Jump to content

Military and Aviation News Thread (NO DISCUSSION)


topol-m

Recommended Posts

you want to have the option to loiter when dealing with an invasion..something NATO is actually planning quite well.. there are patriots systems ringed all around syria borders.. i wonder why? There are 15.000 US soldeirs in Jordan right now.. to me this looks like invasion in order.. which means lots of CAS planes LOITERING.. which means S-300 is what increases stability as it prevents an invasion.. unless you think a woman unarmed is more repellent to a rapist than one carrying a 9mm ..

 

@invader.. am, well, its funny you mention that, all that hezbollah talk is just an excuse.. Israel hit Army units, a chicken hen, and a normal army depot .. how is that involved with hezbollah..and even if it is, unless hezbollah fires at israel, attacks israel, violates israeli airspace or ground space there is no DANGER to israel ..right?

 

I mean this is like talking Russia is in danger because Germany sold some weapons to South Korea.. ?!?!? what.. Unless South Korea attacks Russia there is NOTHING Russia should do..

 

Again, please do not try to justify pre-emptive attacks, they are a WAR CRIME by UN .. acknowledge after the 2WW.. by acknowledging them you are breaking more rules and even forum rules than possibly imagining ..

 

So, lets stay grounded on topic and talk REAL threats and real invasions.. So far, Syria and Hezbollah haven't invaded anyone but are in a fight for survival.. Israel is in no danger of being attacked, but the chances of their aggression has diminished severely.. and that is a stabilizing effect.. especially if you live in Syria now..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

fair enough..

 

okei.. so dense corridor vs. loose corridor... thats not the point.. who cares about corridors or even targets to bomb.. its about psychology.. its about being able to waltz in enemy air space and basically loiter without worries.. this is what israel wants and this is what normally Syria doesn't want-as any other nation would obviously..

 

Yes of course, you're right, having those systems operational simply sends a message, I wasn't arguing that.

 

its basically hit-and-run tactics..
These are standard strike tactics, but it would not be good for CAS like you said.

 

about Israeli success in dealing with systems.. i don't know if that hold water.. i know of israeli 30 planes lost when they tried to knock of 1 single KUB system in egypt.. about those sams lost in syria in 80's.. many agree syrians did terrible mistakes like having sam's in valleys, not deploying decoys, not moving actually preferring the sam's be immobilized than having them mobilized, and of course the last fun part ALWAYS have radar ON.. it was like they were trying to piss off the russians and their lectures they receive on proper sam deployment.. Vietnamese learned better even though their education level was lower than Syrians ..
In the case of Israelis losing all those planes, they had a couple of problems - one was they were forced to go in there to do CAS, two, they did not have their SEAD tempo up yet, and IIRC they have had some weapons/technology shortages and issues. But again, IIRC, I don't recall the history too well.

 

As for the Vietnamese, that again was a different ball of wax. You are talking about very different types of battles, and I will quote from wikipedia here:

 

All told, the U.S. Air Force flew 5.25 million sorties over South Vietnam, North Vietnam, northern and southern Laos, and Cambodia, losing 2,251 aircraft: 1,737 to hostile action, and 514 in accidents. 110 of the losses were helicopters and the rest fixed-wing. A ratio of roughly 0.4 losses per 1,000 sorties compared favorably with a 2.0 rate in Korea and the 9.7 figure during World War II.[1]

So, actually the combined US air forces did quite well if you think about this - the Vietnamese only got one plane per 5250 missions flown, and that includes accidents!

 

So, again, S-300 role is already accomplished.. its psychological.. can it be destroyed?of course, thats not the point, but there will be losses, and this is what Israel cannot have.. imagine seeing 6 planes shot down, 4 pilots captured, 2 dead.. its a no-go..
Only Israel can determine if they are facing a big enough threat to go up against an S-300 and take losses. They may well determine that it is a go-go.

 

I won't respond to your last paragraph, because it leads to politics and politics lead to the dark side. :D

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@GG ..lol) yeah, i agree with most what you wrote.. about Vietnam, yeah its different age, no Kub's only Goa's))

 

what was interesting to me was how a very small number of planes were destroyed by Goa's but it made many changes in operations so planes started flying low to hide from the long-range sams..thus exposing themselves to triple A instead.. this made it a paradox situation, where if one flies high yes, more planes would be lost to SAM but much less then if one tries to avoid SAM and goes into the AAA range.. AAA by evidence is much more dangerous and obviously cheaper and destroyed much more planes (well with a help of SAM also, since with no SAM there would be no need to crawl on the ground-in this regard SAM did the psychological thing that otherwise wouldn't) ...

 

About sorties flown, yeah, i agree, quite successful .. but that is because the force that backs this up is US economy..which can replace all those losses and continue un-abated.. Vietnam was close to being an attrition war for the US.. the budget deficit exploded following almost a hyper--inflation period that was resolved only by the mighty -i have much balls- Volker who raised the interest so high he nearly killed the economy, but he brought the inflation back to manageable levels.. all this was an after-effect of playing attrition war with high-tech gadgets..

 

of course such schenenegins are out of the picture for lesser nations like Syria, Italy, Israel, Iran, Spain.. such nations have what they have in stores.. if this gets blown up its gone for good..unless your "sponsor" daddy comes and brings you new toys..

 

agree, politics leads to the dark side.. what the hell leads to the light side then? they never explained that one.. damn, no wonder all we got from star wars is the dark side in the world.. they forgot the instructions for the light side.. ah, yoda, too much nonsense you talk, too little directions for finding the light side you gave..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you want to have the option to loiter when dealing with an invasion..something NATO is actually planning quite well.. there are patriots systems ringed all around syria borders.. i wonder why? There are 15.000 US soldeirs in Jordan right now.. to me this looks like invasion in order.. which means lots of CAS planes LOITERING.. which means S-300 is what increases stability as it prevents an invasion.. unless you think a woman unarmed is more repellent to a rapist than one carrying a 9mm ..

 

What NATO plans is nothing worth discusing - since they probably also have plans regarding the outbreak of world war III. 15.000 US soldiers and some Patriot-batteries around Syria is nothing compared to what an invasion would require.

 

If the world would indeed push ahead with a full scale invasion then they would surely need to destroy most of the LRAD and MRAD batteries before even thinking about sending in loitering fighters over Syria.

 

But if we forget the `what if` for a while and instead see todays situation. An operational S-300 battery in Damascus would really hinder Israeli air-movements in the northern part of Israel and Lebanon. Do you think this will be tolerated by the Israelis? It is plain and simple - strategic weapons of this kind NEVER makes the situation more secure - especially not if it affects others affairs.

[sIGPIC]sigpic70266_4.gif[/sIGPIC]

Snooze-81st-vFS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand why Israel absolutly needs to destroy the s300 bateries ?

What if syria declares war to israel? Even if the russians don't get involved why risk an all out pointles war over a few sam batteries that are just a "speed bumb"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

otto, out of the many concerns which are outlined below in the Reuters article, I think one of the big concerns is that the S-300 has such a long range that Syria could use it as leverage against civilian aircraft operating at Israeli airports. Israel's neighbors have a long history of targeting civilian public transportation and aircraft in attacks, and such a system that allows interception of aircraft over Israel proper is not acceptable to them.

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/30/us-syria-crisis-israel-s300-analysis-idUSBRE94T0IZ20130530

 

(Reuters) - Israel could overcome advanced S-300 anti-aircraft missiles if they were deployed in Syria but any strikes on the system would be difficult and risk alienating its supplier, Russia.

 

Israel has pledged to take preventive action, seeing a future Syrian S-300 as a "game-changing" threat to its own airspace as well as to the relative free rein with which it now overflies its northern foe and neighboring Lebanon.

 

Experts agree that Israeli sabotage or open force to disrupt delivery by Russia is extremely unlikely - a view seemingly shored up by Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's announcement on Thursday that the first missiles had arrived.

 

That leaves Israel lobbying Moscow to slow down the shipment in hopes it would be overtaken and scrapped if Assad fell to a more than two-year-old rebellion, and in parallel preparing counter-measures to neutralize the S-300 on the ground in Syria.

 

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz quoted National Security Adviser Yaakov Amidror as warning European diplomats that Israel would "prevent the S-300 missiles from becoming operational". That may be achieved by ensuring Assad does not get the full system, experts say, or by disabling it militarily if he does.

 

"The S-300 would be the pinnacle of Russian-supplied arms for Syria," Colonel Zvika Haimovich, a senior Israeli air force officer, told Reuters in an interview. "Though it would impinge on our operations, we are capable of overcoming it.

 

He said Israel's "red line" on the S-300 was "between Syria and others". This was a hint Israel might hold off on bombing the batteries as long they did not appear set on shooting down planes within Israeli airspace, of being transferred to Lebanese Hezbollah guerrillas or to Iran - both staunch allies of Assad and enemies of Israel, or of being looted by Islamist rebels.

 

MARKETING MOSCOW

The Israelis excel in electronic warfare. In 1982, they "blinded" Soviet-supplied Syrian anti-aircraft units in Lebanon, then destroyed 19 of them without Israeli losses. Similar technologies helped Israeli jets destroy a suspected nuclear reactor in Syria in 2007 and, this year, to hit Syrian targets on at least three occasions to prevent what intelligence sources called attempts to move advanced weaponry to Hezbollah.

 

A source close to Russia's defense ministry agreed that the Israelis "likely have a million ways to combat the S-300 electronically". But he questioned their feasibility because they had not been tested in war.

"So, whether the S-300 would fail or not cannot be known".

Robert Hewson, an IHS Jane's air power analyst, predicted Israeli prowess would prevail in Syria while cautioning that the S-300 would be the most formidable air defense system it had ever faced. "Israel has had nasty surprises from these things before," he said, noting its steep losses to the Soviet anti-aircraft missiles used by Syria and Egypt in the 1973 war.

Hewson felt Israel would prefer to destroy the S-300 in Syria but may opt instead just to circumvent it as required for missions, especially if there was the risk of inadvertently killing or wounding Russians helping to install the system.

 

Security sources have put the number of Russian military personnel in Syria at several hundred.

"The Russians would react badly to losing their people, and Israel knows that equally," Hewson said.

 

Former Israeli defense minister Moshe Arens said Moscow should be mindful of the harm that seeing the S-300 defeated in Syria would do to exports of the system elsewhere.

 

Past clients include Cyprus, whose S-300, posted on the Greek island of Crete, may have given Israel's air force a chance for test runs during maneuvers over the Mediterranean.

 

"I'd be very surprised if the Russians deliver this system (to Syria)," Arens told Israel Radio. "It would become apparent that our air force is capable of besting this system, and that would not make for good advertising."

 

Playing down the strategic challenge that would be posed to Israel by a Syrian S-300, Arens added. "We are not afraid. This would simply change the situation, and we are not interested in the situation being changed to our detriment."

 

HAZY DEPLOYMENT TIMELINE

The timeline for the anticipated Syrian deployment of the S-300 remains hazy. Hewson said it could be "up and running within a minimum of a few weeks" once all components were in, and provided qualified Syrian personnel were available.

 

But the Russian defense ministry source said he knew of no Syrians who had already been trained by Moscow, and put the completion of the S-300 delivery at "six to 12 months from now".

 

Assuming Assad survives in power, such a lag could provide Israel with thwarting opportunities.

 

Hewson said the truck-towed S-300 would be physically hard to conceal. Its radar, if activated, would emit a distinctive signal that Israel could easily monitor, he added.

 

Diplomatic alternatives may not have been exhausted, though.

Yuval Steinitz, a senior member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's cabinet, held on Thursday what political sources described as a discussion of the Syrian S-300 deal with Russian Ambassador Sergei Yakovlev.

In 2010, following Israeli appeals, Russia scrapped an S-300 sale to Iran. In what may have been a quid pro quo, the Israelis also agreed that year to sell Russia surveillance drones that would narrow its technological military gap with rival Georgia.

 

Russia now has other strategic interests - for example, investment in Israel's Mediterranean gas fields. Silvan Shalom, another Israeli cabinet minister, told Reuters that Russian President Vladimir Putin mentioned the gas fields while hosting Netanyahu in Sochi on May 14 for talks that focused on Syria.

 

But Zvi Magen, a former Israeli ambassador to Moscow, was skeptical that Israel could offer anything that would spur Putin to slacken his support for Assad. "There's too much at stake here for the Russians," he said.

He was alluding to the conflagration's wider geo-strategic dimensions - pitting a Russian preference to keep Syria under Assad's control to preserve Moscow's last significant toehold in the Middle East against a Western and Gulf Arab desire for the downfall of Assad to roll back Iranian influence in the region.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't hack a system that has no wireless or hardwired connection unless you have some kind of T-X Terminator 3 technology. Besides, Israel are no geniuses, Anonymous soon shut them down.

 

I agree with your assessment of the S-300 and the variables involved in it's procurement marcos, but I think your forgetting that Israel has proven time and again that they have some pretty good ground based intelligence on it's neighbors. I also wouldn't throw out the idea that the U.S. could supply Satellite and other types of intel on the S-300's as well to aid in taking them out.

What can you take it out with that's immune to getting shot down itself, missile or aircraft? If well setup and operated by Russians the only solace may be that it can only fire so many SAMs consecutively. I'll be blunt and say that I'm secretly hoping they get at least one plane shot down for their endeavours of late and continual contravention of international law. Maybe the S-300 will succeed where the UN have failed. Maybe they will then appoint a 48H6E2 as UN Secretary General and replace the US veto with a cat.


Edited by marcos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

MLRS comes to mind, and LORA, unless they have the U.S. Atacms in an export version. If you want to overwhelm the system, I'd use barrage jamming from multiple directions by having the ECM set up on multiple cheap drones or land based since we're so close to the threat to entice the the S-300 to wake up and fire, while I fired multiple rounds from the LORA system, the round itself is small and maneuvering, and I'd have each round maneuver differently and come from different directions if applicable depending on range which coupled with the jamming, they would be a tough target I would imagine. Even if the S-300 attempted to intercept, it would be prohibitively expensive for Syria since they apparently will have a very limited number of S-300 sites, and also missiles available for the system. If the system isn't knocked out directly, it will soon become combat ineffective, all without even using HARM laden Israeli aircraft.

 

 

http://missilethreat.com/missiles/lora/

 

LORA (Long Range Artillery Rocket) which is similar to the U.S. ATACMS. Each LORA missile weighs 1.23 tons and carries a half ton warhead. With a range of 300 kilometers, GPS guidance is used to land the warhead within 10 meters (31 feet) of the aim point. These missiles are expensive. The similar U.S. ATACMS, which is fired from a MLRS container that normally carries six of the standard MLRS rockets, cost a million dollars each. It's often a lot cheaper if you can use smart bombs (which cost less than $50,000). But if you don't have aircraft up there, or control of the air is contested, you can get a LORA missile on a target within ten minutes of the order being given.

 

432px-Lora_missile_launcher.jpg

 

 

If the war escalates and Syria Egypt and Iran attack, there's a solution, and you can see it on Google Maps:

 

http://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/eilabun-ilabun-israeli-tactical-nuclear-weapons-storage/view/?service=0

 

Eilabun [ilabun] is reportedly a tactical nuclear weapons storage facility in eastern Galilee. One of two Israeli nuclear weapons storage facilities, it is located near the town of the same name immediately west of the Sea of Gallilee off Route 65. It is speculated that that Tirosh is the strategic weapons storage site, while Eilabun is the tactical weapons storage site. Eilabun reportedly stores tactical nuclear artillery shells, nuclear landmines and other tactical nuclear weapons.

Edited by Invader ZIM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(or do a BF3 troll attack with a jeep and C4).

 

LOL, nice one marcos. Yea, I had to come up with some kind of solution without using manned aircraft as per the scenario so I used the LORA system as an example.

 

Using Google Maps, I think you could move parts of the Israeli army to the border and help ensure a safe operations area at the border closest to the known position of the S-300 and engage if it's in range. Going by the given ranges, I can stay inside Israel without going into Lebanon and engage air defense sites in southern Syria into the region of Homs, perhaps with a lightened payload the Hamah area. This would force the S-300 sites to be positioned far enough away to prevent them from engaging aircraft over Israel itself, or risk detection and destruction from Lora.

 

Looking at the brochure from the maker's of LORA: http://www.iai.co.il/sip_storage/FILES/6/39426.pdf

 

It's also capable of being launched from ship, so that opens up new possibilities for taking out the deeper SAM threats in Syria without air strikes.

 

Looking at the map:

 

aa3132-651081.jpg

 

Israel has some options of dealing with the expected threat, that we know of at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had the same issue in Cyprus back in 99' when we bought the S-300 from Russia. Let's just say some neighbors in the North (look at map above) didn't take these news very well and after repeated threats about bombing internationals ports and power stations we had to move them in Crete.

 

But for Syria to get this tech.. man it's not good news. Israel should be pissed by now. No way they'll let that happen.


Edited by Innerloop
 

Intel i7 12700k / Corsair H150i Elite Capellix / Asus TUF Z690 Wifi D4 / Corsair Dominator 32GB 3200Mhz / Corsair HW1000W / 1x Samsung SSD 970 Evo Plus 500Gb + 1 Corsair MP600 1TB / ASUS ROG Strix RTX 3080 OC V2 / Fractal Design Meshify 2 / HOTAS Warthog / TFRP Rudder / TrackIR 5 / Dell U2515h 25" Monitor 1440p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

boys,girls, no need to get upset, Israel will not get destroyed because of a couple of s300 systems in Syria.. and no Israeli civilian airplanes are getting shot, you do realize before the outbreak in 2011 in Syria there were many planes going to Israel while flying over Syria.. are you saying Syria couldn't shoot them down? they didn't because thats a war crime, ..

 

The only lunatics that are capable of shooting civilian plane down are the one that Isral is arming today in Syria-wahabi-salafi alah-snackbars.. EU embargo for weapons has fallen meaning they will get all the fancy gadgets to kill all targets in sight.. including armed with modern manpads..

 

if i were israel i'd worry for my wahabi friends and their weapons than responsible Syrian armed forces that have yet to retaliate for Israeli 3 attacks by now-which constitute an act of war by international law..

 

And here, we sadly see some people trying to say Israel is endangered and cannot live with s300 in Syria?)) thats sad, .. to be armed with 200 nukes, US support, iron dome, modern air force, UN council immunity, and still be afraid on a couple of system s300 in syria? It just shows how much confidence Israel has in itself. and i think this is the biggest loss in Israel right now, them showing to the world how low their confidence in their nation, their country,their armed forces is.. its ultra low..

 

@marcos.. i agree, i vote for 48H6E2 Secretary of UN Council..

 

Again, people are arguing this is a threat cuz MAYBE a civilian plane could be targeted.. all this is a MAYBE, a potentiality that is YET to happen, while Israeli planes ACTUALLY ALREADY violated airspace of Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, and bombed targets, killed people while NOT being attacked in the first place-ergo committing and act of aggression .. i talk to many people, and many people see through this "israel is under attack and threatened BS".. but some still peddle the nazi thinking of pre-emptive attacks..even though this is forbidden by international law..

 

somebody mentioned what would happen if Israel would kill Russia technicians.. well, remember what happened when Georgia launched a massive MLRS attack on a city where Russian peacekeepers were and killed 50 outright? ..same thing but with more dangerous consequence for the whole world because Israel is armed with nukes.. I figure a Tu-160 would be called for to retaliate with cruise missiles and hit army barracks (this should pay back for 50 Russian specialist plus another 200 soldiers for interest cost ) .. If at this point US doesn't run around screaming STOP STOP, we would see a Israeli retaliation and since they are the paranoid and unrestrained kind of a species they could contemplate a nuke strike with their german donated Dolphin subs in the Black sea and hit something in Western part of Russia.. at this point Russia would be mad as hell and could very well start lobbing ICBMs and if US would get involved put US on the list as well and the whole charade called civilization could end in 25 minutes...

 

My guess is US officials told ISrael to shut up, and they did, they made many comments lately how their THREAT wasn't intended for Russians, and how ISrael is usually over-confident but not so much after all to kill Russians.. and explained in detail how they are going to wait patiently until Russian technicians take off back to Russia and then attack the system.. but somehow before its assembled .. now thats one hell of a acrobatic move by ISrael.. how they gonna accomplish this is beyond me.. The system will be very much hidden by the time Russians depart..

 

My guess is, Israel will employ their mercs such as Al-Nusra terrorist groups to go and hunt S-300 on the ground.. Israeli new guided munitions-alah snackbar, each "missile" costs one Koran and 100 USD)) .. Syria knows this, they flirted to the terrorist a "radar dish" and drew them into a valley and finished them off... it would seem Al-Nusra has a priority now, its not syrian armour units, or infantry but radar defense)) i wonder why and i wonder by whom are they guided)lol..


Edited by Kaktus29
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's also capable of being launched from ship, so that opens up new possibilities for taking out the deeper SAM threats in Syria without air strikes.

One drawback. Syria also have P-800s.

 

http://www.nti.org/gsn/article/russia-exports-sophisticated-cruise-missiles-syria/

 

And they have Iskander-E too. Same range as LORA, faster (Mach 6-7) and 1500lb warhead.

 

 

 

 

CEP - 30m

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/ss-26-iskander-e.htm

 

Fuel Air Explosive/EMP/sub-munitions warhead?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS-26

http://missilethreat.com/missiles/iskander-ss-26/

 

Several Smerch systems could also keep the Israeli LORAs back from the border.

 

3M-14E is a possibility too.

 

What I find amusing is all this 'urging Russia not to sell SAMs to Syria'. It's as if they were saving up for some kind of airstrike.

 

http://www.voanews.com/content/kerry-urges-russia-not-to-sell-weapons-to-syria/1657835.html


Edited by marcos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, I liked the third video, always appreciate the laugh marcos :D

 

If your going to use tactical ballistic missiles, that's what the Israeli Arrow 2 system is for, as well as the Patriots and Iron Dome they have. Syria bogged down in a massive civil war for years already probably means that their military cohesion isn't as good as it was when the country wasn't at war with itself.

 

The civil war makes tactical strikes by Israel easier because of the inner strife.

 

And P-800's are the least of your worries when you can use your airforce to sink the ships that carry them, or use the Dolphin submarine to launch cruise missiles to take out the S-300's, Smerch's and other assorted long range artillery systems. Israel has counterbattery radars that would pinpoint the launch from enemy artillery and allow for quick strikes in retaliation.

 

http://www.defencetalk.com/israel-receive-pac-3-systems-by-us-22446/

 

Back in 2009, it looks like we left behind a few of our PAC-3 systems for Israel to use, these would work well against the maneuvering Iksandr missiles. But the interesting part of the article is this:

 

During the previous Juniper Cobra exercise, held in 2007, the focus was placed upon integration of the PAC 3 and the Arrow 2 systems, whereas this year the goal is to heighten the interoperability between Aegis, Arrow, and THAAD.

Israel had planned to utilize the PAC 3 system as the middle rung on its nascent five-tiered anti-missile network, which will involve the Arrow 3, Arrow 2, Iron Dome, and David’s Sling systems.

 

Confirmation of the fact is in this 2011 article:

 

http://www.jpost.com/Defense/IDF-upgrades-Patriot-missile-defense-battery

 

In July, the IAF announced that it was upgrading the Patriot with new software updates and hardware changes. The purpose of the upgrade is to enable the Patriot launchers and accompanying components to operate the system’s new generation of interceptors which are used by the new generation Patriot called PAC 3.

 

Israel’s existing launchers can fire four missiles, and once upgraded to accommodate PAC 3 interceptors, they will be able to fire 16 missiles each: four missiles in each of the launcher’s four canisters.

 

The IAF eventually plans on phasing out the Patriot missile systems and replacing them with the David’s Sling, a missile defense system currently under development by Rafael and the US-based Raytheon.

 

David’s Sling is expected to have a longer range than the Patriot and will also one day replace the Hawk surface-to-air missile systems in air defense missions.

 

It would appear that Israel has already set itself up for the expected ballistic missile threat, and it seems to be tied with the U.S. network for interception of missiles.


Edited by Invader ZIM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your going to use tactical ballistic missiles, that's what the Israeli Arrow 2 system is for, as well as the Patriots and Iron Dome they have. Syria bogged down in a massive civil war for years already probably means that their military cohesion isn't as good as it was when the country wasn't at war with itself.

 

The civil war makes tactical strikes by Israel easier because of the inner strife.

 

And P-800's are the least of your worries when you can use your airforce to sink the ships that carry them, or use the Dolphin submarine to launch cruise missiles to take out the S-300's.

 

http://www.defencetalk.com/israel-receive-pac-3-systems-by-us-22446/

 

Back in 2009, it looks like we left behind a few of our PAC-3 systems for Israel to use, these would work well against the maneuvering Iksandr missiles. But the interesting part of the article is this:

 

During the previous Juniper Cobra exercise, held in 2007, the focus was placed upon integration of the PAC 3 and the Arrow 2 systems, whereas this year the goal is to heighten the interoperability between Aegis, Arrow, and THAAD.

Israel had planned to utilize the PAC 3 system as the middle rung on its nascent five-tiered anti-missile network, which will involve the Arrow 3, Arrow 2, Iron Dome, and David’s Sling systems.

 

Confirmation of the fact is in this 2011 article:

 

http://www.jpost.com/Defense/IDF-upgrades-Patriot-missile-defense-battery

 

In July, the IAF announced that it was upgrading the Patriot with new software updates and hardware changes. The purpose of the upgrade is to enable the Patriot launchers and accompanying components to operate the system’s new generation of interceptors which are used by the new generation Patriot called PAC 3.

 

Israel’s existing launchers can fire four missiles, and once upgraded to accommodate PAC 3 interceptors, they will be able to fire 16 missiles each: four missiles in each of the launcher’s four canisters.

 

The IAF eventually plans on phasing out the Patriot missile systems and replacing them with the David’s Sling, a missile defense system currently under development by Rafael and the US-based Raytheon.

 

David’s Sling is expected to have a longer range than the Patriot and will also one day replace the Hawk surface-to-air missile systems in air defense missions.

 

It would appear that Israel has already set itself up for the expected ballistic missile threat, and it seems to be tied with the U.S. network for interception of missiles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never liked hit-to-kill. Doomed to failure. Most SAM/AAMs don't even have a good record for getting close.

 

Besides that, peace can only come through an Israeli failure. Who knows, maybe Iran, Syria and Egypt will go hell for leather simultaneously.


Edited by marcos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing most countries agree with you and don't rely entirely on the new hit to kill technology alone, that's why you'll notice in photos and videos that you see Patriot PAC-2GEM+ carrying units alongside the newer PAC-3's. This allows a larger engagement envelope against aircraft and ballistic missiles between the more conventional proximity PAC-2, and the more exotic PAC-3.

 

 

Besides that, peace can only come through an Israeli failure. Who knows, maybe Iran, Syria and Egypt will go hell for leather simultaneously.

 

I agree with you there, but then we're back to the tactical nuke deterrent option if that were to happen, as well as the U.S. commitment to assist Israel, which also acts as a deterrent to such actions.

 

Like I said, we'll have to wait and see. It would take months to train Syrian SAM operators on the S-300 system, and who knows what could happen in the meantime? The entire Regime may crumble before anything would have to be done about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had the same issue in Cyprus back in 99' when we bought the S-300 from Russia. Let's just say some neighbors in the North (look at map above) didn't take these news very well and after repeated threats about bombing internationals ports and power stations we had to move them in Crete.

 

But for Syria to get this tech.. man it's not good news. Israel should be pissed by now. No way they'll let that happen.

 

Israel may be pissed by the message rather than the weapons themselves. SAM's are easy targets for those who invested seriously in training and hardware Like Israel.

 

I don't see Syria suddenly becoming a power due to some S300's alone when the rest of the military hardware consists in junk.

[sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic]

My PC specs below:

Case: Corsair 400C

PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum

CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T)

RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T

MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4

GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X

Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO

Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red

HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals

Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion, Syria is part of a regional/superpower strategic asset and foothold in the region.

 

If the Assad regime falls, Russia stands to lose Tartus, which is the last Russian military facility outside the former Soviet Union, and its only Mediterranean repair and replenishment spot.

 

And if the new government in Syria would happen to be more Western friendly, it would isolate Iran from it's former regime ally and helps tighten the noose on them, as well as the possibility the new government could deny the Russian navy access to operations in the Mediterranean.

 

That's what I think this is all really about.


Edited by Invader ZIM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if the new government in Syria would happen to be more Western friendly, it would isolate Iran from it's former regime ally and helps tighten the noose on them, as well as the possibility the new government could deny the Russian navy access to operations in the Mediterranean.

 

That's what I think this is all really about.

I think that's too general an assessment. Tartus is along the Coast to the West of the Alawite Mountains... which draws it's namesake from the Alawites who live there. They are very much a homogeneous lot and the New Damascus (Sunni + Fundamentalists) would never control them. The same way they won't control the largely Homogeneous Kurdish areas. I guess if Assad did fall, the old Alawite State that used to exist would be reformed. Tartus would remain as it is.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...