Sanakius

i agree, you need space, lots of space to do implement integrated defence network, .. Belgium, Slovenia, Slovakia etc. with their small size cannot really afford lots of systems to begin with, and those that would be there coudn't "escape" in that small space, .. But Iraq, Iran, Syria, especially Russia i must say have that component, .. i have read a lot about SAMs and i must say i am very dissapointed at their poor perfomance in virtual simulation games especially from lacking "inteligence", .. and not to mention the lack of optical targeting which would disable any warning system when fired upon in that mode.. anyway as i have said, there is a lot of things happening in the SAM world that we plane freaks cannot see and seem not to care since we are so in love with aircrafts.. For instance there is a plan to create some sort of a "clone attack", . .. cheap versions of tracking radar -the one's that make a lot of "noise"- and place them around SAMs in close proximity and very far away, .. the point of this idea is to "engage" an enemy aircraft at the same time as the launching of the AD missile at him.. That would create many false readings in the RWR and one real one that cannot be seen or distinguished from the fake, .. apart from this advantage it also disturbs the Wild weasels en route in their effort to target the "right" SAM system.. Such "cheap" moveable systems would turn themself on and off only to be moved and do this again in a rapid fashion would create a blinding picture of not jamming but of thousands and thousands of SAM that if you are crazy enough would try to destroy with missiles and bombs and at the same time risk being blown in the process for staying in the HOT zone for too long.. i cannot tell you exactly where i read this, cannot remember but it was some reaserch project in Russia that involved the forementioned "integrated defence system" .. i just wanted to bring some awarness of how SAM systems are not being simulated to the levels they should be in order to get that feeling of what this systems really meanin a real war instead of such statments such as : SAMs = Speed bumps, .. i agree, but only if you play a video game that is..

Actually it was an abject failure. It is PRECICELY because the military stayed hidden that NATO attacked infrastructure instead. Your definition of success is very skewed. They preserved their military. Great. They lost a country. well, trying to save the civilians isn't really a failure on their part, and NATO's behaviour is in fact a war crime so i don't see how that is explained but lets go along with this logic, .. infrastructure is more important to civilians that it is to the Army, army can take much togher situation, and if civilians suffer there is a bigger chance that the resistance they will put on the ground just even stronger.. Vietnam had extreme losses in the war, especially civilians because of such "tactics" that US employed, but still won, ..i am talking about winning a war and preventing the supremacy of the invading AF.. i have never said SAMs alone are enough, if you would care to read again the first article of this thread you will see i am talking about SAM and AF working together, which means knowing your are of responsibility with SAM and SAM with AF and dragging unfortunate souls into the zones of fire.. and such zones can be changed very easily to cover a different part of the country etc.. I am saying that by preparation and knowledge and training you can disable anykind of advantage the invading AF has.. to take Iran case is very good, US has been there for quite a while, probing the AD trying to "see" and "feel" where AD is,.. but if Iranians are smart they will have all of their equipment shut down, .. but you will say what is bombs start falling? .. that is something that not to smart to think about, cruise missiles cannot be stopped by Iranian AF or AD at the moment, but the soon as they hear invading AF flying over their heads that is the time you turn the heat and planes-stealth or no stealth start droping like eggs in the basket.. The reason US AF is always probing is very simple .. INTELIGENCE.. you take that away and they are as blind as you say the Sucksois are against raptors.. to try to employ double standars in this very logical debate doesn't seem to have any either sense or point ..

i know that inteligence is important, ..that is the point of the integrated defence, to keep that inteligence secret.. As you know or may not know, .. US AF managed to provoke the iraqies in the early stages of the preparation of Desert Storm Iraqi SAM responses, ..those idiots kept their radar on, .. their C&C sites turned on, ..there was no such thing as radio silence, .. in those weeks, months US had gathered the neccessary inteligence needed for an Air operation of such scale as it deed. But when i say integrated defence i mean smart defence, ..not someone who have their radar turned on and screaming on the top of their lungs here i am, i am invincible.. You can incorporate stealth just as easily on the ground as you do in the air.. in fact it is even easier.. And about infrastructure, ..don't worry, millitary can do without infrastructure, .. but to lose 100 attack aircraft while trying to bomb some civilians and destroy a couple of bridges that have no strategic capabilty apart from scaring the hell out of civilians in the "shock and awe" illusions, .. i can't see the profit coming from that..

you keep me amazed under such clarification i have put still there is insistance that such countries that are pre-prepared for slaughter do not count.. Yugoslavia was hit with sanctions, wars and overwhelming force, their AF had missing parts, inoperable radars, no RWR etc.. and very low number of fighters, .. under such circumstances i must say YES it is a success to destroy 2 fighters and keep your military intact.. and the Yugoslav military was intact at least from the military point of view. Their ability to perform on the battlefield was untouched since the NATO aircraft only dared to fly at 20 000 feet it is not surprising that is the case. Now, to leave this poor country alone-since you cannot i hope you will now- and to try and understand how SAM systems really work and how an integrated defense might be destroyed by some reason, analytical thinking and suggestions would be more apreciated in this discussion than the ussual "i know better" dialoge that i cannot see to comprehand as to how it does it "job" .. thank you..

they didn't work? .. i don't understand what you mean by that? The SAMS didn't work, or there was no integrated network, or people just didn't no how to use them-tactical knowledge- something the Yugoslav forces knew more than well, but had a little bit of problem-their SAM systems were old, like really old-from the 60' old.. and still managed to shoot the infamous F-117 and F-16 , .. while at the same time not loosing their SAM systems .. that is what i mean when i say tactical knowledge coupled with AF and LPI kind of a behaviour.. Now Serbia is a bad example for the obvious reasons, so i am talking about a country that is not pre-prepared for slaughter like sanction hit Iraq or lacking of everything Afghanistan, .. in normal situations with integrated defenses how much do you really believe an AF can destroy the enemy and dominate the skies without considerable losess..??

this aviation week online magazine seems not to good if you ask me, .. i mean, just read a couple of their "stories", ..it amazes me that such analyitical minds can't undestand why Russia hasn't been able to see the imminent danger of the georgian attack when it vwas obvious that an attack was coming.. as to describe the Russian armed forces as uncapable of functioning properly.. The Russian forces knew of the crazy plans this crazy leader had-Saakashvili, but coudn't have done anything as the moment any reiforcments would come in to Ossetia it would hit the western media as look, ..Russia is occupying Ossetia etc.. Russians actually had to wait to get wiped off in the capital only then do Russians have the moral right to defend themself and even THEN they are the agressors.. If it would have been in US Mexico border, .. if a leader of Mexico would say that he would send tanks near the border in the same minute he would be speaking bombs would start flying on Mexico, .. talk about unproportional attack.. This media analyzis make me laugh, .. but seriously, ..what about the AWACS killer system..? what do you think?

"Formidable SAM fortesses have yet to resist a smart attack from the sky." so far there hasn't been a formidable SAM system in wars and if it was it was not integrated on a level that it could be, .. 1973 is far from integrated SAM system and when there is no AWACS capability it makes almost no sense.. So, please tell me why this wouldn't work, .. what i have written, so far..? An AF can't waste time to locat SAM and at the same time fight the enemy AF or it can try but lose a lot of its own aircraft in the process.. There is a reason why Israel and US are trying so haaaard to prevent the shipment of medium to long range SAM system to Iran and Sryia, ..not to mention about hysteria about AWACS systems.. i am just saying, if all of it connected together, i believe it is very hard for anything to survive in the air, no matter the stealth or power or what have you.. But of course you can always go and destroy the SAMs by groung forces, it takes time but it can be done, .. the problem is US ground forces would never dare to go into a war that would mean they coudn't employ their umbrella-US AF...

We all know how air superiority is important, but just how important is it in the face of advanced SAM's and techiques of emploment on the field together with Air force in order to defend against such Air Force as the US? SAMs coupled with AWACS and Sukhoi fighters could easily locate F-22 regardelss of the so called stealth-that is the reason why US air force always goes after radar warning systems and SAMs in the first phase of the war-usally with Tomahawk missiles and other cruise weponry of their choice-- and here is the most important question.. if the "host" turns off his systems or employs them periodicly and yet integratedly it can make a LPI of some sort, .. it would be impossible to locate SAMs and target them as they would always be on the move or to put it differently, ..one of the SAMs would move while other provide cover and vice versa and to couple that with AF it makes it very hard do achieve that goal of that very important "FIRST PHASE" in order to progress and afterwards send more aircrafts in to provide CAS, CAP, strike missions etc.. What do you think? Plus i have an idea that has to be wrong or else someone would have already done it.. but i wil tell it to you so you can rebuff it in a logical point of view so to see what i have missed.? ..okei? here it goes; if AWACS is a much bigger and stronger radar that can pick the smallest of the crap flying in the air, why don' make even a bigger stronger radars on such DC like passanger planes coupled with bombers that would carry an array of AA missiless like the one in the S-400 containers, .. not to mention that the range would be improved tremendously since the energy needed to get off the ground would be preserved for extending the range of the missile, the missiles would be guided by the "awacs" system so, .. theoreticaly you can kill an invading AF with 2-5 such radar dishes flying behined the screen of bombers with missiles that would offer an ability to destroy targets away as much as 200 miles, .. in between the "awacs" and "bombers" would be fighters to provide protection just in case of some emergencies that could occur.. So, ..lets start the "rebuffall" .. :)

wow, guys wonderfull work, so it is a SU-27 .. great news, .. i can't see how i didn't noticed it before?? anyone here an expert on radars and maybe we could explore the idea from where it came from.. ? If we take Georgia to be "correct" in their statement that it must be a Russian aircrat, but since they got it wrong from the start -Mig-29?- i don't know what to believe anymore, .. is it possible that professionals like georgia military man know less than we(lomac fans) do at recognizing aircrafts or was there a motive to say this was a Mig-29? ..

un-responsible flying, it is this kind of flying that casuses tragic mistakes-like the Italy A-6 Intruder accident, or Su-27 Ukraine etc.. pure dumbass flying if you ask me..

any clue? on how is this Sweden such a resourcefull country that it can make their own fighters, ..?? i mean that in full respect, that is usually something you need partners etc.. EF is a product of all of EU, well, not all of it, most of it, and here we have one country that is capable of making it on their own? how is that? cheap resource, materials, engineers, ..what? .. i have to give it to them, to make a aircraft that is on a parallel with the E-fighter is quite the achivement :))) Go Sweden .. :))

"vekkinho" you are correct, ..i apologize, .. no more, ..