Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #10

medo wrote:Su-15 is useless for Syria as it is clear air defense interceptor with no air to ground capabilities. Maybe Russia have some Su-17M4 in reserve (Su-22 is export version of Su-17), which could be useful. Belarus also provide upgrades for Su-17 in Baranovichi aircraft repair plant.

Those too would be in beyond questionable state by now, probably would cost more to refubrish them than to build new MiG-29SMT.

Militarov wrote:

eehnie wrote:This is what I would expect to be supplied to Syria from third countries by their suppliers. It would be available at low price.

Heavy Towed Weapons:

160mm M-43
160mm M-160
085mm D-48
085mm D-44
SA-5
SA-2
SA-3
057mm S-60
076mm ZIS-3
023mm ZU-23-2 (also from Russia)
130mm M-46
122mm D-74
122mm M-30
082mm Vasilek (also from Russia)
152mm ML-20
152mm D-1
152mm D-20

Mobile Land Warfare:

100mm SU-100
240mm BM-240
T-34
BTR-40
BTR-152
PT-76
BTR-50
SA-9

Air Warfare:

Il-28 (H-5)
MiG-15 (FT-2)
MiG-17 (FT-5)
Tu-16 (H-6)

T-34s in Syria would be literally useless today.

MiG-15/17 do not exist in any serviceable numbers these days anywhere.

Some older artillery sure, M-46, D-30s, D-20s are still viable.

T-34's wouldn't be that useless i remember reading during Kosovo war that a T-34-85 took out a bunker housing NATO troops severely injuring the troops. The gun itself still has use but the armour would need to have the rocket screen treatment and sandbag treatment. But ideally it needs to be used in a defensive role with dirt piled around it. This would be much better than the Su-100 mentioned above having limited gun movement.

Il-28 and Tu-16 would also be in a severe state unless you mean getting Chinese H-6, and only North Korea still use Il-28 and i think it would be highly unlikely they would send them and even more unlikely that they would be able to get them out of the country. Russia in terms of aircraft could send Su-24, Su-25, Mig-29, Mi-8, Mi-24, Mi-2. Ideally if we talk about other countries India could easily send its Mig-21 and Mig-27 that its currently looking to retire, and China could send its Nanchang Q-5. The Mig-21 and Mig-27 wouldn't be a problem for Syrian pilots and the Q-5 it shouldn't be much of a problem being a pretty basic aircraft. All three are ideal for the conflict they face.

the artillery i agree with, but you also missed off T-12 and BS-3. Russia has more useful vehicles that it could send such as BMP-1 and 2, MT-LB, T-72, BTR-60/70, BRDM-2, ZSU-57-2, ZSU-23-4, ZPU-1/2/4, 61-K 37mm, SPG-9, Bm-21, 2S3, 2S1, 2S5, 2A36 Giatsint-B, T-64 and T-62 (if theirs any left)

the big birds take to the skies again

Russian strategic bombers Tu-160 and Tu-95 prepare to strike terrorists in Syria – Russian Diplomat

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/russian-strategic-bombers-tu-160-tu-95-prepare-strike-terrorists-syria-russian-diplomat/

d_taddei2 wrote:

Militarov wrote:

eehnie wrote:This is what I would expect to be supplied to Syria from third countries by their suppliers. It would be available at low price.

Heavy Towed Weapons:

160mm M-43
160mm M-160
085mm D-48
085mm D-44
SA-5
SA-2
SA-3
057mm S-60
076mm ZIS-3
023mm ZU-23-2 (also from Russia)
130mm M-46
122mm D-74
122mm M-30
082mm Vasilek (also from Russia)
152mm ML-20
152mm D-1
152mm D-20

Mobile Land Warfare:

100mm SU-100
240mm BM-240
T-34
BTR-40
BTR-152
PT-76
BTR-50
SA-9

Air Warfare:

Il-28 (H-5)
MiG-15 (FT-2)
MiG-17 (FT-5)
Tu-16 (H-6)

T-34s in Syria would be literally useless today.

MiG-15/17 do not exist in any serviceable numbers these days anywhere.

Some older artillery sure, M-46, D-30s, D-20s are still viable.

T-34's wouldn't be that useless i remember reading during Kosovo war that a T-34-85 took out a bunker housing NATO troops severely injuring the troops. The gun itself still has use but the armour would need to have the rocket screen treatment and sandbag treatment. But ideally it needs to be used in a defensive role with dirt piled around it. This would be much better than the Su-100 mentioned above having limited gun movement.

Il-28 and Tu-16 would also be in a severe state unless you mean getting Chinese H-6, and only North Korea still use Il-28 and i think it would be highly unlikely they would send them and even more unlikely that they would be able to get them out of the country. Russia in terms of aircraft could send Su-24, Su-25, Mig-29, Mi-8, Mi-24, Mi-2. Ideally if we talk about other countries India could easily send its Mig-21 and Mig-27 that its currently looking to retire, and China could send its Nanchang Q-5. The Mig-21 and Mig-27 wouldn't be a problem for Syrian pilots and the Q-5 it shouldn't be much of a problem being a pretty basic aircraft. All three are ideal for the conflict they face.

the artillery i agree with, but you also missed off T-12 and BS-3. Russia has more useful vehicles that it could send such as BMP-1 and 2, MT-LB, T-72, BTR-60/70, BRDM-2, ZSU-57-2, ZSU-23-4, ZPU-1/2/4, 61-K 37mm, SPG-9, Bm-21, 2S3, 2S1, 2S5, 2A36 Giatsint-B, T-64 and T-62 (if theirs any left)

We did not have T-34s operating on Kosovo, only T-55s and now and then T-72/M-84, but not on significant scale as those were held back in case of NATO land invasion. We did use some T-34s as mockup targets for NATO, but not only those, Shermans too, Hellcats... M-47s...

For those pilebox roles they can get dirt cheap Type-59s and T-55s everywhere, you can buy functioning T-55 for 5.000 USD these days.

Syria lacks pilots atm too, there are not many left, and they dont have that many fuel or aircraft to train new ones either, and getting one pilot combat ready takes at least 5-6 years.

There is alot of various artillery pieces they could supply them, however artillery seems adequate atm for Syrians, they mostly rely on D-30s anways as that is the cheapest and most numerous ammunition.

And ye there are leftovers in stragetic reserve in form of T-64s and T-62s.

Why would Syrians need more weapons? They got plenty of them, the problem is one of attrition. Attrition comes from the fact there's no halt in the supplies of the Rats. Military success should be achieved while securing a political settlement with those who supply the rats.

Militarov wrote:

medo wrote:Su-15 is useless for Syria as it is clear air defense interceptor with no air to ground capabilities. Maybe Russia have some Su-17M4 in reserve (Su-22 is export version of Su-17), which could be useful. Belarus also provide upgrades for Su-17 in Baranovichi aircraft repair plant.

Those too would be in beyond questionable state by now, probably would cost more to refubrish them than to build new MiG-29SMT.

I think Syria could buy some MiG-21 and Su-17M4 jets from other ex-USSR republics. They are simple enough, that they could be put in the air relatively quickly, also SyAF have pilots, which could fly them. I'm not sure about the state of MiG-23 and MiG-27 there, but I think Kazakhstan still use some MiG-27 jets.

Militarov wrote:

d_taddei2 wrote:

Militarov wrote:

eehnie wrote:This is what I would expect to be supplied to Syria from third countries by their suppliers. It would be available at low price.

Heavy Towed Weapons:

160mm M-43
160mm M-160
085mm D-48
085mm D-44
SA-5
SA-2
SA-3
057mm S-60
076mm ZIS-3
023mm ZU-23-2 (also from Russia)
130mm M-46
122mm D-74
122mm M-30
082mm Vasilek (also from Russia)
152mm ML-20
152mm D-1
152mm D-20

Mobile Land Warfare:

100mm SU-100
240mm BM-240
T-34
BTR-40
BTR-152
PT-76
BTR-50
SA-9

Air Warfare:

Il-28 (H-5)
MiG-15 (FT-2)
MiG-17 (FT-5)
Tu-16 (H-6)

T-34s in Syria would be literally useless today.

MiG-15/17 do not exist in any serviceable numbers these days anywhere.

Some older artillery sure, M-46, D-30s, D-20s are still viable.

T-34's wouldn't be that useless i remember reading during Kosovo war that a T-34-85 took out a bunker housing NATO troops severely injuring the troops. The gun itself still has use but the armour would need to have the rocket screen treatment and sandbag treatment. But ideally it needs to be used in a defensive role with dirt piled around it. This would be much better than the Su-100 mentioned above having limited gun movement.

Il-28 and Tu-16 would also be in a severe state unless you mean getting Chinese H-6, and only North Korea still use Il-28 and i think it would be highly unlikely they would send them and even more unlikely that they would be able to get them out of the country. Russia in terms of aircraft could send Su-24, Su-25, Mig-29, Mi-8, Mi-24, Mi-2. Ideally if we talk about other countries India could easily send its Mig-21 and Mig-27 that its currently looking to retire, and China could send its Nanchang Q-5. The Mig-21 and Mig-27 wouldn't be a problem for Syrian pilots and the Q-5 it shouldn't be much of a problem being a pretty basic aircraft. All three are ideal for the conflict they face.

the artillery i agree with, but you also missed off T-12 and BS-3. Russia has more useful vehicles that it could send such as BMP-1 and 2, MT-LB, T-72, BTR-60/70, BRDM-2, ZSU-57-2, ZSU-23-4, ZPU-1/2/4, 61-K 37mm, SPG-9, Bm-21, 2S3, 2S1, 2S5, 2A36 Giatsint-B, T-64 and T-62 (if theirs any left)

We did not have T-34s operating on Kosovo, only T-55s and now and then T-72/M-84, but not on significant scale as those were held back in case of NATO land invasion. We did use some T-34s as mockup targets for NATO, but not only those, Shermans too, Hellcats... M-47s...

For those pilebox roles they can get dirt cheap Type-59s and T-55s everywhere, you can buy functioning T-55 for 5.000 USD these days.

Syria lacks pilots atm too, there are not many left, and they dont have that many fuel or aircraft to train new ones either, and getting one pilot combat ready takes at least 5-6 years.

There is alot of various artillery pieces they could supply them, however artillery seems adequate atm for Syrians, they mostly rely on D-30s anways as that is the cheapest and most numerous ammunition.

And ye there are leftovers in stragetic reserve in form of T-64s and T-62s.

The PT-76 could also be used for pillbox roles, and Syria had reasonable amount before the war. But many have came out of service with Russia as well. At the end of the day its the guns on the PT-76 and T-34-85 that are the useful bit, these are still capable of doing reasonable damage to terrorists in buildings and fortified enemy positions on hillsides etc. And with both vehicles given the SAA upgrade treatment would become useful.

Pilots i agree must be in short supply but wasn't North Korean helicopter pilots and artillery specialists operating in Syria, maybe something else similar could happen them or other countries. Also attack versions of L-39 would also be ideal.

in regards to T-34 incident it might not have been Kosovo but on the 3 May 1995 a T-34 fired a round into a UNPROFOR building which housed 21st regiment Royal engineers. I remember it was something to do with T-34 injuring troops from royal engineers but couldn't remember the exact details but heres some accurate info.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldjudgmt/jd000406/walker-1.htm#prof

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1996/may/20/sergeant-trevor-walker

also Bosnian Serb Army T-34-85 in 1996.

medo wrote:

Militarov wrote:

medo wrote:Su-15 is useless for Syria as it is clear air defense interceptor with no air to ground capabilities. Maybe Russia have some Su-17M4 in reserve (Su-22 is export version of Su-17), which could be useful. Belarus also provide upgrades for Su-17 in Baranovichi aircraft repair plant.

Those too would be in beyond questionable state by now, probably would cost more to refubrish them than to build new MiG-29SMT.

I think Syria could buy some MiG-21 and Su-17M4 jets from other ex-USSR republics. They are simple enough, that they could be put in the air relatively quickly, also SyAF have pilots, which could fly them. I'm not sure about the state of MiG-23 and MiG-27 there, but I think Kazakhstan still use some MiG-27 jets.

i agree, India would be the place to buy Mig-21 and Mig-27. Also Chinese J-7's

Militarov wrote:

d_taddei2 wrote:

Militarov wrote:

eehnie wrote:This is what I would expect to be supplied to Syria from third countries by their suppliers. It would be available at low price.

Heavy Towed Weapons:

160mm M-43
160mm M-160
085mm D-48
085mm D-44
SA-5
SA-2
SA-3
057mm S-60
076mm ZIS-3
023mm ZU-23-2 (also from Russia)
130mm M-46
122mm D-74
122mm M-30
082mm Vasilek (also from Russia)
152mm ML-20
152mm D-1
152mm D-20

Mobile Land Warfare:

100mm SU-100
240mm BM-240
T-34
BTR-40
BTR-152
PT-76
BTR-50
SA-9

Air Warfare:

Il-28 (H-5)
MiG-15 (FT-2)
MiG-17 (FT-5)
Tu-16 (H-6)

T-34s in Syria would be literally useless today.

MiG-15/17 do not exist in any serviceable numbers these days anywhere.

Some older artillery sure, M-46, D-30s, D-20s are still viable.

T-34's wouldn't be that useless i remember reading during Kosovo war that a T-34-85 took out a bunker housing NATO troops severely injuring the troops. The gun itself still has use but the armour would need to have the rocket screen treatment and sandbag treatment. But ideally it needs to be used in a defensive role with dirt piled around it. This would be much better than the Su-100 mentioned above having limited gun movement.

Il-28 and Tu-16 would also be in a severe state unless you mean getting Chinese H-6, and only North Korea still use Il-28 and i think it would be highly unlikely they would send them and even more unlikely that they would be able to get them out of the country. Russia in terms of aircraft could send Su-24, Su-25, Mig-29, Mi-8, Mi-24, Mi-2. Ideally if we talk about other countries India could easily send its Mig-21 and Mig-27 that its currently looking to retire, and China could send its Nanchang Q-5. The Mig-21 and Mig-27 wouldn't be a problem for Syrian pilots and the Q-5 it shouldn't be much of a problem being a pretty basic aircraft. All three are ideal for the conflict they face.

the artillery i agree with, but you also missed off T-12 and BS-3. Russia has more useful vehicles that it could send such as BMP-1 and 2, MT-LB, T-72, BTR-60/70, BRDM-2, ZSU-57-2, ZSU-23-4, ZPU-1/2/4, 61-K 37mm, SPG-9, Bm-21, 2S3, 2S1, 2S5, 2A36 Giatsint-B, T-64 and T-62 (if theirs any left)

We did not have T-34s operating on Kosovo, only T-55s and now and then T-72/M-84, but not on significant scale as those were held back in case of NATO land invasion. We did use some T-34s as mockup targets for NATO, but not only those, Shermans too, Hellcats... M-47s...

For those pilebox roles they can get dirt cheap Type-59s and T-55s everywhere, you can buy functioning T-55 for 5.000 USD these days.

Syria lacks pilots atm too, there are not many left, and they dont have that many fuel or aircraft to train new ones either, and getting one pilot combat ready takes at least 5-6 years.

There is alot of various artillery pieces they could supply them, however artillery seems adequate atm for Syrians, they mostly rely on D-30s anways as that is the cheapest and most numerous ammunition.

And ye there are leftovers in stragetic reserve in form of T-64s and T-62s.

According to the reports Syria has still some T-34, and created their own artillery variant armed with D-30s. If someone can use them is Syria. The MiG-15 and 17 are almost retired but not totally out (note that in the list are mentioned the Chinese variants). Syria would be able to use them since also they had both until recently and have own pilots that know the aircrafts. Of course the mentioned aircrafts are in the lowest technological level between the aircrafts that remain active in the continental Asia. Still it is possible that some of the warfare listed is totally finished by today, since the sources have some lag and can not be totally updated. As example the BS-3 was not cited because it seems finished today in continental Asia. Next in line to be in the list would be the MiG-19 and the ASU-85,

In fact the wars in Syria and Irak will likely to be the end of a good number of old warfare that is to be finished in the short term. The war in both countries have a basis of low technological level, and are long and expensive enough for both countries to welcome even the oldest warfare available. Syria can not win the war with 15(?) T-90s. In this sense the oldest warfare of the list that is almost finished can have advantage in its way to Syria because they would have the lowest prices. In some case at scrape price.

My first comment was refered basically to what can be supplied to Syria from third countries. I commented before what can I would expect to be supplied by Russia (including some weapons mentioned here). Yo can see the comment in the page 32 of this topic. The warfare listed today would come (likely is coming) to Syria from other different allies of Syria and from black markets that can be working in the continental Asia. And it means not that other more modern warfare can go to Syria, but it would not be as cheap. Even if we talk about Su-7, FROG-7, T-54, T-62, T-55, MiG-21 or T-64s.

d_taddei2 wrote:

medo wrote:

Militarov wrote:

medo wrote:Su-15 is useless for Syria as it is clear air defense interceptor with no air to ground capabilities. Maybe Russia have some Su-17M4 in reserve (Su-22 is export version of Su-17), which could be useful. Belarus also provide upgrades for Su-17 in Baranovichi aircraft repair plant.

Those too would be in beyond questionable state by now, probably would cost more to refubrish them than to build new MiG-29SMT.

I think Syria could buy some MiG-21 and Su-17M4 jets from other ex-USSR republics. They are simple enough, that they could be put in the air relatively quickly, also SyAF have pilots, which could fly them. I'm not sure about the state of MiG-23 and MiG-27 there, but I think Kazakhstan still use some MiG-27 jets.

i agree, India would be the place to buy Mig-21 and Mig-27. Also Chinese J-7's

The Su-15 seems not available today in the continental Asia despite to be more modern than others.

More modern aircrafts are better of course but Syria need to keep an strong economic effort only in ammunition. I would say that Syria would depend today of the external aid (gifts not credits) to have access to more units of the cited aircrafts and to others more modern.

medo wrote:

Militarov wrote:

medo wrote:Su-15 is useless for Syria as it is clear air defense interceptor with no air to ground capabilities. Maybe Russia have some Su-17M4 in reserve (Su-22 is export version of Su-17), which could be useful. Belarus also provide upgrades for Su-17 in Baranovichi aircraft repair plant.

Those too would be in beyond questionable state by now, probably would cost more to refubrish them than to build new MiG-29SMT.

I think Syria could buy some MiG-21 and Su-17M4 jets from other ex-USSR republics. They are simple enough, that they could be put in the air relatively quickly, also SyAF have pilots, which could fly them. I'm not sure about the state of MiG-23 and MiG-27 there, but I think Kazakhstan still use some MiG-27 jets.

Again, their state is questionable. Ukraine for an example used some spares from Yemeni MiG-21s to refubrish Croatian MiG-21s... which points towards conclusion that MiG-21 spares are nowhere to be find anymore. To my knowledge only Ukraine has few stored Su-17s atm. Poland would never sell them, those that were inherited by Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan are probably rust buckets by now.

You couldnt probably find more than like 30 that could be put back into service anywhere outside Poland.

eehnie wrote:According to the reports Syria has still some T-34, and created their own artillery variant armed with D-30s. If someone can use them is Syria. The MiG-15 and 17 are almost retired but not totally out (note that in the list are mentioned the Chinese variants). Syria would be able to use them since also they had both until recently and have own pilots that know the aircrafts. Of course the mentioned aircrafts are in the lowest technological level between the aircrafts that remain active in the continental Asia. Still it is possible that some of the warfare listed is totally finished by today, since the sources have some lag and can not be totally updated. As example the BS-3 was not cited because it seems finished today in continental Asia. Next in line to be in the list would be the MiG-19 and the FROG-3/5 (if available still),

In fact the wars in Syria and Irak will likely to be the end of a good number of old warfare that is to be finished in the short term. The war in both countries have a basis of low technological level, and are long and expensive enough for both countries to welcome even the oldest warfare available. Syria can not win the war with 15(?) T-90s. In this sense the oldest warfare of the list that is almost finished can have advantage in its way to Syria because they would have the lowest prices. In some case at scrape price.

My first comment was refered basically to what can be supplied to Syria from third countries. I commented before what can I would expect to be supplied by Russia (including some weapons mentioned here). Yo can see the comment in the page 32 of this topic. The warfare listed today would come (likely is coming) to Syria from other different allies of Syria and from black markets that can be working in the continental Asia. And it means not that other more modern warfare can go to Syria, but it would not be as cheap. Even if we talk about Su-7, FROG-7, T-54, T-62, T-55, MiG-21 or T-64s.

Yes, however T-34s as tanks are not used for decades. Only few T-34s were converted into D-30 carrying tractors, few photos emerged few years ago. As tanks T-34s are horrible idea atm, even as pileboxes, as i already said T-55s sell for beans these days.

Syria still has over 60 MiG-17/19s that are out of order for looong time, and they are not planning on bringing them to service either, simply as there are no adequate spares, they are in bad shape, and majority of pilots that flew them are about what... 65? Also where to overhaul them? Who to overhaul them? Its not Lada Niva so everyone with hammer and french key can fix it.

I find plausible supplies in terms of ammunition, some second hand artillery, radars, artillery radars, uniforms, food... armored vehicles. But bringing back from the graveyards of Asia MiG-15s and its derivates... not gonna happen.

d_taddei2 wrote:The PT-76 could also be used for pillbox roles, and Syria had reasonable amount before the war. But many have came out of service with Russia as well. At the end of the day its the guns on the PT-76 and T-34-85 that are the useful bit, these are still capable of doing reasonable damage to terrorists in buildings and fortified enemy positions on hillsides etc. And with both vehicles given the SAA upgrade treatment would become useful.

Pilots i agree must be in short supply but wasn't North Korean helicopter pilots and artillery specialists operating in Syria, maybe something else similar could happen them or other countries. Also attack versions of L-39 would also be ideal.  

in regards to T-34 incident it might not have been Kosovo but on the 3 May 1995 a T-34 fired a round into a UNPROFOR building which housed 21st regiment Royal engineers. I remember it was something to do with T-34 injuring troops from royal engineers but couldn't remember the exact details but heres some accurate info.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldjudgmt/jd000406/walker-1.htm#prof

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1996/may/20/sergeant-trevor-walker

also Bosnian Serb Army T-34-85 in 1996.

PT-76 is quite horrid vehicle actually for what Syria is fighting atm, Serbs tried using them during war in Bosnia and it did not go all that well due to bad protection.

Yes, T-34s were used during war in Bosnia by all sides, mostly due to huge amounts of ammunition which were available and fact that many people served on them during service time in YNA.

They however were retired and mostly scrapped by all sides after the war, used for target practice on proving grounds etc.

T-34s tho were not operated by "regular" Yugoslav army into the war, those were basically given to the Serb forces in Bosnia and Croatia, together with many ZiS-3 guns and other WW2 stockpiles. Actually battlefield in Bosnia and Herzegovina was full of relics. T-34s, M-47s, Shermans... Zis-3 guns, M-114s...Hellcats...

medo wrote:Any informations, when will Kuz be in the position to start sending their fighter jets on their combat missions inside Syria? They must be very near now.

She has been in position for a few days.

For all we know she may have already run some operations.

EDIT
The ops have started it seems

Military Advisor ‏@miladvisor 3h3 hours ago

Admiral Kuznetsov's MiG-29KR 1st flight over Idlib.

JohninMK wrote:

medo wrote:Any informations, when will Kuz be in the position to start sending their fighter jets on their combat missions inside Syria? They must be very near now.

She has been in position for a few days.

For all we know she may have already run some operations.

EDIT
The ops have started it seems

Military Advisor ‏@miladvisor 3h3 hours ago

Admiral Kuznetsov's MiG-29KR 1st flight over Idlib.

Actually having been doing flights over Syria for the past 2-3 days getting the lie of the land. Have not heard of any bombing missions yet.

Careful what you wish for...

Su-15s would be totally useless to Syria even if they could get them... they are interceptors only with no ground attack capability and their performance in air interception these days would be poor... they are designed to shoot down large slow non manouvering bombers.

Regarding the other items... it makes no sense just to send them obsolete stuff and think it will be useful.

You need weapons in calibres they already have access to, you need vehicles and equipment they already have in service and can maintain and operate effectively.

Old worn out aircraft that have been in storage for 25 years will not be that much use.

Newer better armed better armoured systems make rather more sense.

To focus well the answer to which warfare can come to Syria from their allies (without count Russia, Iran has a key role) and the black markets in the continental Asia, The money is a key factor. Everyone with a minimun knowledge knows the specifications of every piece of warfare. More the current owners. Then obviously, the most useful warfare will have higher price than less effective warfare, but still useful (when the other option is to use civil vehicles or to use only portable/man portable weapons). The higher prize of the most useful warfare is justified because of the lower incentive of the current owners to sale them.

The money is a bareer to see better warfare in Syria, and the lowest technological level has a welcome in this war. To provide material for large military forces in war is not easy and cheap, and even $5K by unit of T-55 ($1M by 200 without ammunition) can become too much in adition to other needs of ammunition and material. Syria today is not in position of selecting material, Syria depends of the external gifts/aid and of cheapest material available of Russian design, that for sure has been receiving it the last years (the numbers for the evolution of the equipment of their Armed Forces suggest it). Today Syria must fight adapting themselves to what they have available, and to what the current owners of these weapons want to sale.

To remember the list including the MiG-19 and the ASU-85:

This is is what I would expect to be supplied to Syria from third countries by their suppliers. It would be available at low price.

Heavy Towed Weapons:

160mm M-43
160mm M-160
085mm D-48
085mm D-44
SA-5
SA-2
SA-3
057mm S-60
076mm ZIS-3
023mm ZU-23-2 (also from Russia)
130mm M-46
122mm D-74
122mm M-30
082mm Vasilek (also from Russia)
152mm ML-20
152mm D-1
152mm D-20

Mobile Land Warfare:

100mm SU-100
240mm BM-240
T-34
BTR-40
BTR-152
PT-76
BTR-50
SA-9
ASU-85

Air Warfare:

Il-28 (H-5)
MiG-15 (FT-2)
MiG-17 (FT-5)
Tu-16 (H-6)
MiG-19 (J-6, F-6, Q-5, A-5, FT-6,...)

To have more modern warfare retired by Russia like Su-7, FROG-7, T-54, T-62, T-55, MiG-21, T-64 or to have warfare present in the Russian Armed Forces, surely Syria would need to pay significantly more.

From what I see in the public data, the number of units of the warfare cited in the box, available in the continental Asia (except Russia), is not big today, In most of the cases less than three hundreds.

In the refered to Russia, I think Syria did some contracts that finished its purchasing capability. Today the relation would be more about external aid, than about purchases of warfare. In this context, we can understand the direct military operation, and also the transfers of material that we can expect today. To remind it:

This is what I would expect to see moved to Syria from the Russian Armed Forces:

023mm 1960 ZU-23-2 (Until to be totally exhausted in the Russian Armed Forces).
082mm 1970 Vasilek (Until to be totally exhausted in the Russian Armed Forces).
Iveco LMV (Until to be totally exhausted in the Russian Armed Forces. Surely continue present in other non-military Russian security forces).

152mm 1975 Giatsint-B
120mm 1986 Nona-K
122mm 1960 D-30
100mm 1961 (M)T-12
152mm 1987 Msta-B

Su-25
BM-21

And this is what I would expect to see moved to Syria from other Russian security forces:

BPM-97
Vodnik

122mm 1960 D-30 (Until to be totally exhausted in the Russian security forces).

MI-24/25/35 (Until to be totally exhausted in the Russian security forces).
Ka-27/28/29/31/32/35 (Until to be totally exhausted in the Russian security forces).

The main reasons to include the Su-25 and the helicopters would be that Russia may want to tranfer to Syria the riskiest operations of air support and the transfer of this warfare would have very low affect in the capabilities of the Russian Aerospace Forces (the helicopters even are not part of their warfare).

eehnie wrote:

Su-25
MI-24/25/35 (Until to be totally exhausted in the Russian security forces).
Ka-27/28/29/31/32/35 (Until to be totally exhausted in the Russian security forces).

[/quote]

The main reasons to include the Su-25 and the helicopters would be that Russia may want to tranfer to Syria the riskiest operations of air support and the transfer of this warfare would have very low affect in the capabilities of the Russian Aerospace Forces (the helicopters even are not part of their warfare).[/quote]

The Su-25, Mi-24/25/35, Ka-27/28/29/31/32/35 are all still very much needed in the Russian armed forces and upgrades are still happening, in fact Mi-24/35 orders are still being placed, and Su-25 are being upgraded to SM/SM3 levels, the Ka series are having upgrades. Also i think some of the equipment you have been talking about in your last few posts are far to gone to be economically viable to put back into service and some of the aircraft would be unsafe to fly. Also some of the older stuff's ammo hasn't been in production for some time and ammo reliability greatly reduces over time and the conditions of its storage. Like others have stated Syria needs equipment they need little to no training on and with ammo thats current. Also things like Frog 3/5/7 are far too inaccurate to use in this conflict due to the number of civilians in rebel areas, the media and the west would love to have an excuse to attack Assad if suddenly a Frog-7 lands on a crowded civilian area killing 100's of civilians. Hence Tochka have only been used and not many recently. Right now the SAA need two things ammo and manpower but the second option is non-existant. I think if the terrorists lose USA backing and supplies this could really change the game in even more favour for the SAA and we could see a quicker collapse.

Russian Navy MiG-29K reportedly crashed off Syrian coast

http://defense-watch.com/2016/11/14/russian-navy-mig-29k-reportedly-crashed-mediterranean/

airstrike wrote:Russian Navy MiG-29K reportedly crashed off Syrian coast

http://defense-watch.com/2016/11/14/russian-navy-mig-29k-reportedly-crashed-mediterranean/

While unclear if they were part of a tactical mission or conducting an exercise, shortly after three Russian MiG-29 fighter jets took off from their Soviet-era aircraft carrier, Admiral Kuznetsov, and flew in the direction of Syria, one of the Russian jets appeared to have mechanical difficulties and turned around in the direction of the aircraft carrier. The Russian jet then allegedly splashed down in the water while attempting to land. A Russian rescue helicopter picked up a parachute and the pilot. The pilot's status was unclear, U.S. intelligence officials said.

That went well.

Militarov wrote:That went well.

Yup, at least he didn't have to ditch in the Arctic.

http://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/3782983

Confirmed by MoD

airstrike wrote:Russian Navy MiG-29K reportedly crashed off Syrian coast

http://defense-watch.com/2016/11/14/russian-navy-mig-29k-reportedly-crashed-mediterranean/

This sucks, hopefully they find out the cause. I wonder if they will the planes onboard the Admiral for airstrikes.

Still puts into question of Mikoyans lack of quality. They always seem to have an issue of some sort, with their new jets. And they also have had returns from Algeria due to poor quality compared to Sukhoi.

Sucks but oh well. Signs that maybe MiG-35 may not be a good buy till Sokol plant and Mikoyan can get their crap together.