability to "win" from the air only.

karp773•37m ago

Maybe it was friendly fire but I did not see that in the news yet.

DASD•24m ago

~15/16 MQ-9 Reapers have been shot down inside Iran. Not jets but still combat(strike and reconnaissance) aircraft.

karp773•13m ago

I just looked it up. Those are turboprop (slower) but have a high ceiling of 50k feet. So Iran did have something better than stingers left. Maybe they just got lucky this time.

eqvinox•19m ago

I didn't downvote, but your post sounds like you're implying some kind of tomfoolery, deception, or other hidden reasons. There are very likely none, it just takes time to adapt to a specific enemy, probability slowly increases while you get more attempts, and then after some time (t) the first shootdown is "properly" successful. And note how this was preceded by that half-successful shootdown where the plane made an emergency landing. And they shot down drones.

You sound like they roll an antiaircraft cannon out of the hangar and immediately successfully down a plane. That's not how that works. The AA was probably there from the beginning, just not successful.

vkr2020•50m ago

apparently, Iran is claiming that the search and rescue helicopter has also been hit by a projectile.

pwarner•48m ago

I hope the aviators are OK, and also hope whoever they were bombing are also OK.

I do wonder if Iran finds them first, will they treat them better than the US treated survivors of the ship sunk by a US torpedo in the Indiana Ocean?

jacquesm•39m ago

You left out 'unarmed'.

I used AI. It worked. I hated it

Slog: Structured Logging for Java

Employment increased by 178,000 in March; unemployment flat at 4.3%

How Japan's JT-60SA is testing real-time TSN for future fusion reactors

You Can Try Build Billing In-House but You Probably Can't Afford to Own It

The Mystery of Rennes-Le-Château, Part 3: A Secret History

Show HN: Notion Calendar Wrapper Linux (tray, libnotify notifications)

This Month in Ladybird: March 2026

Agent Labs: Workload-Harness Fit

New Advances Bring the Era of Quantum Computers Closer

Channel Surfer Weather Channel

Software Engineering Feels Weird Now

Show HN: Speck PBR – A WebGPU molecular visualizer

The Wayward Webring: a collection of link collections

Ask HN: What do you dislike most about Linux and Windows?

An Actionable Model of Trust

Anthropic's next model could be a 'watershed moment' for cybersecurity

Status icons and symbols on Apple Watch

CISA Adds One Known Exploited Vulnerability to Catalog

Show HN: Aurion OS, A 1.8MB OS with a browser, try it live (C/x86 ASM)

Show HN: Mold – local AI image generation CLI (FLUX, SDXL, SD1.5, 8 families)

US F-15E jet confirmed shot down over Iran as Tehran releases wreckage images

Security Risk of AI code editors

Rainy-city.com: A side project I have been thinking about for a long time

Ask HN: Advice on Solo Launching

I found an IDOR exposing 250k patient records in a telehealth startup

MicroSafe-RL v1.0 – Sub-microsecond safety for Edge AI

Ask HN: What music are you currently working to?

ARCHE3-7B – Sparse Moe with SmartRouter and Foundation Curriculum Training

Packaging 128 Languages with Nix

I used AI. It worked. I hated it

Slog: Structured Logging for Java

Employment increased by 178,000 in March; unemployment flat at 4.3%

How Japan's JT-60SA is testing real-time TSN for future fusion reactors

You Can Try Build Billing In-House but You Probably Can't Afford to Own It

The Mystery of Rennes-Le-Château, Part 3: A Secret History

Show HN: Notion Calendar Wrapper Linux (tray, libnotify notifications)

This Month in Ladybird: March 2026

Agent Labs: Workload-Harness Fit

New Advances Bring the Era of Quantum Computers Closer

Channel Surfer Weather Channel

Software Engineering Feels Weird Now

Show HN: Speck PBR – A WebGPU molecular visualizer

The Wayward Webring: a collection of link collections

Ask HN: What do you dislike most about Linux and Windows?

An Actionable Model of Trust

Anthropic's next model could be a 'watershed moment' for cybersecurity

Status icons and symbols on Apple Watch

CISA Adds One Known Exploited Vulnerability to Catalog

Show HN: Aurion OS, A 1.8MB OS with a browser, try it live (C/x86 ASM)

Show HN: Mold – local AI image generation CLI (FLUX, SDXL, SD1.5, 8 families)

US F-15E jet confirmed shot down over Iran as Tehran releases wreckage images

Security Risk of AI code editors

Rainy-city.com: A side project I have been thinking about for a long time

Ask HN: Advice on Solo Launching

I found an IDOR exposing 250k patient records in a telehealth startup

MicroSafe-RL v1.0 – Sub-microsecond safety for Edge AI

Ask HN: What music are you currently working to?

ARCHE3-7B – Sparse Moe with SmartRouter and Foundation Curriculum Training

Packaging 128 Languages with Nix

U.S. fighter jet shot down in Iran, search underway for crew

Comments