Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #12

Regular wrote:

JohninMK wrote:Look closely at the 'team hit' video.

After they had decamped from one vehicle and had got into the second waiting for them in front of the building, just before the explosion the shadow of a third vehicle, top left of frame, suddenly jumps as if the film had been edited at a rather crucial point.

Noticed that too. Arty shells take time to arrive and my understanding is whoever edited the video cut the away dead air after target was spotted and identified.

Also, this delay timing information should not be given away to Russia's enemies.

JohninMK wrote:Look closely at the 'team hit' video. ....

Good pick up

---------

Looks like a Forpost UAV was shot down...apparently by a Zu-23-2




http://in24.org/world/30302?utm_source=warfiles.ru

Cyberspec wrote:..........

---------

Looks like a Forpost UAV was shot down...apparently by a Zu-23-2
.........
http://in24.org/world/30302?utm_source=warfiles.ru

Meh.... that's what drones are for.... 

MOD brieffing on the drone attack...they suspect Ukraine supplied the explosive for the manufacture of the drone munitions

Cyberspec wrote:

JohninMK wrote:Look closely at the 'team hit' video. ....

Good pick up

---------

Looks like a Forpost UAV was shot down...apparently by a Zu-23-2




http://in24.org/world/30302?utm_source=warfiles.ru

This is the israeli model of UAV that Russia is operating, if I'm not wrong.

Cyberspec wrote:MOD brieffing on the drone attack...they suspect Ukraine supplied the explosive for the manufacture of the drone munitions

Ukraine is not the main responsible under these attacks. They would do it before in Novorussia.

Unedited video of the Krasnopol strike on those terrorists. They didn't get away. The original video had like 5 seconds cut out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1x0pkzvyn0&feature=youtu.be&t=5m53s

eehnie wrote:

http://in24.org/world/30302?utm_source=warfiles.ru
This is the israeli model of UAV that Russia is operating, if I'm not wrong.

Yes, Russian built version of the Searcher II

Ukraine is not the main responsible under these attacks. They would do it before in Novorussia

The type of explosive used in the drone munitions is not widely available. It's produced in Ukraine among a few other places hence they suspect it might have been supplied from there....but yeah, no definite proof so far

JohninMK wrote:Look closely at the 'team hit' video.

After they had decamped from one vehicle and had got into the second waiting for them in front of the building, just before the explosion the shadow of a third vehicle, top left of frame, suddenly jumps as if the film had been edited at a rather crucial point.

This perfectly fits in your role.

Do those conspiracy theorists even watch videos? There is a full version of the strike available.

More detailed info on drones

I posted on anti air defence thread on here about swarm attacks saying it was a threat. And everyone said it was nonsense and that cheap swarm of drones posed no threat. I guess they were wrong I might not know as much as some people on here about air defence but I did serve in the military and understand things on the ground not in an arm chair. And before you say it yes these drones were taken down but it gave the Russians a bit of a scare and that was 13 drones what happens if 50 are sent?

http://www.janes.com/article/77013/russians-reveal-details-of-uav-swarm-attacks-on-syrian-bases?utm_campaign=PC6110_E18%20DF%20NL%20Airforces%2016_01_18&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Eloqua

...then they destroy or capture 50 instead of 13.

Drone swarm tactics will likely lead to accelerated development of guided 57mm rounds and fusing tech to allow defeat of drones by air-burst/frag. Also further developments of EW/ECM platforms. This swarm attack may have caught the Russians (partly) by surprise but they acquitted themselves well, and doubtlessly disappointed the Jihadis US/HATO handlers.

Big_Gazza wrote:...then they destroy or capture 50 instead of 13.

Drone swarm tactics will likely lead to accelerated development of guided 57mm rounds and fusing tech to allow defeat of drones by air-burst/frag.  Also further developments of EW/ECM platforms.  This swarm attack may have caught the Russians (partly) by surprise but they acquitted themselves well, and doubtlessly disappointed the Jihadis US/HATO handlers.

Indeed. This was supposed to be some epic attack by the "rag tag band of freedom fighters" which was going to become a Hollywood movie.
But once again the mud hut dwellers from Russia stopped the cat even getting out of the bag. And then mopped up the bag handlers.
Hollywood is not going to make a movie about losers, losing, big time.

Big_Gazza wrote:...then they destroy or capture 50 instead of 13.

Drone swarm tactics will likely lead to accelerated development of guided 57mm rounds and fusing tech to allow defeat of drones by air-burst/frag.  Also further developments of EW/ECM platforms.  This swarm attack may have caught the Russians (partly) by surprise but they acquitted themselves well, and doubtlessly disappointed the Jihadis US/HATO handlers.

+1

Such UAVs are just too slow to make a difference 10, 20 even 100. Russia has covered their base's air defense with low altitude radar detection  and lots of Pantsirs to go for the kill. I'd assume Tors are also there (maybe not as much advertised). And I'm pretty sure the whole region if filled with those elevated Flap Lids and Clam Shells (part of the S-300/400 unified ADS).

I have not seen a Tor pictured though.

Pantsir makes more sense anyway.

Im intrigued about the 57mm air defense system though.

With the very likely exhaustion of the Yak-Pchela-1 UAV in Syria:
1.- Only 92 units where produced, of which some were exhausted, destroyed (Chechnya,...) or exported to North Korea.
http://www.yak.ru/ENG/FIRM/hist3.php
2.- Every aircraft can be used only a limited number of times, 5 if Im not wrong.
http://www.deagel.com/Support-Aircraft/Pchela-1T_a000180001.aspx

The Israeli UAV used by Russia becomes the second oldest technologically of the entire Russian arsenal of UAVs, only after the Tu-143.

Then, the intense use by Russia of the Israeli UAV in Syria is assured.

Turks in Moscow today.

Good choice of photos by MOD
https://twitter.com/mod_russia/status/954006533960097794

calm wrote:Turks in Moscow today.

Good choice of photos by MOD.........



...........

Holy crap, are they smiling? Is that Gerasimov smiling? I thought he only had one facial expression preset (scary one)...

They all look like they just won lifetime supply of free beer so I assume things went well?

"d_taddei2".

And before you say it yes these drones were taken down but it gave the Russians a bit of a scare and that was 13 drones what happens if 50 are sent?

http://www.janes.com/article/77013/russians-reveal-details-of-uav-swarm-attacks-on-syrian-bases?utm_campaign=PC6110_E18%20DF%20NL%20Airforces%2016_01_18&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Eloqua

Then as you rightly guessed it will make things more complicated for Russia the interception of all of them
before they too close to the base.   No matter how effective/powerful are Russia military air defenses.. any system
in the world can be saturated..  whether is a pantsir or an S-300 ,s-400 or even s-500 ,or american aegis defenses or
Israelis iron dome .  This was a first try with 13 drones at same time.. by NATO backed terrorist.. the question should
be how many drones US/NATO/Israel could get in the air flying at the same time..??   for sure a lot more than that..
what if the attack is done by 100 - 300 cheap kamikazi drones? using similar tactics?  

No idea of the numbers of Russia air defense hardware in Syria.. for the sake of example , lets say Russia have
deployed in Syria many S-400s defenses with a total of 100 missiles.. then if the terrorist launch an attack with US help of (100 + 1 ) drones armed with bombs... then the number 101 will hit the intended target... and while technically
speaking it will be a major success of S-400 capability, a perfect score.. Russia could lose hundreds of soldiers and all the dozens of combat planes if just one drone penetrates the airbase. fortunately Pantsirs also have gatling MACHINE gun as the last line of defense WITH ~4K range defense.. but that ammo is also limited to a few minutes of combat..
will have to be refueled something that cannot be done fast..even less in the middle of major attack..

Because the drones (Putin told ) had the fly route programmed internally ,so jamming will not be very effective
to deviate significantly the drone from its intended path ,because the core navigation in guided internally . So a mass attack wave of too many drones.. against any army in the world NATO or Russia or Israel.. will always represent a big issue and a security threat... This is why Laser weapons can save the day.. if developed well and with plenty of energy to operate non stop for many hours to defeat the drones or a missiles attack.

Russia military however apparently have claimed to have energy weapons too in service... Not using laser ..but
instead using very high electromagnetic energy fields like weapons.. that can fry the electronics of any system missiles, drones and planes... so if this is true.. then it will be an additional layer of protection.. but still such weapons lasers guns/electromagnetic guns can be overwhelmed or not work in all cases..specially against  old and reliable artillery, So this is why air defenses alone will not be enough.. not even pantsirs and s-400's can do it all..it will be vulnerable without the help of an aiforce to push the enemy farther away from the zone you want to protect. But this is not the case of Syria.. Russia was unable to create a safe zone around its base.. because of Turkey invasion on idlib ,so it will need to combine effective diplomacy too with Turkey and Americans and so other players aiding terrorist in Syria ,to make it less likely for a direct military confrontation between them.

last but not least geography is very important ..even as much as technology is ,in defending a military base... Russia air defenses in Syria are in a vulnerable position.. because the entire base is very close to Turkey border.. and also
Israel airforce through lebanon airspace invasion can get close enough for a surprise first strike attack... if Netanyahu one day lose his mind and decide to pick a fight with Russia there. So Russian airdefenses can't be judged based on
Syria performance because of the vulnerability of the geography there , plays against Russia more than anyone , Since US ,Israel ,Turkey and many other Middle east nations can send operatives to Idlib close to Russia base and allow them
to try and try and try until they get it done...  In Russia main land is a totally different story.. S-400s to really take advantage of their range (to prevent a first strike surprise attack,when the war have not started yet) you need a big territory ,and your most important military bases and hardware far from from your enemy positions and your airforce
need to provide help to keep the enemy away from your borders..

So Syria is very complicate ,to properly defend when already you have the enemy lines/terrorist-NATO positions withing the artillery distance.. if the fight was in Russia , the military have more than plenty of territory to move to a safer position.. but is totally the opposite.

So the entire thing is very complex , Russia best options is with diplomacy and to freeze the conflict as much
as possible. In long term , things could be better ,since is unlikely erdogan will last for long in power and US will eventually leave Syria as they did in IRAQ... Kurdistan dream is just fantasy ,that will cost a lot of money to US
to maintain a landlocked region as a prosperous country.and sooner or later ,in a few years US will stop sending
the money and Kurds will have to Return to Russia and Syria for help.

[quote="GarryB"]

Reminds me of the Afghan war when the CIA taught the Afghans to use GPS and 120mm mortars... carry 6-12 120mm mortars and a dozen rounds for each tube to a position less than 6km from a Soviet airbase and use the GPS to locate your position and calculate the direction and distance to the target and line them all off and fire off a dozen rounds and then run away leaving the tubes... perhaps even boobytrapping them.

A 16kg HE round is very effective and 12x12 = 144 rounds landing rapidly can be quite devastating to area targets like helos and aircraft in the open like on an airfield...  wonder when that will backfire on the CIA...

Well US had learned ,more than 15 years before, and "the hard way" how such mortar and rockets attacks against air bases are conducted













https://vpk.name/news/203070_meryi_po_zashite_baz_amerikanskoi_aviacii_vo_vetname.html

From that point of view those badly provided patronage had already heavily backfired behind in the time )

Major threat for AD defended forward deployed airbases is obviously represented by mortar attacks - much more than rocket or missile attacks, particularly if subsonic - for the simple reason that mortar rounds ,both for the distance of fire and trajectories are very difficult targets even for the most modern domestic SHORADs and completely uninterceptable for foreign-built systems.

Naturally mortar attacks conducted by infantry, mostly for the very short range of fire, represent very high-risk operations in need to penetrate well within third and second defensive area perimeter of enemy air bases therefore usually those attacks last short time (infantry cannot carry the necessary equipment for a sustained operation) and represent a manageable menace.

Different is the instance of such attack conducted as part of mechanized airborne operation, at the same basis of the doctrine of this Armed Force branch; the delivery of troops perfectly equipped for mechanized operations with purposely developed EW and masking equipment in this instance is conducted at low altiutude well outside the coverage of defensive radar footprint and capitalizing at maximum blind area and limit in coverage time of hypothetical airborne ISR assets.

Speed of closing with the intended targets (often 6 or 7 in the selected area of operation attacked contemporaneously) ,allowed by the airborne amphibious mechanized component, and the immeasurably greater firing range of the weapons involved render those attacks truly "crippling" for the enemy installations and allow not only the destruction of enemy key assets - mostly key air bases and radar installations - but also their conquest so to bring to opened rear lines of enemy new supply ,troops and equipment in particular air defense and artillery batteries.

As stated in other threads even upgrades of old anti aircraft guns most of them sitting in storage would be sufficient with a few upgrades automatic radar guidance with proximity fuses are your sorted. Guns in mind

Zpu-1/2/4
Zu -23-2
37mm 61-K
57mm S-60
85mm 52-k
100mm ks-19 (15km ceiling height)
130mm ks-30

All could be based around what Iran did with ks-19 called Sa-ir for the 37mm and upwards equipment and anything below that like what they did with mesbah -1. Zu -23-2 has upgrades already with ZOM1 etc incorporating radar guidance and manpads together.

Even the zsu 23-4M is good and the zsu -57-2 could have similar upgrades. Iran produced the bahman based on zsu-57-2 on a truck.

By choosing these methods it uses up old equipment in stock, cheap to upgrade and make self propelled, and cheap ammo compared to missiles and the larger caliber stuff would actually be better due to options of making new ECM rounds and of course having more fragmentation and airburst range.

Of course if you have older missile systems in storage these could also be used or upgraded with ECM missiles. Can you imagine the size of the EMP a Sa-4 missile would create.

Mindstorm wrote:

Well US had learned ,more than 15 years before, and "the hard way" how such mortar and rockets attacks against air bases are conducted

Thanks for posting these photos.   This is what real mortar damage does to aircraft.   It sets off fires and aluminum
burns very, very well (throw a can into camp fire and find out).    Not a single image from Syria shows such damage
to Russian aircraft on the ground.    The terrorists could have take photos of the fire plume of the 7 aircraft they
claim to have destroyed from far away.   We do not even have such photos.

The Kommersant linked clowns who posted the photos of some sort of damage (from sometime and someplace) in order
to prop up the terrorist claims should be investigated and prosecuted for collusion with terrorists.   Information warfare
is serious business and clearly these clowns have pro-terrorist convictions.

Interesting mix of bowsers (fuel/water?) and cargo trucks. Not sure of the 133 estimate.
Yörük Işık‏Verified account @YorukIsik

Reinforcements to #Syria: Heavy with 133 Ural trucks, Russian goverment contractor, Panama flag RoRo Altay transits Med-bound Bosphorus en route to #Tartus #Syria 06:30Z. AIS set falsely to Alexandria. The usual RoRo A.Tkachenko was getting repaired at TorlakShipyard in Tuzla????????