Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Share
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  nemrod on Tue Mar 05, 2013 10:21 pm

    I have a question, does it exist a radar that can evade, or successfully fight the US' Wild Weasel/SEAD ?
    In the history, is there a war, or example that sam successefully fight against Wild Weasel/SEAD ?
    If you have competence's team in S300/400/5000, has she any chance to neutralize US Wild Weasel/SEAD, and the new JSF F35 ?

    I suspect it must be exist something, because for example an old libyan Sam 5 Gammon downed a F-15

    an old iraqian Sam 6 downed an f-16

    or here by serbian'sam
    here is I suspect this f-16 might be a wild weasel.
    Can you confirm me if a wild weasel could be successfully tracked by a radar, and shot down next.

    Thanks for any response.


    PS: Please do not mock me, Iam not a specialist, Iam not soldier, Iam here just for learn.
    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5669
    Points : 6312
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 37
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  Viktor on Tue Mar 05, 2013 11:17 pm

    nemrod wrote:I have a question, does it exist a radar that can evade, or successfully fight the US' Wild Weasel/SEAD ?

    Actually there are whole range of such radar. Every tactic has its counter. US developed Wild Weasel and Russia developed

    wide range of counters.

    nemrod wrote:In the history, is there a war, or example that sam successefully fight against Wild Weasel/SEAD ?

    Israel-Arab wars/ Vietnam war.

    That tactics was developed because earlier air defense systems where not able to shoot down low flying targets very good and

    on the other hand it was very unsafe to do hi-flying missions.


    nemrod wrote:If you have competence's team in S300/400/5000, has she any chance to neutralize US Wild Weasel/SEAD, and the new JSF F35 ?

    Its a game of numbers (on each side), terrain, type of radar systems, competence teams, integration, etc. In case of Russia

    deploying such tactics or any other tactic that does not include simultaneous attack on few fronts with full blow attack with massive

    amounts of planes and all the other assets stands no chance.

    nemrod wrote:Can you confirm me if a wild weasel could be successfully tracked by a radar, and shot down next.

    Depend on what country we are talking about. Most of the countries don`t have capable air defense and those can be either easily

    penetrated because of lack of radar coverage, inadequate radar systems, prone to saturation (very inadequate number of air defense and

    fighter assets) etc ... there are wide range of problems.


    Last edited by Viktor on Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:18 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 5708
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  TR1 on Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:12 am

    Was Tor (among others) not designed with ARMs in mind?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16536
    Points : 17144
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  GarryB on Wed Mar 06, 2013 7:51 am

    Think of it in terms of measure and countermeasure.

    SAMs must have been effective or perceived as being effective enough to warrant the cost and effort of developing aircraft with the dedicated role of defeating air defence forces that the US calls wild weasels.

    Of course the makers of SAMs have not been asleep either and they have developed features for their systems to reduce their vulnerability to SEAD and DEAD aircraft types.

    In the conflicts with Israel and the Arabs it was found that systems like the SA-6 were very capable but had distinct features that could become vulnerabilities. When first revealed the SA-6 was very effective because no existing countermeasures worked.
    The first tactic was because of the shallow climb of the missile a roll over and dive could evade the missile but brought the fighter down to a lower level where other systems like MANPADS and ZSU-23-4 systems could then engage the aircraft. The use of decoy UAVs got the SA-6 operators to turn on their radars which were then engaged from standoff ranges with ARMs. Once the radar vehicle of an SA-6 unit was destroyed then the missile vehicles were vulnerable because they could not guide their missiles without radar and were sitting ducks even to fighter bombers with dumb bombs.

    The immediate solution was an upgrade to add optical guidance, but that was just a patch, the real solution came with BUK (SA-6 is KUB), which has a guidance radar on each launch vehicle so you can't take out the whole unit by destroying its radar vehicle.

    Also the SA-11 and later model versions (SA-17 etc) have the ability to engage incoming ARMs so taking a BUK battery out with HARMS would actually be rather difficult. The newer missiles also have longer range which makes engagement from standoff distances much more difficult.

    Other vehicles like TOR and Pantsir-S1 are also designed to defend larger SAMs from anti radiation missiles and bombs and other weapons used by SEAD and DEAD aircraft and can even engage targets while moving.

    To penetrate Russian airspace you would need hundreds of dedicated SEAD aircraft and like the NATO attack on Kosovo even after months of conflict there is no guarantee that on the last day the airspace would be any safer for aircraft than the first day.


    _________________
    “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
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  nemrod on Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:32 pm

    At first thx for your responses.

    GarryB wrote:
    To penetrate Russian airspace you would need hundreds of dedicated SEAD aircraft and like the NATO attack on Kosovo even after months of conflict there is no guarantee that on the last day the airspace would be any safer for aircraft than the first day.

    No use to talk about war with Russia.
    The last example was a little shit named Mr Cheney in 2008 with Georgia, I think he -and his lackey Saakatchvilli- understood very well, what is Russia.
    No country in the world, now could wage a war against Russia. This topic in fact could be moved in other parts in the forum. Simply because Russia is a superpower, and need not any air defense, as it has the best of best aircrafts, and very well educated military staff. Moreover Russia has the best nuclear arsenal, and no one could match, hence Russia does not fear any country in the world. If war trigger now, this next war could concern USA, and maybe Iran.

    Viktor wrote:
    Depend on what country we are talking about. Most of the countries don`t have capable air defense and those can be either easily

    penetrated because of lack of radar coverage, inadequate radar systems, prone to saturation (very inadequate number of air defense and

    fighter assets) etc ... there are wide range of problems.


    USA is more interrested by wars against weaker -but rich- countries as Iran, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, Algeria, Libya, Lebananon. Their air defense are often old, outdated, old fashionned, if it merely does not exist.



    The immediate solution was an upgrade to add optical guidance.

    Does optical guidance be jammed ?
    Why cannot we use laser to guide missile ? Is it fiseable ? Is it to expensive ?
    As Stalin said,
    the gun is war's king
    , I have more confidence with gun, instead of missile.

    Why instead of developping Sam 10, Sam 12 -now codenamed S300, S400, ...- Russia did not develop a special anti aircraft laser gun ?
    I mean a more sophistaced Oerlikon.
    Can a laser be jammed too, or mislead by decoys ?


    Thx for all friends.
    avatar
    KomissarBojanchev

    Posts : 1185
    Points : 1338
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Wed Mar 06, 2013 1:46 pm

    The main problem with autocannons and lasers is range but the Russian army already has very capable cannon AA vehicles like the pantsir. however wouldnt it be better to have some kind of laserpoint defence gun that almost never missies rather than a gatling gun that sprays hundreds of bullts with very little chance to hit?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16536
    Points : 17144
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  GarryB on Thu Mar 07, 2013 1:45 am

    No use to talk about war with Russia.

    When talking about US air forces and wild weasels you are talking about money and attack. Such things work very well against third world countries because such countries don't have the money or the resources to fully develop a capable integrated air defence network and also have an airforce and army and navy to protect that network.

    I mention Russia because it is one of the few countries that has actually spend money at a comparable rate (note I said comparable... not equivalent) so that their defences can more properly be compared with the US attack forces capability.

    I am not suggesting the US will attack Russia... such an attack would be suicide for both sides.

    In comparison we can look at Libya that was defeated largely with about 120 cruise missiles because its old SAM network could not handle multiple low flying targets at one time... launch three cruise missiles at a large SAM site at one time and odds are at least two of those missiles will hit it and take out its primary radars leaving it vulnerable to conventional air attack. Once all the large SAM sites are taken down you hit comms sites and command sites and the defence structure falls to pieces and then you can send in groups of fighters and bombers with Wild Weasel escort to deal with any remaining air defence systems which will be much less effective working on their own.

    Mobility, and the sheer number of operational systems in Russia make that very unlikely to be successful... especially taking into account that the comms centres and HQs and major SAM sites in Russia are defended by systems that can defeat ARMs and are likely to be much more difficult to defeat.

    hence Russia does not fear any country in the world.

    Russias nuclear weapons only makes it safe from rational opponents... an aggressive collapsing west might not be that rational... Razz

    Remember everyone was rational and sensible just before being dragged in to WWI because of binding defence agreements and a fool with a pistol.

    Does optical guidance be jammed ?

    In this case the missiles don't have optical seekers, it is a way for missiles to be guided without using standard radar systems on the vehicles that would otherwise be jammed. Optical guidance can be jammed in the sense that optical guidance uses optics for tracking the target but the system still needs to transmit course corrections to the missile to make it hit the target being tracked by optics.

    It doesn't make a SAM unjammable, but it greatly complicates the job of the Wild Weasel aircraft as there is rather less warning of an engagement as the SAM site can use radar information from other sites to locate the targets and then use optics to track so the first warning of an attack will be guidance commands from the SAM site to the missile launched at the aircraft...

    Why cannot we use laser to guide missile ? Is it fiseable ? Is it to expensive ?

    Lasers, like optics are limited in range and weather, so they are generally used for short range missiles or in the case of optics as a backup guidance option.

    , I have more confidence with gun, instead of missile.

    Both have good features and problems. Missiles are expensive, but they have much better range features and also higher kill probability per shot.

    Why instead of developping Sam 10, Sam 12 -now codenamed S300, S400, ...- Russia did not develop a special anti aircraft laser gun ?

    Lasers are of relatively low power and enormously expensive per shot... now and in the near future. Missiles are much cheaper. Russia has developed anti aircraft lasers... and anti missile lasers.

    The President-M system fitted to Ka-52 helos has laser dazzler turrets near the main undercarriage to defeat IR and optical and laser guided anti aircraft missiles.

    I mean a more sophistaced Oerlikon.

    57mm S-60 was replaced by OSA (SA-Cool many years ago, and will in turn be replaced by the TOR as they enter service.

    The Russians have never abandoned guns and 23mm Shilka and 30mm Tunguska have been in continuous service and likely the new large calibre IFV gun for the new BMP vehicles will most likely have laser guided shells to make it an ideal replacement for Tunguska... in 45mm or 57mm calibre.

    A laser as a weapon would need some sort of search and tracking system to find and follow its targets so the laser can be directed at them, which would most likely be radar based for best all weather and long range capability. Wild Weasels would be as effective against such radar as with a missile based systems radars.

    The laser would need to be very powerful and therefore would be very expensive and have a limited number of "shots".

    Right now missiles are cheaper and easier and much "cleaner". (lots of toxic chemicals involved in lasers).

    however wouldnt it be better to have some kind of laserpoint defence gun that almost never missies rather than a gatling gun that sprays hundreds of bullts with very little chance to hit?

    The problem is that for each accurate laser shot you are likely spending 20 million dollars, while a burst of cannon shells might cost a few grand.

    The laser has a huge advantage of speed as the amount of time the laser beam takes to get from the laser to the target is so short the target will not have moved very far at all so a slight aiming off should ensure a hit. With cannon shells that travel orders of magnitude slower and actually get slower as they move through the air the problem is that the time from launch to impact is much longer so the target has more time to move or speed up or slow down or turn or even stop in some cases. This means that a burst of shells covering an area allows for minor changes in speed and direction by the target between the time when the shells are fired and when the impact the interception area. A spread of shells from a gatling gun is actually a good thing and makes a hit on target more likely rather than less likely.

    Just like using a shotgun against small fast moving targets improves your chances of a hit. A super accurate rifle is much less useful against small fast moving targets because there is only one chance for a hit.


    _________________
    “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
    gaurav

    Posts : 357
    Points : 353
    Join date : 2013-02-19
    Age : 37
    Location : Blr

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  gaurav on Tue Mar 12, 2013 7:31 am

    nemrod wrote:Why instead of developping Sam 10, Sam 12 -now codenamed S300, S400, ...- Russia did not develop a special anti aircraft laser gun ?
    I mean a more sophistaced Oerlikon.
    Can a laser be jammed too, or mislead by decoys ?
    @nemrod..
    My two cents on this ..

    The recent Israeli 12-24 F-16 blk52 sudden attack with atleast 5-10 PGM on Sria military facilities was done by hiding in a mountainous ranges.

    The jets went slow behind the set of mountain ranges and then when they cleared the mountaines they made their attack on (Syria building) Although dont know what those building s were.. (they were inside syria for only short time, dont know exact time though..may be 10-20 minutes.. at dawn..)
    It is the concept of very low flyng jets that make missiles the best option to tackle air threats from unknown and terrible mountanous terrain.. which the Israeli jets always take advantage off ..
    but yes they have to be detected and tracked first..
    by radar.. or air based assets.. and then only they can be engaged with missiles..

    nemrod wrote: Does optical guidance be jammed ?
    Why cannot we use laser to guide missile ? Is it fiseable ? Is it to expensive ?
    As Stalin said,
    laser guided missiles round are used all over Russia . I mean all missiles fired from T-90 initial version are laser guided.
    They can target air based threats also.
    Mostly they are used against ground targets. Smile
    Laser guided shells one example krasnopol-M again only for ground targets.. Razz Remember they are NON line of sight and they can be engaged through mountainous terrains etc..

    laser guided anti-aircraft gun rounds come into focus in more plainer terrain where low observable targets(maneuvering can be engaged with a laser guided round from 30mm , 45 mm gun etc. This is line of sight hitting . This is really deadly.This part of technology is lead by Russia of course.Technology is comparably better than that Gatling guns of Tunguska ,pantsir etc.But I would not like to comment on its effectiveness .).I am also a beginner. Cool

    Now coming to the laser guns..As you yourself said it is special.. so this technology is not mature and neither it is effective because..
    The laser shots (plasma rounds ) ,I think this is what it is called in Russia) but they cannot fire in salvo and also they cannot compare against very high rate of fire Gatling guns .These guns( really create a horror(psychological) impact at start of conflict against enemy air squadrons ) this cannot be matched with laser ,in no way .. and finally I would say this laser gun this technology is simply not developed..

    As for pantsir I dont have a link.. Their guns can destroy any target within Line of sight to 1-2 km and can deter any target from 4-5 kms with rain(or burst) of fire..(even if Israeli jets are not hit .. they better get a taste of their medicine of they venture anytime close to syrian , Iranian airspace).

    Now for the effectiveness of pantsir..
    No wonder after 3-4 years of dense middle east conflicts not a single U.S UAV,ucav has even vetured into syrian airspace and also all the frustration of Hague(warcriminal) and netanhyu etc etc is day by day increasing because they FULLY UNDERSTAND AND THEY know what they will be faced with if they enter into Syrian and Iranian air space with 100 of F-16's or even 1000's of F-16..
    I think that is definitely the best option as as huge armada type attacks enemy are slso met
    with approx same rate of fire for air defense..
    So the important part of pantsir becomes a very high rate of fire Gatling guns(whatevr).. (which is the most critised .. but often the most imp .. Cool )that is deterrence aspect as much as destruction aspect of Pantsir..

    One last point .. the height of small Very Happy radar of S-400 is increased from a crane to almost 50 metres.. .. pirat Razz .. it is huge height ..need to check the actual figures..
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  nemrod on Thu Mar 14, 2013 1:51 pm

    Thx to all, Iam not a specialist, and it is very usefull to read you.
    But, here, I repeat anti aircraft defense does not concern Russia. The air defense concern chieftly third world countries like midle estern, south, central america, african, and many asian countries.
    Because Russia is strong enough, and no countries in the world could wage nowadays a war against Russia.
    But USA are the predator country, and has the goal to colonize other countries, by other things than french, british empires.
    In order to defend themselve, they need russian hardwares, and chieftly russian'pundits.
    As Gary said in the previous message

    In peace time it would take a year or two to master such a system, in the current conditions I suspect it will be interesting to see if they can get it to perform properly.

    Such systems are very reliant on the tactics used and the quality of the people using it.

    It means, russian hardwares request many compentencies, and highly skills, this is that third world countries cannot afford it.
    I don't say they are less intelligent, but, their educaation'system cannot provide them good experts.
    Maybe the only expection could be Iran, and its fast developpement could create an unhappy surprise for american.



    Regards.
    avatar
    gaurav

    Posts : 357
    Points : 353
    Join date : 2013-02-19
    Age : 37
    Location : Blr

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  gaurav on Sat Mar 16, 2013 4:53 pm

    Nemrod wrote:But, here, I repeat anti aircraft defense does not concern Russia.
    The air defense concern chieftly third world countries like middle estern,
    south, central america, african, and many asian countries.

    Thats true. Syria and Iran are most likely to be attacked from West.It is a fact that they will try to avoid "Libya" scenario.

    How that can be done I also dont know.
    If they are serious then they should take Russian specialists help.
    That also a fact thatwest will not attack african states.Though they are poor and vulnerable there are least likely to be attacked from western air forces.
    Most high profile and most likely case therefore is Syria and Iran.

    Members can contribute on this syria and Iran air defense scenario
    against western states
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  nemrod on Sat Mar 16, 2013 6:13 pm

    [quote="gaurav"]
    Nemrod wrote:

    Members can contribute on this syria and Iran air defense scenario
    against western states

    As US'economic situation is going worse and worse, if not gloomy, it is nowadays dubious if USA undergoes such riskies adventures. USA is in bankrupty situation, and the dollar with their QE..., has less and less value. Many countries in world, including Russia, is trading with other money than dollar.
    Nevertheless, if USA does not undergoe to attack Iran now, in few years, it would be impossible, as iranian'economy should become power. They are in the verge of nuclear power, and their economy is very well prepare to fight a new era. It now exports refined oils, and not only crude oil, electricity, steel, and many many goods. In the next decade, Iran could threaten western economies, in many areas.
    Hence USA, and western allies are in someway between the hammer and the anvill -french's expression 'être entre le marteau et l'enclume'- in fact only bad solutions for USA.

    Few words concerning Syria, when I was student-1988, till 1992-, in my university, we've seen many syrian students. They were there, to complete their studies, in the goal to obtain universities' diplomas in mechanical engineering.
    They were at least 20, all of them were military staff. None of them obtained any french diplomas, because their level were very weak, more weaker than you can imagine. Rare very rare are syrian that could obtain diplomas.
    On contrary, there were lebanese students in University, in 30 lebanese, just one have failed to obtain a diploma.
    If we back to the subject, to handle S-300, Pantsir-C1, it required many compentencies, that syrian staff has not, or far to have.
    Again, Iam not doing propaganda, syrian people is as other, they are not less intelligent than russians, or american. But the corruption system that preavailed, deter to any compentencies.
    For Iran I know nothing, it must be very cleaver people, because from zero, and the hardest embargo in history, the country is developping very well.

    Regards.

    PS: do not consider my post as propaganda, the syrian students I've seen them, this is what I felt, they have a very weak level in science area, because of their system is like that, since longtime ago.


    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5669
    Points : 6312
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 37
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  Viktor on Sun Mar 17, 2013 12:52 am

    Given the situation in Syria one can wonder about the efficiency of its air defense systems. But if looked in comparison with Iran

    they have better radar coverage and more airdefense systems. Of course geography is important and because Iran is pretty far from

    Israel and big country overall gives them batter position but on the other hand their airdefense is obsolete and based mostly

    on artillery air defense. Those have little combat values.
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  nemrod on Sun Mar 17, 2013 3:23 pm

    Viktor wrote:Given the situation in Syria one can wonder about the efficiency of its air defense systems. But if looked in comparison with Iran

    they have better radar coverage and more airdefense systems. Of course geography is important and because Iran is pretty far from

    Israel and big country overall gives them batter position but on the other hand their airdefense is obsolete and based mostly

    on artillery air defense. Those have little combat values.

    About Syria as I've said, having russina'state of the art military hardware is one thing, but how to use it efficiently is another question.
    As I said previously, syrian people is not less intelligent than another, but the system in Syria, in military area, the select'critèrion is not the compenticies at first, but the loyalibility to the regime. For that reason, Russia has a huge headache, if not nightmare with Syria, because to use its state of art S-300/400, Tor, Pantsir, it must be russian milirary staff, not another.

    On Iran many things were said, but I've seen, they downed with high success RQ sentinelle recently-US state of art drone-, moreover, during Iraq/Iran war, the Sadam's army, with their state of art hardwares, could never penetrate deeply inside Iranian'terroritory.

    Iam near sure now, USA/Israel cannot afford to dare a war with Iran, moreover, I doubt that if Hormuz detroit is bloqued, USA cannot afford to reopen it. Noone could tell you this truth.
    To attack Iran, this is too late. It could be possible in early 2000's, but now it is near impossible for America, as their huge credit crisis is only begining. And the next phase of their crisis T-Bond, dollar will definitly knock out this country for at least this decade, as the USSR was.
    Furthermore, I suspect Iran has developped other weapons that could cause a such loses to US army, that a war is useless.
    We are on the verge of an historical switch, and contrary what it was said, USA wants now as soon as possible to integrate Iran and Russia, as new allies, even though they will have to sacrifice Israel. And more than ever, they are ready for that.


    Regards.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3222
    Points : 3308
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  medo on Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:49 pm

    No use to talk about war with Russia.

    http://www.aif.ru/politics/article/61001

    I think there are still some wise people, who don't think big war is impossible. China is getting ready for war. Question is against who. They build big blue water navy for war in pacific and Indian ocean, but also they build big land force. Against who, India or maybe against Russia for natural resources in far East?

    For Russia is still quite important to have strong armored forces with good air force and air defense protection to fight big conventional war. Russia have nukes, but China also and China have more than billion people, so they have large reserves and modern army.
    avatar
    gaurav

    Posts : 357
    Points : 353
    Join date : 2013-02-19
    Age : 37
    Location : Blr

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  gaurav on Wed Mar 20, 2013 9:31 am

    Nemrod wrote: As US'economic situation is going worse and worse, if not gloomy, it is nowadays dubious
    if USA undergoes such riskies adventures. USA is in bankrupty situation, and the dollar with their QE...,
    has less and less value. Many countries in world, including Russia, is trading with other money than dollar.

    That is true but U.S is withdrawing from Afghan and Iraq and both of them as controvesial as it can be.Even now U.S soldiers and their domestic informers(police persons) are killed daily in Iraq and Afghan.
    The use IED's in Iraq and Afghan is stil the most destructive weapon in insurgents hands.
    After the U.S withdraws(during withdrawal the U.S ) will have lot of reserves to go to war with Syria.
    But U.S does not understand what is going on in Syria.Infact for any analyst it is difficult to predict the outcome of the
    prolonged civil war in Syria.This is the reason U.S is still waiting in Syria.

    The U.S economic situation was bad from July 2008 onwards.From that point it has relatively stabilized at extreme
    lower points of GDP Growth.The growth of salaries and incomes for majority of middle class in U.S is close to zero
    but it has not decreased.
    Yes initially there were lot of layoffs but last 4 years there has been relative staibillity with no job growth.
    The result is that almost 50million Americans are below poverty line.

    In the same way there has been no decrease of U.S arms industry.On the whole it is filled with workers(white) and (immigrants) alike.
    That insdutry also keeps on working as usual.
    But on the whole ..
    We can conclude from the above points that the U.S economy and mil Industry are in relative stable but overall Chaotic
    conditions.The result is that U.S thirst for war to stabilize it's economy is increasing day by day.

    Infact France, U.K also want that their aircraft, armoured carriers, ships keep floating in times of economic stress
    Recently U.K offered Amorured personal carriers to Syrian rebels . The conditions of transfer are not easy.

    Nemrod wrote:Nevertheless, if USA does not undergoe to attack Iran now, in few years, it would be impossible, as iranian'economy should become power. They are in the verge of nuclear power, and their economy is very well
    prepare to fight a new era. It now exports refined oils, and not only crude oil,
    electricity, steel, and many many goods.

    Exactly U.S is in no position to take on Iran.By the way one of reasons U.S does not want to take on Iran is that Iran is
    filled with China suppllied missles.
    Both in navy and in air defense.Fori.e c-602,c-702,c802 and their modifications.Iran also has strong and stable army  
    with lots of old weapons but effective in fighting ground war.
    Beside 39 Tor-m2 systems were supplied to Iran in 2008 ..!that time..

    Regarding Iran we know now that U.S does not have the guts totake on 80 million strong country.



    Regardng the scenario in Syria it is really complex to tell what situation will unfold.

    Nemrod wrote:On contrary, there were lebanese students in University, in 30 lebanese, just one have failed to obtain a diploma.
    If we back to the subject, to handle S-300, Pantsir-C1, it required many compentencies, that syrian staff has not, or far to have.

    What I see is..
    This conflict is unique in the world and the Army has dug in its heels.Th is after almost 66percent of complte Syrian army
    has either left or joind rebel ranks.
    Thi is a three year old high intensity war.The Syrian army is fghting an insurgency, a full scale terror attack
    (from zihadists, wahabhis ,syrian rebels)and a civil war combined into one.
    The terrorists have come to Syria from any countries t is difficult to list all countries citizens fighting in Syria.

    The present Syrian army is the worlds only independent organization(without NATO support)who isnow capable to fight a full blown highintensity war(insurgency) on its own means.
    Iraq and Afghan insurgency was handled by the U.S special operation forces from day 1 almost (decade ago)
    to last day which still has not come.

    One can laugh at the though if Syrian army is replaced with Iraq or Afghan "domestic" witout a cent been payed by U.S.
    Hence,
    By no means it can be said that syrians are less experienced or their capacity to be effective in war is lower than others.
    What thse present data suggest.

    Now why the U.S is reluctant to go to war  in Syria after 3 years of high intensity conflict there.Syrian army is
    already depleted.
    Their personnel are tired , they have become inefficient , special operation forces are also depleted .
    Comman structure everything is hardly working

    Barring media hype .. Not one single U.S favourite " air based reconasaance mission has gone close to syrian airspace
    from any direction. No reconnaissance from  all beloved Turkey(loved by all..? why not..).
    One of the major source of armed insurgents in Syria is Turkey.
    Now the U.S media will say
    The reason U.S satellite technology writing number plates of all cars in Damascus..he he .. cut the crap..
    that is not the reason..  
    One direct answere is "Russian arms supply to Syria" Thsis an unending report seen in CNN, Fox news from past 3 years.
    But Russian arma are very limited whch are given to Syria.
    Well I also guess the real reason is close to above one.
    The reason fro U.S to NOT to go to war with Syria are..
    a.Complex situation on the ground not understood till now.
    b. Russian arms suppy to syria.
    C. May be reent arms supply from Russia to compensate losses of Syria army. Smile

    Recently 2-3 ships(no need to say huge capacity ships) frm Pacific fleet (I think delivered ..?or not) they are still on the way..are delivering "combat cargo" to Syria beach.
    In january also 2 Russian ships delivered their cargo , dont know what they were.
    what I can  say is that Syrian air defense are manned by quality personnel (not replaced by Russian crews).

    Of course to add that there are no Russian crews manning Syrian air defense or anything of that sort.
    They are able to do their job on their own atleast till now.
    This is a thank less job because the results are not seen..
    from all the  richest countries (of this world) not a single  jet fighter close to Syrian rispace for atleast 3-4 years.
    Israel planned a utter desperate , air attack for 20 minutes and then ran away.
    They gave their reason.. air defense of Syria.

    No Reconnaissance from -> EF-200, F-16, Israeli jets..  
    well real mystery .. Not if the time is almost 3-4 years of real hot confict and still no NATO aircraft in Syrian vicinity.

    I would conclude that Syrian air defese is still aive and is maintaining its deterrence factor inspite of "ZILLION ODDDS STACKED AGANST THEM"
    We hope that keep this maintanence for some more time. Smile
    avatar
    coolieno99

    Posts : 139
    Points : 162
    Join date : 2010-08-25

    Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAM S-300/400

    Post  coolieno99 on Tue Mar 26, 2013 4:14 am

    Flying SEAD missions against air defenses manned by competent crews is very dangerous. During the Vietnam War, American pilots who flew SEAD missions, called them "suicide missions". 37 F-105F/G "Wild Weasel" aircrafts were shot down.

    indochina

    Posts : 44
    Points : 66
    Join date : 2013-02-07

    Soviet SAM effectiveness against USAF Fighters

    Post  indochina on Thu Jun 06, 2013 10:29 pm

    There really Volhov S-75M3 (SA-2E Guideline) has shot down the F-15E in the Gulf War in 1991?

    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  nemrod on Fri Jun 07, 2013 1:42 pm

    indochina wrote:There really Volhov S-75M3 (SA-2E Guideline) has shot down the F-15E in the Gulf War in 1991?
    I don't know. When US losses aircrafts, either figther-bombers, or bombers in order to justify the losses, uses the magic words "Mechanical faillures", or less often "Anti Aircrafts Guns". Avoiding as much as possible SAM causes, and chieftly forbidden the uses of Mig's causes -Mig 25 downed an 2 F15A in Lebanon in 80's, downed at least F-18, and B-52 during Desert Storm-. The propaganda is a weapon as another weapon, you realize very well where are interrests. For example during "Desert Storm" sources said that US lost around 30 F-16, obviously du to....accidents, hence "mecanical faillures". The scale of US coalition losses during Desert Storm is still unknown, but far more important than we believe.

    You notice that several years after conflicts, US withdrew from Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, because of "Mechanical faillures". Not because of General Dynamics, Mc Donnell Douglass, or Boeing, but ...."Mechanical faillures".

    The worst shit of propaganda is provided by israelis, as they use US hardwares, you will have to know their magic aces as Giora Epstein, Abraham Shalmon, Asher Snir, against the genetic so-stupid arab pilots. However, when you search you discover many surprises, that propaganda tried to hide. Finally, US, Israelis hardwares, or pilots are not upper the others, but simply as the others. And soviet hardwares performances were excellent seeing the conditions of use. Surely, if there were a conventionnal conclict between US and USSR, US could not win.
    We will discuss next about israelo-arabs conclicts.

    I think all ex soviet SAM are still effectives, and still very threatening all US hardwares nowadays.
    However the main drawbacks of Sam-2,3, 5, are not mobiles, and hence highly vulnerable to US cruise missiles, and their anti-radiation missiles, if and only if they can launch hundreds, in order to disable one battery in the better case.
    No use to tell more about the SA-6, 8, 9, 10, 11, etc...effectiveness, as the oldest fixe batteries are still danger for US aircrafts.
    Back to your question, SA-2 could obviously downed every US aircraft, as during the Libya's war an old SA-5 supposed to be downed a F-15C. Information provided by US officials, true ? False ?...
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    SAM issues: Discussion

    Post  nemrod on Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:41 pm

    It is an interresting POV, it desserves to be read.

    https://defenseissues.wordpress.com/2015/02/15/assessing-the-sam-threat/

    However, It is usefull to mention that many specialists are not agree with this opinion, as during Vietnam war,US lost between 2.500 to 3.500 aircrafts and SA-2 downed about 1.500 US aircrafts. It is obvious that, never US will admit this. About Israel, they never said the truth, and part of israelis losses in october 1973, are far higher than Israel claimed, and most of them were du to the migs.  It is noteworthy too, that during operation Mole Cricket operation in 1982, if Israel indeed successfully destroyed, or disabled many SAM radars, the reason -is evidently written off- is Syria had no intentions to engage its SAM against Israel, all the radars were built up all its radars in no-offensive posture -maybe du to soviet pressures-, then, only at this moment, Israel triggered SEAD in violation of all agreements. Pretending there was a success, it is a lie.

    In 1991, we will never know the range of US losses, as Iraq lied, and of course US lie more than anyone. Nevertheless, the US losses are far higher than the 50 aircrafts claimed by DOD. What were the effectiveness of SAM ? If there were low, why ? Did US coaltion had all secrets of radars frequencies of SAM before the war ? If yes by what ? Who ? How ? Where ? It is usefull to mention that SA-2, SA-3, SA-6 were all compromises, as the Migs, and Sukhoi radars, as Iraqi Air Defense radars. In these conditions, it is easy to jam them, or to disable them. Regarding Serbia's war, it is more harder to understand what's happenned exactly. In 90's Russia was in complete collapse, US accessed to all Russia's secrets weapons, meanwhile, noone had access to US, UK secrets. In that dark decade, most of serbian's secrets were in US hands.
    I mean that the studies, and analysis of SAM effectiveness is more harder than taking pieces of lies provided by Department of Propaganda as DOD. Assessing that SAM were ineffectives is an incorrect conclusion. I did not mean that SAM might be effective too.

    Will the S-400, or S-300 be more effective nowadays against western fighters ? Maybe yes, or not ? The arrivals of new technologies available for SAM as furtive drone, microprocessors, servers, computer sciences, importants and powerfull C4I components, and new radars, RWR, new more modern more powerfull chineses, and russian satelits -glonass network-,  IRST, laser, could significantly improve SAM tactical limitations, and their evident effectiveness. With the drones beside Air defense, the anti aircraft artillerie will become more more effectives, if not completly more lethal. Maybe are we going to assist at a new revolution of air defense ?
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10535
    Points : 11012
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  George1 on Sun Feb 15, 2015 7:26 pm

    This is an article that questions the effectiveness of soviet/russian SAM systems against US Aircrafts?
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  nemrod on Sun Feb 15, 2015 8:41 pm

    George1 wrote:This is an article that questions the effectiveness of soviet/russian SAM systems against US Aircrafts?
    Of course.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16536
    Points : 17144
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  GarryB on Sun Feb 15, 2015 11:35 pm



    _________________
    “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
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5357
    Points : 5588
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  Werewolf on Mon Feb 16, 2015 12:01 am

    The material reality is that newer generation SAM systems such as the S-300PMU1, S-300PMU2 Favorit (SA-20), HQ-9/FD-2000/FT-2000 and S-400 Triumf (SA-21) are in terms of basic technology and performance very close to, if not better than the US MIM-104 Patriot series, and importantly, have never been challenged in combat by Western air forces, these including the formidable Israeli Air Force.

    Tells you already enough of Auspair...
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  nemrod on Wed Feb 18, 2015 2:30 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    Tells you already enough of Ausairpower...
    This website I spent hours, and hours to read nearly all its articles. This website is well done.
    Ausairpower.net made a very serious work, nevertheless, the problem with Karlo Koop's website is its approach. I mean, he has an accademic attitude, because its conclusions are from US DOD, and Israeli defense minister informations. In other words, Karlo Koop's conclusions are from the center of propaganda, or, from the center lies. Hence, many times, he has complete wrong conclusions.
    Here is an excerpt  what he wrote about Desert Storm


    ...The notion that the cumbersome SA-4 and SA-5 systems, and new mobile SA-10, SA-11 and SA-12 would have made up for the additional numbers and capability of Allied electronic combat assets in that theatre is hard to support
    What this suggests is that the NATO-Warpac central European air battle would have probably followed a similar course, leading to the defeat of the Communists' IADS within a week or so, in turn leading to air superiority in the following week, as the Communist air forces would have withered under the fire of the Allied counter-air campaign.

    Iam sorry but these conclusions are merely stupids, if not idiots. It is hard to know why Iraq did not fight as they might be. Nevertheless, a conflict is never an easy to study, even less to conclued quickly.

    Here is a quote, that was in fact completly forgotten, and it reveal how hard was the US coalition engagement in Iraq war.

    Navy attacks Iraqi oil tanker, triggering Schwarzkopf's threat of court-martial. British high command, alarmed at aircraft losses, abandons low-altitude attacks against airfields

    What does this "innoncent sentence" -British high command, alarmed at aircraft losses, abandons low-altitude attacks-  suggest ?
    5 days after the begining Desert Storm war, it suggests at least that the aircraft losses are higher than we were told. Told by US-British propaganda there is far to be a simple detail, but another thing that suggest that Iraqi air defense behaved better than we thougt. And the bombing campaign changed its tactics. The best way to bomb is at low altittude, and middle, or high altitude, you bomb nothing, other than useless targets.
    Do not forget things.
    - The syrian Mig-23 ML -was too, one of the best iraqi fighters- in 1983 downed several israelis' F-15, and F-16. In 1986 a syrian Mig-23 ML defected to Israel, and western specialists rushed to Israel in order to study the Mig-23 ML, they found that its avionics was far better than they believed.
    - 1986, the Tolkachev scandall, he betrayed his country, and sold the avionics of the Mig-29, Mig-31, Su-27 and their missiles.
    Immediatly, US modified their air fleet avionics.
    - 1990, France, member of Nato decided to join US coalition, and revealed all weak points of Kari -the strategical pilar that Iraqi air defense was relied-.

    Then, before the war started most of the Iraqis best fighters, and radars were compromised, the secret frequencies were between US hands. Of course, there was easy for US to jam, with their elint, jammers, etc...but, it did not deter heavy losses for US coalition, and they decided to bomb at high altitude, and launch their fire and forget cruise missiles against static infrastructes, with limited impacts -as in Vietnam-.
    However, it did not deter Iraqis to manage to evade several dozens of Iraqis fighters, and tankers, including 16 Il-76, and Iraqis to launch ground offensive to Khafji. If indeed, AH-64 Apache, and A-10 took a toll of iraqi armors vehicles, yes, but....because iraqi divisions had been withdrawing from Kuwait, and without defense.

    Conclusion
    It suggest to me that US coalition had indeed, superiority, but not suprematy against iraqi air defense, but not enough impact to influe about the war. And US coaltion had many difficulties to keep its superiority. With that, how could Karlo Koop assert that in just one week, US coaltion could obliterate Warsaw pacts. It is simply ridiculous. I started to beware about many nato compliant websites.
    avatar
    Cyberspec

    Posts : 1974
    Points : 2139
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Darpa project to take out S-300

    Post  Cyberspec on Mon Apr 20, 2015 4:00 am


    Sponsored content

    Re: Wild Weasel/SEAD against soviet/russian SAMs

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Oct 24, 2017 4:16 am