Syrian Air Defence Force

Viktor wrote:Interfax military reports that Syrian AD troops are in Russia - you must pay to open link

Story is interesting and I expect to popup somewhere else.

Syrian air defense officers being trained in Russia - source

What source, where's the link??

AlfaT8 wrote:What source, where's the link??

"Interfax military"

http://www.militarynews.ru/EMAIN.ASP

Nice article among many others lately about the issue
S-300: NATO’s nightmare and perhaps Russia’s too

Viktor wrote:Nice article among many others lately about the issue
S-300: NATO’s nightmare and perhaps Russia’s too

I love how the comment is a jewish guy saying that it is easy to do EW against the system. Of course they like to dream about it, even when in the article, they explain it is really hard to combat such a system with EW.

sepheronx wrote:I love how the comment is a jewish guy saying that it is easy to do EW against the system.   Of course they like to dream about it, even when in the article, they explain it is really hard to combat such a system with EW.

It would be bad for their moral if the country leadership said the only thing they can do is cry or take losses.

Dont want to comment on this but forced too.

This article written by a typical Indian  mostly a new entry  to a payed  gov job thinking great about his career.

Just see how he cunningly shifts and balances his position between Israel and Russian weapons.
Thinks he has  agreat knowledge of Israel and Russian tactics.

RAIN OF ISRAELI AIR ATTACKS IN 2013 (Article states).. Oh really I did not know that .. 

but oh but Israel has 300 f-16 aircrafts (operational)..
why only 3 -4 attacks in  ( in space of 6 months).. My GOD that is too much of a time..
Every attack  approx 10 jets used as per intelligence reports..
THE ARTICLE DOES NOT EXPLAIN THIS PHENOMENON.. 

why these selective and less jets used /attack.. there was no S-300 IN Syria..  during the first 6 months of the year..
There should have been 1000 air attacks not 3 attacks in past 6 months ..if Israel had to show its air power dominance invincibility..
Israel should have launched a BLITZKREIG on Syria.. but what we see few Israel aircraft snucking from behind the mountains and attacking empty buildings in Damascus .. hilarious.. 

This part very quietly , cunningly OMITTED in the article..
The truth is that  S-300 is still not operational in Syria.. and Israel should have launched a series of BLITZKRIEG air bombing campaign against Damascus and military sites..  

Infact what Israel has shown is the complete impotence of IAF AIR FORCE technology in the face of ISOLATED SYRIAN ultra short range pantysir mobile positions

THIS TRUTH IS COMPLETELY JUNKED FROM THE ARTICLED as something ALIEN ..


Just compare with Iraq where approx 2000 aircraft continuously bomb the ground targets for many days altogether.. 
But what we see of Israel attacks is just  10 min -20 min stay inside Syria airspace, hardly couple of air -surface dud missile launches  and those aircraft running from the Damascus airspace like some bull crap .. or some engine flame  out:roll:
or to really tell the truth  a pantsyir automated munition launched and chasing their AR@#.. !  

Everything omitted in the article as if this is something out of the world..

Israel is fact is just using these selective  attack profiles with no military meaning whatsoever..just to provoke SAA and invite a response and divert SAA from their crushing tactics against rebels..
but SAA is clever enough to understand the vile intentions of ISraeli airforce and not commit itself to any counter strike which would be a blunder on part of Syria.

Not even a inch of reality of Israeli Air force (farce) impotence reflected in this article can I ask why  


This article is now copied in all U.S websites as some leading article in the world of air defense..!!! what nonsense..  

But the world is like that only so no complaints from my side.. he he he  

Viktor wrote:Nice article among many others lately about the issue
S-300: NATO’s nightmare and perhaps Russia’s too

Hmmm...gaurav correct on the pantirs isolation and the part about "Middle East maneuvers" from Strategy Page sound like something out of F-16.net, overall a good try at least. 

@gurav

There are no objective articles in the net as no journalist is military expert and no military expert knows everything or is totally unbiased when writing articles.

But I like this article because despite some inaccuracies (and US and Israel could be equally pissed if not even more on this) it puts accent on.

- Why S-300 is deadly
- Deadlines of Russian SAM in general
- Importance of training
- Rightly sees that besides SU only Vietnam had extensive and functional SAM network

the part about "Middle East maneuvers" from Strategy Page sound like something out of F-16.net, overall a good try at least.

Yes it seems to be F-16.net philosophy.
The philosophy states that If ISRAel wants then it
can DESTRoY WHOLE batteries of S-300 "now deployed in Syria"..in Damsacus region..

Just see the direction of this article ..
that superiority of Israeli F-16 is indisputable .. then it shifts the balance
to the Syrian side saiying that Russia will continue to supply additional
Batteries of S-300 if Israel destroys Syrian S-300..

In effect what he is concluding is that the Syria S-300 are no match to
well trained F-16 pilots and Electronic Warfare , dummy targets , noise injection that Israel will deploy against Syria.. S-300 BATTERIES..

I mean what non sense is this..

Why S-300 is deadly

Point taken.

Deadlines of Russian SAM in general

Correct .Point taken
I think you are stating the Speed of s-300 munition mach 7.. to destroy targets
above Israeli -Telaviv airspace.

Importance of training

Absolutely correct.

Rightly sees that besides SU only Vietnam had extensive and functional SAM network

Thats one of the only points that I liked in the article.
Vietnam has recently upgraded its batteries to fire very high speed long range munitions..
..DEEP INSIDE CHINESE TERRITORY.. that is SOME REEL AIR defense force I guess..  

This is a realistic analysis of the capabilities of Syrian air defense network against a western attack publicly available.


http://www.arms-expo.ru/057050048050.html


How i had explained already a pair of years ago, the percentage of up-to date air defense systems in Syrian network in very low and the bulk of that small percentage is composed mostly by point defense systems.

At this is necessary to add : T

- The obsolescence of command and control nodes of IAD
- Very poor to not-existent very long range early warning systems
- Antediluvian EW assets
- Total absence of any space based sensor
- Scarce cability to combine with Air Forces for anti-decoy/ambush missions
- Wide presence of enemy ground forces (FSA operatives) capable to provide crucial live-time humint on the position of the most important elements of Syrian PVO.


In spite of all what said, those very few , insulated, up-to date SAM systems in Syria represent still deadly menaces for NATO hypothetical intruders to the point that very likely the entire attention of NATO planners in those hours in concentrated in track the position of those few high mobile batteries (through mostly HUMINT on the field and the aid of space based  sensor surveillance for data matching).

The best option for Syrian planners in those hours is to force transporter vehicles /APCs / transloaders vehicles and  even civilian heavy vehicles of the right size to enter ,with those SAM systems, under covered places (such as hangars ,tunnels, even underground civil parking ) and arrange them with extensive coverage with wood/metal "skeleton" sustainers (included the original SAM systems) so to render impossible to categorize their precise layout from space based sensor and very difficult to do also for far observer on the ground ,

Mixing those groups and maintaining high the mobility will render, even only planning for NATO's generals hundreds of times more difficult and force them at risk direct intrusions of Syrian airspace.

In general IAD work better when offensive element of the armed forces of the Nation it defend can selectively choose and obliterate enemy air-bases , one after the other with overwhelming attacks (in a progressive action of degradation of enemy Air Force capabilities)  or,anyhow, force enemy Air Force at engage forcibly some elements of those offensive forces ,such as cruise missile launchers, ballistic missile launchers , MLRS or advancing ground forces etc...etc...to avoid to be obliterated.

At example in Yom Kippur war the combination of the presence, for the first time in the Middle East military history, of relatively up-to-date (even if downgraded export models) of SAM systems and of the up-delineated situation (advancing ground forces menacing to destroy IAF's airbases in a matter of hours if capable to achieve a breakthrough) generated truly hindering losses among IAF aircraft "forced" at attack the enemy forces without getting months or even years to prepare for the mission.


What just said is the rational behind international treaty such as MTCR; without those treaties could have been Syrian and Iranian generals, not NATO ones with the limited number of cruise missiles present on theirs ships, at debate in those hours in what airbase full of aircraft , what ship, what radar installation, what C4 base etc... to selectively destroy ,before move the launchers recharge and repeat all under cover of theirs national IAD and all within over two thousands km

That would not only prevent to enemy nations to slowly bring and concentrate theirs aircraft ,radar, ships and command in the theatre of operation in view of an air campaign (an action that would simply expose them to theirs destruction even before be operational in the area !) ,but would also totally deprive them of any capabilities or time to plan the missions : in the best chance them would find themselves in the same situation of IAF in Yom Kippur war....

IAF already bombed Syria with no consequences. And I woukd say that US has better odds than them. It's likely that US already knows exact capability of Syrian AD. Drones, satellites, CIA, defectors will help them paint the picture.
It's very interesting what they will do- criple SAA or target so called WMD sites.
I'm interested in seeing Syrian AD performance too, but wouldn't hold my breath.
And about slaughter of civilians- rebels, terrorists, kurds, regime forces.. all of them don't really care about them. I don't think we can expect US carrying too.

Can somebody tell me how many BUK and Pantsirs have been sold to Syria and what does the Syrian IADS currently consist of. 

AlfaT8 wrote:Can somebody tell me how many BUK  and Pantsirs have been sold to Syria and what does the Syrian IADS currently consist of. 

Wikipedia

LINK


Link mindstorm provided

Syria's air defenses, Salvation or illusion? Подробнее: http://www.arms-expo.ru/057050048050.html

SOC analysis

LINK

Another SOC article

LINK


And there you go. Now you need to sum up the whole thing. It will be interesting to see the role of Russian Navy in Syrian air defense throughout providing information about

the start of the attack, numbers, vectors of approach etc.

Yeah notice that the one thing I wrote there is from 2007, and is a bit out of date! Not too much has changed in terms of overall coverage or layout, but that was written before Chinese-made modern radars were located, new Russian SAM deliveries, etc.

Viktor wrote:

AlfaT8 wrote:Can somebody tell me how many BUK  and Pantsirs have been sold to Syria and what does the Syrian IADS currently consist of. 

Wikipedia

LINK


Link mindstorm provided

Syria's air defenses, Salvation or illusion?  Подробнее: http://www.arms-expo.ru/057050048050.html

SOC analysis

LINK

Another SOC article

LINK


And there you go. Now you need to sum up the whole thing. It will be interesting to see the role of Russian Navy in Syrian air defense throughout providing information about

the start of the attack, numbers, vectors of approach etc.

Thanks  

BUK-M2 near Mezzeh airbase

Nice article about Syria air defense

Hold out for three days. Syria's air defense system might well be resisted American attack - under certain conditions

Could the radar of syrian SA-10 detect the US stealth fighter F-22 ?

I have no doubts that the russian SA-10 and SA-20 's radar could easily detect all US figthers, including F-22, B2 and the could engage them, if not destroy them. Nevetheless, unfortunetly for Syria, the russian SA-10 export might not be optimize to destroy the US stelth fighters.

GarryB wrote:A S-300 battery is part of a system.

As a unit on its own it does not come with the long wave radars needed to detect and track the F-22 at long range.

This is not to say a long wave radar with that capability could not be set up and plugged in to an old S-300 system to provide the data necessary to engage small stealth aircraft and weapons.

Thx for your answer.

Israel airforce flies without any problem in Syrian's airspace . The Syrian air defence force : (Wikipedia)

25 teams defense (130 batteries) Including:

Self-propelled
62 batteries:
11 teams - 27 batteries - SA-6 Gainful (PU SAM 2K12 Square);
14 Battery - SA-8 Gecko (PU SAM 9K33 Osa);
12 Battery - SA-22 Greyhound (96K6 Pantsyr S1E);
9 Battery - Buk-M2
Towed
11 teams - 60 batteries with SA-2 Guideline (CP-75 Dvina / S-75M Volga) and SA-3 Goa (S-125 Neva / S-125M Pechora) (Being upgraded);
Two SAM regiment with SA-5 Gammon(in each brigade to 2 divisions for 2 batteries each).
Four SAM battalion
Eight Static/Shelter SAM batteries

Two independent SAM Regiment
Four SAM batteries with SA-8
Four SAM batteries with SA-10

These weapons don't seem to be very effective ! Could someone explain ?

Ramos 2 wrote:Israel airforce flies without any problem in Syrian's airspace . The Syrian air defence force : (Wikipedia)

25 teams defense (130 batteries) Including:

   Self-propelled
       62 batteries:
           11 teams - 27 batteries - SA-6 Gainful (PU SAM 2K12 Square);
           14 Battery - SA-8 Gecko (PU SAM 9K33 Osa);
           12 Battery - SA-22 Greyhound (96K6 Pantsyr S1E);
           9 Battery - Buk-M2
   Towed
       11 teams - 60 batteries with SA-2 Guideline (CP-75 Dvina / S-75M Volga) and SA-3 Goa (S-125 Neva / S-125M Pechora) (Being upgraded);
   Two SAM regiment with SA-5 Gammon(in each brigade to 2 divisions for 2 batteries each).
       Four SAM battalion
           Eight Static/Shelter SAM batteries

   Two independent SAM Regiment
       Four SAM batteries with SA-8
       Four SAM batteries with SA-10

These weapons don't seem to be very effective ! Could someone explain ?

Nothing to do with them being efficient. Has to do with the whole GBAD being in sorry state and Syria being in a civil war. The ones that get a chance work good enough (Turkish planes shot down, Israeli PGM's).

Ramos 2 wrote:Israel airforce flies without any problem in Syrian's airspace .
..............................
These weapons don't seem to be very effective ! Could someone explain ?

The Arab missile crews were poorly trained and poorly led. Modern weapon systems still need a competent crew to operate it in a effective manner.

Here's a Serbian crew showing the proper method to launched a SA-6 .