Lucas_From_Hell

NOLA explained it very clearly :) Here are some additional tidbits because why not. As of now slightly less than half of the Su-25 fleet consists of Su-25SM variants, with the rest being the initial (sometimes called Su-25A) variants. FlightGlobal has the total number at 199 Su-25s of all variants, SM, UB and (presumably) T included. Most sources I can find state that there are about 60 Su-25SMs flying right now, and also that the upgrade run will be completed in 2020 with 80 planes upgraded by then. To me it is unclear if the grand total number of Su-25s flying will be 80 in 2020 or if there are another 80 in the way. The other aircraft operating in Syria are the Su-24M2, the Su-30SM (no Su-30M2s) and the vanilla Su-34.

Beautiful video!

(Source)

Qatari-supplied FN-6 MANPADs which found their way to ISIS, specifically. The article is pretty generic though, it isn't directly stated that the A-10C will be flying low, only that they usually fly 'lower and slower' than the F-16. The closest comparable aircraft in the area is the Su-25SM, and at the moment it seems these are delivering (surprisingly very accurate) medium altitude strikes using dumb munitions and CCRP. The FN-6 has a pretty short maximum range and altitude so any aircraft with a decent targeting system can deliver a reasonably accurate hit with dumb bombs without getting shot at. I can't see the USAF sending them in the kind of CAS they are used to doing in Afghanistan and previously in Iraq if the AA threat is considerable. A more concerning issue is that Osa SAM (NATO: SA-8 Gecko) destroyed by a Su-34. While this one in particular was sitting there doing nothing and its range is not impressive either, the fact that more capable SAM systems are up for grabs can cause a lot of trouble if it falls in the wrong hands. Hopefully we won't see any pilots from any country shot down in this mess, there has been enough horror about this already (even before the horrific Kasasbeh incident).

Sometimes I wonder what on Earth goes through one's head to make a move like that. It's as if nobody has learned from the Afghanistan case :noexpression: ISIS has used an FN-6 to shoot down an Iraqi Mi-35, and Ahrar ash-Sham has previously shot down a Syrian MiG-21 in - guess what - Latakia, back in 2013. That being said, the altitude the Sukhois are flying at right now means anyone who shoots from a MANPAD will only help the aircraft place their bombs in the right place. Anyhow, to the news :) (From defenseworld.net)

You are correct about that one :) I've been doing some map reading on the situation, from the looks of it Latakia has together with FSA a strong Al-Nusra presence though. Considering the insane amount of trouble al-Qaeda has given the Middle East and the Western countries in the past two decades, I personally would never take its Syrian branch lightly despite the political situation. In those areas, everyone is either cooperating or coexisting, which allows for interpretation. After all these years, personally I think whatever happens, happens as long as the region gets to see some stability and most importantly peace for the people living there.

An interesting tidbit is that medium altitude flights seem to be strictly forbidden in the Russian AF area. The Sukhois are dropping lead from 5.000m out of SHORAD reach, and the Mi-24s are hitting hard and extremely low to mix in with ground clutter due to reports that Saudi Arabia, despite being advised against it by American officials, is supplying MANPADs to unidentified groups in the RuAFs area of operation.

I can only recommend some WW2 and earlier reads, but they help a lot to get the fighter pilot spirit - an essential thing. Pierre Clostermann's The Big Show (Le Grand Cirque) is a good read. For virtual flying and particularly the psychology of the fighter pilot, In Pursuit (read it here) has some great stuff. Soak up whatever material you can find in English about Field Marshal Aleksandr Suvorov. I haven't had the chance to read all of it, but I found this USAF Air University paper that seems to contain a good basic overview of it here. Try to read whatever you can on Russian fighter pilots too, particularly Aleksandr Pokryshkin (who was a near-religious follower of Suvorov). The war in 1941 and 1942 put them at terrible odds, and it took lots of guts and skill to go up there and kill rather than be killed. Also, try to fly with a wingman whenever possible. Your tactical bag of tricks gets much wider that way.

It wasn't in development this whole time, the R-27EA was pursued in the 1990s but like many projects started in that era was discontinued. Instead they just went ahead with development of the R-77, a much more capable missile by all means. The same thing happened to the proposals for the Active Skyflash. When budget is tight and your choices are between upgrading an old missile that has its limitations or making a new one from scratch that has more room for improvement, the choice is obvious - particularly during peace time. Many air forces still field Sparrows for example. In the Syria situation, it is much more convenient to take your endless stock of old missiles to the field when there is virtually no air opposition and the R-27 can still do the trick should anyone bother you. It's cheaper.

The 'finest' sources for quality military and political journalism :D

I saw that today too but the Su-30SM has been flying armed way back. The ASRAAM report looks like a classic piece of 'tabloidry', I think it was first published in The Sun and The Daily Mail. The same people who said a Russian jet was shot down over Turkey. Isn't it standard procedure (as far as I recall) for the GR.4 and any other NATO attack aircraft to carry at least one heatseeker in unescorted combat flights wherever there are any flying assets outside NATO/coalition command? I can't seem to find photos besides the RAAF F/A-18Fs carrying the AIM-132 but I thought that was the deal anyway. I don't think any of the neighbours means trouble though. This is a rough sketch of the situation: Saudi Arabia: cooperating with Russia (an official SA delegation went to Sochi yesterday to work on a common path of work in the Syria situation, and there have been many military meetings over this year). Iraq: good terms with Russia, with the latter giving it intense military assistance early on against ISIS ('express delivery' Mi-28s, Mi-35s and Su-25s) and Iraqi officials recently hinting at a partnership, though this is unlikely Turkey: While they have a hot history of air defence, shooting down Syrian aircraft and regularly tangling with Greek jets (fun read), the economic partnership between Russia and Turkey has awarded a merely symbolic response from the Turkish government to the Russian airstrikes. "Turkey cannot lose relations with Russia for political interests in Syria", to quote their deputy PM. Jordan: The Jordanian king has meet Chairwoman of the Federation Council Matviyenko in Amman since the airstrikes, and reiterated the relationship between countries is deep. During the same visit Jordan signed a parliamentary cooperation agreement with Russia to increase and improve communication and cooperation between the countries. Lebanon: Russian FM Lavrov stated on Oct. 3 that Russia is going to modernise the Lebanese armed forces and internal security forces so they can effectively deal with ISIS and Al-Nusra, and equipment delivery agreements have been signed. Israel: It's no secret that Netanyahu is a hothead, but just like Erdogan, Russia is a different issue. Back in Sept. 22, before Russia's operation was fully public, Netanyahu went to Moscow and said he and Putin had agreed on "a joint mechanism for preventing misunderstandings between our forces". TL;DR: All regional players are in close contact with Russia, and despite the diverging interests, all sides are quietly making room for everyone to operate safely.

I think they are not really concerned about any long range encounter because that's just not likely to happen. The Su-30SM deployment is probably a mix of discouraging anyone from trying anything 'funny' and the Russian AFs' own interest in using them operationally. It also makes it a good just-in-case weapon against any accidental engagements and such. Both Russia and US defence officials are working together to keep themselves out of each other's yard, and it seems the aircraft have flown reasonably close to each other without incident (at least according to CBS, which said a Su-34 flight was operating 32km from American F-16s). Despite the media wars my impression is that all sides are in good and friendly terms over air operations, with the main concern being mid-airs and such. From what I've seen the loadout right now is 2x R-73 + 4x R-27 + 2 jammers. While lacking the edge of the R-77, this is more than enough to cause 'international clusterf**k'. Same goes for any short range missile coalition aircraft are fielding, by the way. All it takes is one dumb pilot to fly aggressively and either attack - not even hit, but just fire at - another aircraft in the area or put so much pressure into them to warrant being shot down as means of self-defence. Remember that time an USN F-14 armed with a Sidewinder shot down an USAF RF-4C for example? They didn't need anything long range to f*** up, just one very crazy pilot. Yes, it was domestic, but it shows how the human factor can mess up much further than the weaponry carried. I have no info on this but I would expect that the pilots being sent into the fray are no greenhorns considering the intensity of operations and the guarantee of torture and killing if captured. All things considered, Syria already uses S-200 systems, which have their range in the hundreds, and if and when Syria's S-300 are delivered/deployed, these will be the ones dictating who flies where and when.

I have a quick question, maybe someone else here would be able to explain. Why are the VVS ROSSII and red star markings hastily painted over in most Su-34s and Su-30s operating in Syria? There's been a high degree of transparency about their missions there, and the aircraft's silhouette's are extremely recognisable since they stand out from anything else operating in the area.

There is a great story to this image. First and foremost, it is not an actual photo. This was the work of a photographer to merely demonstrate a MiG - MiG-17, to answer your question - flying under a bridge in Novosibirsk. Now the fun part: the incident actually happened. To the amazement of the crowd of onlookers and the ire of military staff there too, MiG-17 pilot Valentin Privalov flew under a bridge over the river Ob in Novosibirsk, during the summer of 1965. Initially - as expected - he was removed from flying duties, but he was reinstated shortly after due to the public's outstanding reception of the stunt.

The low altitude flying is probably the best way to put the rounds where they need to be with less risk of hitting civilians in the process. We are talking about 30mm shells and rockets mostly. Also, their job is to guard the area around the airbase (which is particularly close to the front lines) to save the attack and fighter aircraft from being shot down while taking off and landing. I would presume IS attacks near the base are surprise ones, so you can't send a Su-34 and wait for it to climb towards 4000m to drop a KAB-500, nor can you risk a Su-25 for a low-level strike since it would be a sitting duck when taking-off and making many passes to identify and attack the targets. A Mi-24 flight however can reach combat speeds faster and make a safer head-on pass at low altitude, acquiring the target and hitting it the first time around. Remember, the frontal fuselage is protected against HMG rounds, it is a flying tank. Talking to pilots two years ago, if I remember correctly I was told the frontal cockpit glass and engine areas can even take 20mm cannon rounds and still keep flying. Unlike 12.7mm hits though these would probably wreck the armour and warrant a replacement but the crew would be alive and the helicopter would make it back. I say this from memory though, it is to be taken with a grain of salt. All things considered, I'm not sure how effective would it be for the baddies on the ground to make a run towards a downed helicopter with a second helicopter protecting the crash site, and at such proximity to Russian air and ground forces plus Syrian army troops as well who would surely intervene. The prospect is scary, nonetheless. This RT link has a short video describing, albeit at a superficial level, the Mi-24s tasks and the possible AAA and SAM opposition it faces. https://www.rt.com/news/317841-latakia-airbase-mi24-gunboats/

Pentagon and Russian MoD to meet this weekend, discuss air-to-air communication over Syrian airspace to avoid accidents (source) Peter Cook, Pentagon Spokesman:

GoPro footage of Su-24M attack in Syira, using what I presume are FAB-100 bombs.

Fair enough :) My bad there, I'm still unused to what constitutes news and what crosses into discussion in this thread, and how strict are the rules. On another front, some good news from Eastern Ukraine (IB Times & Sputnik/ex-RIA Novosti).

I threw these locations on Google, there are recent articles mentioning IS presence in the Homs province (example). Ltamenah has no IS there by the looks of it indeed, and it was harder to find anything on - mostly because of variations in spelling, the most common being Lataminah. What I found suggests the forces operating there besides the Syrian Army are Jaish al-Fatah. This, in turn, has strong links to the Al Nusra front (source 1) (source 2), commonly associated with Al Qaeda in Syria (Wikipedia). In other words: are they IS? Indeed no. Are they terrorists? That is up to one's definition. That being said we're turning the News thread into discussion, sorry about that :)

These are just rumours, according to both the Russian ASF and the USAF. See here (Source): According to the Russian MoD, the United States has informed it the areas the Russian AS Forces are operating are not occupied by Syrian opposition forces, only IS terrorists. (Source) If the reports were untrue the US DoD would have been quick to attack it, which it didn't.

Did anyone notice just how fast and far did the pilot fly in that ejection?

Oops! Great initiative :D

Official: Russian Air Force to conduct air strikes against ISIS in Syria A digest I put together from five different sources (RF, US & UK): The atmosphere between the Russian military and its Western counterparts operating in the region appears to be largely collaborative according to both sides. As of today the fighting force consists of four Su-34 in Latakia, Syria. 600 personnel are in the base as well, presumably troops to protect the base plus air and ground crew to support operations. The Russian parliament's approval of the operation comes less than 12 hours after French Foreign Minister L. Fabius urged Russia to commit an aerial force to fight ISIS on the sidelines of the UN GA meeting. According to Federation Council Speaker Valentina Matviyenko, the mission will be strictly to provide close air support coordinated with the regular Syrian Army. No ground forces will be committed.

Developing anything - particularly such a high quality and detail product - is really hard. Hats off to you and the team for not only doing so but also communicating well with the community! :)

Indeed. On top of that they can choose the order or part of it to include naval Ka-52K version, which I believe they will do eventually for compatibility's sake.