JohninMK wrote:Quite a fair analysis on the Israeli attack last week.
What is fair in this article (analysis is totally unfitting) ?
"Reportedly two Pantsir and one older 9K33 Osa (SA- short-range air defense system were destroyed, and four Syrian personnel killed. "
Reportedly by who ?
The monkey in question has "melted" two informations : the first ,produced at few hours from the attack that, falling for the cunning way the israeli video was presented, had sustained that the two systems was two Pantsyr-S1s and the latest that has almost surely identified the first system destroyed (as i had correctly said from the beginning observing the video) as an upgraded "Оса" SAM.
Therefore the two air defense destroyed were OR two Панцирь-С1 (an hypothesis by now almost completely dismissed) OR ,much more likely, an "Оса" and, like an year ago, a not working unmanned Панцирь-С1.
"The IDF also recorded the destruction of a Pantsir-S1 during a massive series of strikes in May. To be fair, a prudent air force can safely target any short-range air defense systems using stand-off weapons. However, the Pantsir theoretically should have had a shot at shooting down the incoming missiles."
The monkey -in mine opinion in a deliberate way- fail one more time to activate any of its working neurons, not infering that both the last year than in the 21 January attack were destroyed exclusively NOT WORKING and UNMANNED Панцирь and that is a terrible news for Israel and even more for western Air Forces (because Israel enjoy geographical ,numerical, Intelligenge -Humint in particular- and technological advantages in Syrian theatre that none Air Forces would enjoy against an opposing Air Defense network).
As i said several time also the hypothesis that the two systems (the one of the last year and that of the 21 January) had expended all the missiles and was deactivated abandoned by the crew in the wait for the reloading is very unlikely and, anyway at most would highlight a monstrous lack of professionalism of theirs operator, because that negate the most elementary notions of the wartime reloading protocol for Панцирь launchers that would render those engagements in "plain sight" of not working SAMs of those type totally impossible.
It is infinitely more probable that Israeli intelligence has identified some unprofessional behaviour by part of some insulated Панцирь launcher's operators, in particular in mine opinion after interruption of the air attack alarm and consequentli IAF has several times attempted to employ stand-off Deliah missiles with man-on-the-loop optical guided ,probably from ground, to caught the window of incapacity of those unmanned Панцирь.