Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Su-24 Fencer

    Share
    avatar
    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1947
    Points : 2068
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Fri May 16, 2014 11:21 am

    TR1 wrote:Yeah that story is fairy tales.

    ...

    And even if it was a Su-34, the story still reads like a Russian Tom Clancy fantasy.

    Wrong forum, you wanted to write this at the mp.net.
    avatar
    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5718
    Points : 5756
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  TR1 on Fri May 16, 2014 11:33 am

    Nah, that my friend is commonsense.net Wink .

    mutantsushi
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 282
    Points : 304
    Join date : 2013-12-11

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  mutantsushi on Fri May 16, 2014 11:49 am

    The story is just transparent BS.  The claims to the events are not attributed to any specific source.
    The claims about USN sailor resignations is absurd, with no clear way any Russian source would know that info,
    Resigning your post while on combat duty would certainly result in being imprisoned, yet the story ends there,
    and no further info on the alleged event has come out, even from Russian military sources.
    The story is padded with generic info on the ship class (threatening reference to nukes) which doesn't bear on specific situation.
    Never mind the technical matter of the idea of Khibini on Su-24.
    It's obviously a "feel good" story for certain perspectives, but can't be taken seriously outside of kindergarten.net.
    Why one can complain about Western MSM fabrication or mis-coverage while applauding such crap is beyond me.
    avatar
    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 906
    Points : 1072
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Sujoy on Fri May 16, 2014 8:35 pm

    I am not sold on the idea that this story is entirely "false" considering the constant lies coming out of the US media.

    The Khibiny EW system were able to neutralize the AEGIS phased array radar target tracking capabilities while the ship's crew was unable to re-boot the system.

    A more pertinent question is whether the jammer affected the radar system itself or only the computer-based component or both at the same time ?

    Also , it is essential to note that the Aegis destroyer Donald Cook left the Black Sea post this incident .

    Firebird
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 932
    Points : 964
    Join date : 2011-10-14

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Firebird on Fri May 16, 2014 9:07 pm

    1)I suspect that the Sukhoi could jam the destroyer's radar.
    In a full scale war tho, planes could be shot down. Ships wouldnt hesitate to shoot. And neither would planes.

    Overall, I suspect that superpower v superpower, a LOT of radar could be jammed. Most equipment is designed for use vs lesser powers.
    For superpower disputes... u basically threaten nukes/false flags or other measures.

    2)This sounds a hell of a lot like EM weapons may have been used to disorientate the US crew.
    They already had the stress of "is this ww3 starting... what should we do..." etc.

    EM weapons arent fiction. It seems very likely the US used them to substantially demoralise the Iraqi troops in GW2, astheyd been putting up a fair defence until then.

    I cant understand why Yanukovich didnt use them vs Maidenloons, or why they arent being used in the S and E Ukraine.
    Perhaps they will be?
    avatar
    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1934
    Points : 2101
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Cyberspec on Fri May 16, 2014 11:48 pm

    I'm no expert on EW but I suspect several aircraft would be needed to jam a destroyers main radar.

    But I do find it surprising that the Su-24 buzzed the ship a dozen times without any countermeasures being taken by the ship
    avatar
    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5718
    Points : 5756
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  TR1 on Fri May 16, 2014 11:57 pm

    Cyberspec wrote:I'm no expert on EW but I suspect several aircraft would be needed to jam a destroyers main radar.

    But I do find it surprising that the Su-24 buzzed the ship a dozen times without any countermeasures being taken by the ship

    What exactly was it supposed to do? Shoot it down?

    A reco Su-24 buzzed the ship, nobody jammed anyone, the world moves on.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15994
    Points : 16645
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  GarryB on Sat May 17, 2014 11:41 am

    The situation has a lot to do with what happens... and of course whose toys belong to whom.

    If this US ship was in Iranian waters and it was firing on big powerful dangerous speed boats and a plane is detected approaching from 50km away or more then obviously the only result will be to shoot down a civilian airliner.

    In this case however the aircraft in question might have been equipped to shoot back so obviously they would do nothing.

    I have read that a single Mi-9 EW helo has blanked out large areas of civilian radar when occidentally turned on... the effectiveness of jamming is directly related to the square of distance so flying over the target radar would give it the best chance of defeating said radar, but jamming radar rarely damages the target radar...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 906
    Points : 1072
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Sujoy on Sat May 17, 2014 1:57 pm

    So far this is what we do know from the disclosures made by the US Navy :

    (1) A Su 24 "buzzed" the USS Donald Cook on April 10 , when it entered the Black Sea .

    (2) Aegis spotted from afar the approaching aircraft, and sounded alarm .

    (3) The ship's in board radars calculated the speed of the approaching target

    (4) After the incident the USS Donald Cook rushes to Romania .


    What we do NOT know is :

    (1) Did the algorithm of the radar in the “Aegis” not load under the influence of jamming by the Su-24 ? This is what may have caused the screens to go blank .

    (2) Why was the Donald Cook suddenly sent to dock at Romania ?


    Bear in mind that this system of mobile location ( in this case the ship) has a significant drawback. That is, the target tracking capabilities. They work well when there is a number of these ships which can coordinate with each other somehow. In this case there was just one destroyer .

    avatar
    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5364
    Points : 5607
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Werewolf on Sat May 17, 2014 5:07 pm

    Sujoy wrote:
    Bear in mind that  this system of mobile location ( in this case the ship) has a significant drawback. That is, the target tracking capabilities. They work well when there is a number of these ships which can coordinate with each other somehow. In this case there was just one destroyer .


    This goes for both, Su-24 was alone and therefore much weaker jamming capability then with several sources to create a high effective or at least dense EW environment for radar systemes.

    Since the western meida especially not reporting from official side as only "Russian bear aggression" and no comment on the fact that the ship retreated from the scene quickly after that shows already that it was indeed jammed by the Su-24. Usually americans are immidiatley reacting with additional propaganda in media how advanced they are but in this case they only use russophobic propaganda and not "We are the best" propaganda.
    avatar
    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1934
    Points : 2101
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Cyberspec on Sun May 18, 2014 7:56 am

    TR1 wrote:
    Cyberspec wrote:I'm no expert on EW but I suspect several aircraft would be needed to jam a destroyers main radar.

    But I do find it surprising that the Su-24 buzzed the ship a dozen times without any countermeasures being taken by the ship

    What exactly was it supposed to do? Shoot it down?

    A reco Su-24 buzzed the ship, nobody jammed anyone, the world moves on.

    Several things it can do short of shooting  Rolling Eyes


    Werewolf wrote:This goes for both, Su-24 was alone and therefore much weaker jamming capability then with several sources to create a high effective or at least dense EW environment for radar systemes.

    Since the western meida especially not reporting from official side as only "Russian bear aggression" and no comment on the fact that the ship retreated from the scene quickly after that shows already that it was indeed jammed by the Su-24. Usually americans are immidiatley reacting with additional propaganda in media how advanced they are but in this case they only use russophobic propaganda and not "We are the best" propaganda.

    There were 2 Su-24's involved according to reports
    avatar
    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5718
    Points : 5756
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  TR1 on Sun May 18, 2014 9:12 am

    What things can do it short of shooting, that would have changed anything in that scenario?
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15994
    Points : 16645
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  GarryB on Sun May 18, 2014 10:34 am

    No form of jamming I know will make the screens go blank... I would suggest this vessel had a malfunction and put in to port for repairs.

    I would point out that there was a film crew on board the AEGIS cruiser that shot down the Iranian Airbus and it showed a malfunction in launching the Standard SAM that shot down the target. It took a full 1 minute 30 seconds to correct the error to launch the missile... which performed as expected.

    One and a half minutes delay when a Shipwreck is coming will likely result in a ship wreck... or several.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1934
    Points : 2101
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Cyberspec on Sun May 18, 2014 12:40 pm

    TR1 wrote:What things can do it short of shooting, that would have changed anything in that scenario?

    Issue a warning over the radio, lock onto the aircraft, take evasive maneuvers, lay a smokescreen.....just a few of the top of my head....I'm pretty sure heading to Romania isn't their standard SOP after being buzzed.

    ...

    There were reports that land based anti-ship batteries were also tracking the ship and it's not impossible that some land based jammers could've been used.
    avatar
    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5718
    Points : 5756
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  TR1 on Sun May 18, 2014 11:02 pm

    This report is 100% bull.

    Stop trying to find reasoning for laughable nonsense.

    You guys....seriously.

    There is zero proof whatsoever anything changed in the operations of the destroyer's functions. Or spooked anyone.

    avatar
    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1934
    Points : 2101
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Cyberspec on Mon May 19, 2014 1:46 am

    Obviously we are just speculating....as are you
    avatar
    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5718
    Points : 5756
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  TR1 on Mon May 19, 2014 3:37 am

    I am relying on logic and common sense, as well as technical information that is public ally available. The report that is causing this "speculation" isn't worth wiping my rear end with.

    I am surprised they didn't mention the US was pulling out of NATO due to fear of war with Russia, due to the Su-24s shocking capabilities.
    avatar
    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15994
    Points : 16645
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  GarryB on Mon May 19, 2014 10:52 am

    Lighten up TR-1... it could just as easily be about how the super AESA radars of the US ship led to the Su-24 accidently flying over the ship several times because its electronics were completely defeated and the plane had to get a visual location because every bit of electronics on the aircraft were fried by the super US ship.

    The US ship immediately pulled into port to celebrate their victory...

    Personally I find it nice that they even dare to suggest Russian superiority in military equipment... never would have happened even just 10 years ago in the early 2000s.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Mindstorm
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 762
    Points : 943
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Mindstorm on Mon May 19, 2014 11:48 am



    http://vpk.name/news/110411_Milliardyi_dlya_smartoruzhiya.html
    avatar
    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 800
    Points : 884
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 29
    Location : Indonesia

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Stealthflanker on Mon May 19, 2014 3:17 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:

    http://vpk.name/news/110411_Milliardyi_dlya_smartoruzhiya.html

    Yep so Kibinhy is not the part of Su-24 avionics. So that story regarding Su-24 jamming Donald cook is wrong.

    avatar
    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 906
    Points : 1072
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Sujoy on Mon May 19, 2014 4:59 pm

    Stealthflanker wrote:Yep so Kibinhy is not the part of Su-24 avionics. So that story regarding Su-24 jamming Donald cook is wrong.

    The US Navy has accepted that Su 24 jammed the Aegis . Maybe the part in the report stating that the Kibinhy EW system was used is wrong .
    avatar
    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1947
    Points : 2068
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Mon May 19, 2014 11:05 pm

    Stealthflanker wrote:Yep so Kibinhy is not the part of Su-24 avionics. So that story regarding Su-24 jamming Donald cook is wrong.

    Why do you need Khibiny to jam a pre-jammed system like Aegis?
    avatar
    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5718
    Points : 5756
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  TR1 on Mon May 19, 2014 11:59 pm

    Sujoy wrote:
    Stealthflanker wrote:Yep so Kibinhy is not the part of Su-24 avionics. So that story regarding Su-24 jamming Donald cook is wrong.

    The US Navy has accepted that Su 24 jammed the Aegis . Maybe the part in the report stating that the Kibinhy EW system was used is wrong .

    How exactly has the US Navy accepted the Su-24 jammed Aegis??!?!

    It was a RECO Su-24! It's jammer is (aside from old as hell) is for basic self protection.
    avatar
    Sujoy
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 906
    Points : 1072
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Sujoy on Tue May 20, 2014 10:05 am

    TR1 wrote:How exactly has the US Navy accepted the Su-24 jammed Aegis??!?!

    The US had send two destroyers to the Black sea . The USS Donald Cook and USS Taylor . Pentagon had then stated -

    “The Donald Cook’s mission is to reassure NATO allies and Black Sea partners of America’s commitment to strengthen and improve interoperability while working towards mutual goals in the region ."

    Donald Cook & Taylor were supposed to be in the Black Sea for an extended period of time . However , the Donald Cook cut short it's mission & left immediately after the incident . Pentagon has NOT clarified why it left abruptly .

    The Pentagon actually used the term "provocative" and "un professional" to describe the incident.

    avatar
    RTN
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 187
    Points : 172
    Join date : 2014-03-24
    Location : Fairfield , CT

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  RTN on Tue May 20, 2014 10:07 am

    Morpheus Eberhardt wrote: a pre-jammed system like Aegis?

    Pre Jammed System means what ?

    Sponsored content

    Re: Su-24 Fencer

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat May 27, 2017 5:43 pm