Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Syrian War: News #22

    ultimatewarrior
    ultimatewarrior

    Posts : 1070
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2016-09-19
    Location : Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  ultimatewarrior on Mon Mar 16, 2020 2:25 pm

    To be honest, AD has never been the nemesis of enemy aircraft. In WW2 anti aircraft only accounted for about 10% of enemy aircraft kills. The lion's share of enemy aircraft losses is downed by fighter planes. In 2008 Russia Georgia war Georgia's Hermes drones were not lost to AD. They were lost to Russian air force fighter jets. Syria don't have fighter jets in flyable condition, that's why they are not able to defend their airspace.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6199
    Points : 6191
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  Isos on Mon Mar 16, 2020 3:18 pm

    ultimatewarrior wrote:To be honest, AD has never been the nemesis of enemy aircraft. In WW2 anti aircraft only accounted for about 10% of enemy aircraft kills. The lion's share of enemy aircraft losses is downed by fighter planes. In 2008 Russia Georgia war Georgia's Hermes drones were not lost to AD. They were lost to Russian air force fighter jets. Syria don't have fighter jets in flyable condition, that's why they are not able to defend their airspace.

    And what would fighter jet do against swarm of cruise missiles ?

    Fighters are very expensive to operate. You can always have some in the air 24/7 but never enough.
    ultimatewarrior
    ultimatewarrior

    Posts : 1070
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2016-09-19
    Location : Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  ultimatewarrior on Mon Mar 16, 2020 3:23 pm

    Isos wrote:
    ultimatewarrior wrote:To be honest, AD has never been the nemesis of enemy aircraft. In WW2 anti aircraft only accounted for about 10% of enemy aircraft kills. The lion's share of enemy aircraft losses is downed by fighter planes. In 2008 Russia Georgia war Georgia's Hermes drones were not lost to AD. They were lost to Russian air force fighter jets. Syria don't have fighter jets in flyable condition, that's why they are not able to defend their airspace.

    And what would fighter jet do against swarm of cruise missiles ?

    Fighters are very expensive to operate. You can always have some in the air 24/7 but never enough.

    As shown in Game Of Thrones, AD is practically useless against aircraft. Of course, the best defense is offense. If by the stage you are getting hit by cruise missiles you have already lost the war.

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6199
    Points : 6191
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  Isos on Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:55 pm

    Seriously, just shut up.
    Hole
    Hole

    Posts : 3139
    Points : 3139
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 44
    Location : Merkelland

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  Hole on Mon Mar 16, 2020 5:08 pm

    AD in the WWII consisted of guns guided by Mk. I eyeballs. Today we´re talking about guided missiles. Great comparison. Rolling Eyes
    ultimatewarrior
    ultimatewarrior

    Posts : 1070
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2016-09-19
    Location : Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  ultimatewarrior on Mon Mar 16, 2020 5:48 pm

    Hole wrote:AD in the WWII consisted of guns guided by Mk. I eyeballs. Today we´re talking about guided missiles. Great comparison. Rolling Eyes

    AD evolve. So do aircraft. These days a Mavic Mini can sneak into an airbase and suicide crash a plane. A Su-30SM at Khmeimim was taken down this way. Crashed shortly after takeoff. Was hit by a toy drone while it was parked. That's why they build shelters.

    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 1071
    Points : 1069
    Join date : 2015-12-30

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic on Mon Mar 16, 2020 6:06 pm

    The only aircraft loss after take off was a syrian mig 29, and not the modernised smt model. I do not even remember if it was based in Latakia...

    And game of thrones? Are you using a bloody fantasy tv series as a precedent? Shocked Rolling Eyes
    JohninMK
    JohninMK

    Posts : 7809
    Points : 7892
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  JohninMK on Mon Mar 16, 2020 6:48 pm

    Rodion_Romanovic wrote:The only aircraft loss after take off was a syrian mig 29, and not the modernised smt model. I do not even remember if it was based in Latakia...

    And game of thrones?  Are you using a bloody fantasy tv series as a precedent? Shocked Rolling Eyes

    Says it all really. In UW's world that is reality.
    ultimatewarrior
    ultimatewarrior

    Posts : 1070
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2016-09-19
    Location : Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  ultimatewarrior on Mon Mar 16, 2020 7:40 pm

    JohninMK wrote:
    Rodion_Romanovic wrote:The only aircraft loss after take off was a syrian mig 29, and not the modernised smt model. I do not even remember if it was based in Latakia...

    And game of thrones?  Are you using a bloody fantasy tv series as a precedent? Shocked Rolling Eyes

    Says it all really. In UW's world that is reality.

    Reality is a $400 Mavic Mini can sneak into Khmeimim undetected and damage a plane causing flight control failure after takeoff. 0.5 lb * 50 km/h is quite a bit of kinetic energy against aluminum. 30 minutes flight time at 50 km/h = 25 km on autopilot. That's more than enough for an undercover agent in Latakia to strike Khmeimim using Mavic Mini. That's why the shelters were built last year to defend from DJI drones.

    Su-30SM was destroyed by DJI drone at Latakia in 2018. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20602/russian-su-30sm-fighter-jet-crashed-off-the-syrian-coast-killing-both-crew



    ultimatewarrior
    ultimatewarrior

    Posts : 1070
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2016-09-19
    Location : Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  ultimatewarrior on Mon Mar 16, 2020 10:20 pm

    Terrorists wrecked M4 highway. No more patrol until terrorists droned.

    https://twitter.com/200_zoka/status/1239660896198234118
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 4731
    Points : 4709
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  miketheterrible on Mon Mar 16, 2020 11:24 pm

    No. No drone destroyed an su-30. The drive isn't a real source. Sorry.
    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6199
    Points : 6191
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  Isos on Mon Mar 16, 2020 11:41 pm

    miketheterrible wrote:No. No drone destroyed an su-30.  The drive isn't a real source. Sorry.

    But the threat is real. I saw the spec of that drone and it can be controled 2km away. Not bad for sneaky attacks.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 25942
    Points : 26488
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  GarryB on Tue Mar 17, 2020 6:23 am

    In WW2 anti aircraft only accounted for about 10% of enemy aircraft kills.

    Not sure where you got your numbers from... 20% of aircraft kills in WWII was probably from weather conditions and probably 30% navigation errors...

    The lion's share of enemy aircraft losses is downed by fighter planes.

    Do you have actual figures or did you pull those from your ass like I did?

    In 2008 Russia Georgia war Georgia's Hermes drones were not lost to AD. They were lost to Russian air force fighter jets.

    Actually... funny you mention that because the Russians lost about three Frogfoot CAS aircraft to their own MANPADS, and a Backfire probably to a BUK and at least one Su-24 from memory, also likely to a BUK. No Russian aircraft AFAIK were shot down by enemy air power in that conflict.

    Syria don't have fighter jets in flyable condition, that's why they are not able to defend their airspace.

    Syrian IADS is defending Syrian Air Space rather better than Syrian fighters ever could... if they had MiG-29M2 or MiG-35 and Su-35 and Su-30 fighters as well as A-50 AWACS platforms to bolster their ground based air defences they would be one of the best protected countries in the region.

    Israel struggles to penetrate their air defences and attack targets...

    And what would fighter jet do against swarm of cruise missiles ?

    Be destroyed in their hangars mostly... Smile

    As shown in Game Of Thrones, AD is practically useless against aircraft. Of course, the best defense is offense. If by the stage you are getting hit by cruise missiles you have already lost the war.

    So if they are so devastating where are they now? Why are all the dragons dead?

    I didn't watch the whole video but even in the first few seconds you could see it was bias... even wooden ships would resist the effect of a giant blow torch for the few seconds it flew past and they would not explode like that unless they were all carrying petrol in leaking drums.

    The fact is that to take down an enemy air defence network you need accurate information about all his equipment and where it is located and you would need to mount large numbers of attacks to weaken and break the network... and his own aircraft will be integrated in to that network so if air power is so all powerful then that is part of his defence network as well...

    The whole point of an IADS is to integrate lots of different components together so they are used efficiently without waste... in Saudi Arabia it failed because their radars and threat detection capacity was poor... they literally didn't see it coming and their attackers exploited that in a very capable way.

    If they had tried that in Syria against a Russian air base they would have needed orders of magnitude more drones and missiles to defeat the air defences... in fact so many more drones and missiles that they probably would have seen all those drones and missiles being shipped in and probably would have bombed the warehouses where they were being assembled making the attack impossible to begin with.

    That is the point of an IADS... not to be 100% perfect and stop everything, but to reduce damage, to use existing resources and assets with the most efficiency, and to make attacking you much more complex and difficult and expensive while minimising the damage you can possibly do.

    Defence without attack is indeed foolish, but you certainly are better off spending money on S-400s than on the dozen Rafales you would get for the same money...

    An IADS is much more than just SAMs and air defence guns, it is radars and other sensors and battle management systems and communication and coordination... the C4IR Russia rebuilt from scratch was necessary before anything else...

    AD evolve. So do aircraft. These days a Mavic Mini can sneak into an airbase and suicide crash a plane. A Su-30SM at Khmeimim was taken down this way. Crashed shortly after takeoff. Was hit by a toy drone while it was parked. That's why they build shelters.

    The Russians have ECM systems that disable drones near air bases...


    Reality is a $400 Mavic Mini can sneak into Khmeimim undetected and damage a plane causing flight control failure after takeoff. 0.5 lb * 50 km/h is quite a bit of kinetic energy against aluminum.

    Aircrew visually check their aircraft before they get in to them and take off... any damage created by a half pound object moving at 50km per hour would be pathetic... it would be like hitting a car with a golf ball.

    But the threat is real. I saw the spec of that drone and it can be controled 2km away. Not bad for sneaky attacks.

    Control signals can be detected and jammed and also used to locate the operator.

    Most drones return to their launch location when they lose signal or auto land when they lose navigation information and don't know where they are to avoid flying in to terrain.

    I would be happy to be given a nice 12 gauge shot gun in semi auto with the job of wandering around airports manually dealing with drones... great fun...

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6199
    Points : 6191
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  Isos on Tue Mar 17, 2020 7:24 am

    Control signals can be detected and jammed and also used to locate the operator.

    Most drones return to their launch location when they lose signal or auto land when they lose navigation information and don't know where they are to avoid flying in to terrain.

    I would be happy to be given a nice 12 gauge shot gun in semi auto with the job of wandering around airports manually dealing with drones... great fun...

    I know such civilian drone will be pretty easy to jamm.

    But it's more the caracteristic that impresse me. 30min in the air for a 250g drone.

    It has a very good camera and frankly speaking you can use it to implement some imagery recognition. Send it in the air near the airport and it will find byitself the runway which is a easy thing to spot above an airport. Then let it fly above the airport until it finds a fighter jet parked outside and explose on him. Awacs are also easy to spot.

    I'm not talking about thise terrorist made drones but something real engineers could do.
    ultimatewarrior
    ultimatewarrior

    Posts : 1070
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2016-09-19
    Location : Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  ultimatewarrior on Tue Mar 17, 2020 3:49 pm

    miketheterrible wrote:No. No drone destroyed an su-30.  The drive isn't a real source. Sorry.

    The rumor is a DJI drone suicide crashed into a Su-30 parked on the tarmac. The damage to the fuselage was not discovered, because the damage was at the top of the fuselage where the drone crashed into the plane. After the plane took off, shortly the plane crashed due to malfunction because of damaged electrical system in the fuselage. That's why they built the shelters at Khmeinum last year to defend from DJI drones.


    Last edited by ultimatewarrior on Tue Mar 17, 2020 3:56 pm; edited 1 time in total
    ultimatewarrior
    ultimatewarrior

    Posts : 1070
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2016-09-19
    Location : Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  ultimatewarrior on Tue Mar 17, 2020 3:51 pm

    Isos wrote:
    miketheterrible wrote:No. No drone destroyed an su-30.  The drive isn't a real source. Sorry.

    But the threat is real. I saw the spec of that drone and it can be controled 2km away. Not bad for sneaky attacks.

    Control range is up to 4 km but if on autopilot the drone can strike up to 25 km away on 30 minutes flight time at 50 km/h flight speed. On autopilot the drone can only be stopped by shutting down GPS signals in the area, because the pilot does not require a radio link to the drone.
    ultimatewarrior
    ultimatewarrior

    Posts : 1070
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2016-09-19
    Location : Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  ultimatewarrior on Tue Mar 17, 2020 3:53 pm

    Isos wrote:
    Control signals can be detected and jammed and also used to locate the operator.

    Most drones return to their launch location when they lose signal or auto land when they lose navigation information and don't know where they are to avoid flying in to terrain.

    I would be happy to be given a nice 12 gauge shot gun in semi auto with the job of wandering around airports manually dealing with drones... great fun...

    I know such civilian drone will be pretty easy to jamm.

    But it's more the caracteristic that impresse me. 30min in the air for a 250g drone.

    It has a very good camera and frankly speaking you can use it to implement some imagery recognition. Send it in the air near the airport and it will find byitself the runway which is a easy thing to spot above an airport. Then let it fly above the airport until it finds a fighter jet parked outside and explose on him. Awacs are also easy to spot.

    I'm not talking about thise terrorist made drones but something real engineers could do.

    Control range is up to 4 km but if on autopilot the drone can strike up to 25 km away on 30 minutes flight time at 50 km/h flight speed. On autopilot the drone can only be stopped by shutting down GPS signals in the area, because the pilot does not require a radio link to the drone.
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 996
    Points : 1163
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  Mindstorm on Tue Mar 17, 2020 4:00 pm

    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Isos wrote:According to russians, syrian buk launched 25 missiles at turkish drones. They destroyed 20 of them, 3 missiles missed and i don't understand about the two other. It's a 80% Pk against drones.

    On their official website they say a 70% Pk against cruise missiles which is a similar target than those turkish drones in terms of size.


    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Etkleg10

    Under a heavy ECM environment with the Turkish Koral deployed.


    Except for the first two days of the Turkey's Operation Spring Shield ,where "tactical surprise" was achieved (in reality more similar to the term "backstab" with the Turkish forces, both within and outside the Syrian border, including majority of the UAV and UCAV involved in the initial phase of the operation, that had been allowed to stay in the area to monitor the situation on the ground second the previous trilateral accord that begun to attack suddenly Syrian Army's forces in theirs area of operation) has been a failure.

    If ,in facts, in the first 36-40 hours of the operation, the sudden attack by parts of the Turkish forces, allowed to remain in the area for the previous accord, managed to inflict some noticeable damages on Syrian ground forces, in minor part directly by part of UCAV and theirs few low power ordnance and for the larger part by part of long range Turkish artillery fire corrected with the precise coordinates provided both by UAVs and ground forces at contact range with Syrian Army forces, the situation changed drammatically after those first hours when Syrian Forces declared no fly zone over Idlib and modified deployment and rules of engagement to cope with a conventional armed enemy.

    Some launchers of Бук-М2Э was placed in the eastern area ,outside of the engagement footprint of turkish artillery and together with two lauchers of Панцирь-С1 (two had been damaged by combined effort of UCAV and artillery in the initial surprise attack) have generated unsustainable losses on turkish UAVs and UCAVs forcing them to operate mostly at night and at very low altitude mostly in the western Idlib area to reduce the rate of the losses.

    Is very important to notice that what happened in those few dozen of hours in a limited area scenario (the forced modification of flight latitude of UAV and UCAV from mid/high to low/very low altitude) fully validate the accepted models developed by domestic military analysis insitutes on which the requirements for composition and modernization of old and creation of new samples of armaments has been based on.

    Even a very very low number of export version of realtively modern SAM specimens (well under the minimum prescrived by domestic literature for coverage of ground operation of the magnitude of those in the Idlib governorate) and moreover devoid of organic EW and air support has been capable in a very short time to produce a number of downed UAV/UCAV high enough to modify the flight pact of surveillance UAVs and attack UAVs, as correctly foreseen in domestic models, toward very low altitude operations at night .

    This fully validate the technical requirements put at the basis of the last decade improvement plan for Federation Ground Forces encoppassing capabilities by part of elements not pertaining to Air Defense and EW integrated in the armoured and mechanized regiments to be capable to independently destroy, day and night, low altitude flying objects using standard weapons using almost exclusively passive sensors or third party informations.

    That capability effectively "close the circle" of defeat, designed to deprive the enemy of effective third party target designation for its long range weapons (air and ground delivered) without weigh-on furtherly on the shoulders of EW and air defense units that in this way can fully deal with long range PGM and delivery platforms.

    Some important developments in that precise direction are:

    - The introduction of standardized 57 mm caliber autocannons and passive optronic authomatic guidance not only in dedicated Деривация but also in the unmannned turrets of perspective БМП and БМПТ
    - Massive introduction of "Верба" manpads in infantry formations
    - The introduction of a new generation of gun and shoulder-launched guided missiles with dual anti-tank/anti air capabilities


    ultimatewarrior
    ultimatewarrior

    Posts : 1070
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2016-09-19
    Location : Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  ultimatewarrior on Tue Mar 17, 2020 4:01 pm

    Today's Mavic Mini is smaller than a smart phone, weighs half a pound, fly 30 minutes at 50 km/h to strike a plane on the tarmac from 25 km away. On autopilot there is no radio link between pilot and drone so it can't be jammed. The drone can hit the plane on the top where the damage can't be discovered by the damage to the electrical system in the fuselage can cause the plane to malfunction and crash shortly after takeoff. This is what today's drone can do. What can drones do say 10 years from now? You can have a such a small drone strike from 50 km away or more, making Khmeinum airbase at risk due to range to rebel territory is less than 50 km away. Su-30 was destroyed by DJI suicide drone in 2018 killing both crew before shelters were finally built at Khmeinum to counter the DJI drone threat.

    https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20602/russian-su-30sm-fighter-jet-crashed-off-the-syrian-coast-killing-both-crew



    ultimatewarrior
    ultimatewarrior

    Posts : 1070
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2016-09-19
    Location : Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  ultimatewarrior on Tue Mar 17, 2020 4:05 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    magnumcromagnon wrote:
    Isos wrote:According to russians, syrian buk launched 25 missiles at turkish drones. They destroyed 20 of them, 3 missiles missed and i don't understand about the two other. It's a 80% Pk against drones.

    On their official website they say a 70% Pk against cruise missiles which is a similar target than those turkish drones in terms of size.


    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Etkleg10

    Under a heavy ECM environment with the Turkish Koral deployed.


    Except for the first two days of the Turkey's Operation Spring Shield ,where "tactical surprise" was achieved (in reality more similar to the term "backstab" with the Turkish forces, both within and outside the Syrian border, including majority of the UAV and UCAV involved in the initial phase of the operation, that had been allowed to stay in the area to monitor the situation on the ground second the previous trilateral accord that begun to attack suddenly Syrian Army's forces in theirs area of operation) has been a failure.

    If ,in facts, in the first 36-40 hours of the operation, the sudden attack by parts of the Turkish forces, allowed to remain in the area for the previous accord, managed to inflict some noticeable damages on Syrian ground forces, in minor part directly by part of UCAV and theirs few low power ordnance and for the larger part by part of long range Turkish artillery fire corrected with the precise coordinates provided both by UAVs and ground forces at contact range with Syrian Army forces, the situation changed drammatically after those first hours when Syrian Forces declared no fly zone over Idlib and modified deployment and rules of engagement to cope with a conventional armed enemy.

    Some launchers of Бук-М2Э was placed in the eastern area ,outside of the engagement footprint of turkish artillery and together with two lauchers of Панцирь-С1 (two had been damaged by combined effort of UCAV and artillery in the initial surprise attack) have generated unsustainable losses on turkish UAVs and UCAVs forcing them to operate mostly at night and at very low altitude mostly in the western Idlib area to reduce the rate of the losses.

    Is very important to notice that what happened in those few dozen of hours in a limited area scenario (the forced modification of flight latitude of UAV and UCAV from mid/high to low/very low altitude) fully validate the accepted models developed by domestic military analysis insitutes on which the requirements for composition and modernization of old and creation of new samples of armaments has been based on.

    Even a very very low number of export version of realtively modern SAM specimens (well under the minimum prescrived by domestic literature for coverage of ground operation of the magnitude of those in the Idlib governorate) and moreover devoid of organic EW and air support has been capable in a very short time to produce a number of downed UAV/UCAV high enough to modify the flight pact of surveillance UAVs and attack UAVs, as correctly foreseen in domestic models, toward very low altitude operations at night .

    This fully validate the technical requirements put at the basis of the last decade improvement plan for Federation Ground Forces encoppassing capabilities by part of elements not pertaining to Air Defense and EW integrated in the armoured and mechanized regiments to be capable to independently destroy, day and night, low altitude flying objects using standard weapons using almost exclusively passive sensors or third party informations.

    That capability effectively "close the circle" of defeat, designed to deprive the enemy of effective third party target designation for its long range weapons (air and ground delivered) without weigh-on furtherly on the shoulders of EW and air defense units that in this way can fully deal with long range PGM and delivery platforms.

    Some important developments in that precise direction are:

    - The introduction of standardized 57 mm caliber autocannons and passive optronic authomatic guidance not only in dedicated Деривация but also in the unmannned turrets of perspective БМП and БМПТ
    -  Massive introduction of "Верба" manpads in infantry formations
    - The introduction of a new generation of gun and shoulder-launched guided missiles with dual anti-tank/anti air capabilities



    Putin guaranteed no F-16 fly over Idlib but Turkish drones could do so, and ordered Syrian AD to move away from Idlib. Big mistake. Putin did not understand drones are the biggest killers in modern warfare. If wasn't until Syrian AD was ordered to move back to Idlib was the Turkish drone problem addressed. 700 Syrian soldiers were slaughtered by drones in February. They could have lived in Putin didn't order Syrian AD move away from Idlib in the first place.
    avatar
    Mindstorm

    Posts : 996
    Points : 1163
    Join date : 2011-07-20

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  Mindstorm on Tue Mar 17, 2020 4:46 pm


    ultimatewarrior wrote:....drones are the biggest killers in modern warfare

    Razz Razz Razz Not even by very far. UCAV are today very poor offensive platforms (is sufficient to read percentage numbers and tonnage of attack munitions delivered by UAVs on the total by any military force at world engaged in any operation) used ,for economic reasons, mostly in COIN operations or for "one time" peace-time surprise attacks on unexpecting targets of opportunity.

    Crossing theirs average costs with theirs index of survivability in presence also of abyshmal level of air defense and EW systems - and just Lybian and Syrian theatre are clear proofs of that - someone receive a clear picture of theirs wide cost-inefficiency, in order to change this axiom there should be achieved a reduction in the cost of UAV in the order of more than an order of magnitude; this with today technology appear completely unattainable.

    The problem is well known also to US planners that already plan to create lower cost nuw generation of UAV to substitute today MQ-9 "Reaper" considered totally unsiotable for a conflict also against a moderately armed opponent.


    https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/03/11/air-force-looking-successor-its-mq-9-reaper-drone.html


    UAV/UCAVS are today used for the almost total absence in theirs use of risks of human losses and therefore of the related political backlash among internal public opinion against a military operation; in substance UCAV employment in today operation is nothing more than a trade-off where someone exchange operational and cost-effciency for internal political viability of a military operation.
    ultimatewarrior
    ultimatewarrior

    Posts : 1070
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2016-09-19
    Location : Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  ultimatewarrior on Tue Mar 17, 2020 5:19 pm

    Mindstorm wrote:
    ultimatewarrior wrote:....drones are the biggest killers in modern warfare

    Razz Razz Razz Not even by very far. UCAV are today very poor offensive platforms (is sufficient to read percentage numbers and tonnage of attack munitions delivered by UAVs on the total by any military force at world engaged in any operation) used ,for economic reasons, mostly in COIN operations or for "one time" peace-time surprise attacks on unexpecting targets of opportunity.

    Crossing theirs average costs with theirs index of survivability in presence also of abyshmal level of air defense and EW systems - and just Lybian and Syrian theatre are clear proofs of that - someone receive a clear picture of theirs wide cost-inefficiency, in order to change this axiom there should be achieved a reduction in the cost of UAV in the order of more than an order of magnitude; this with today technology appear completely unattainable.

    The problem is well known also to US planners that already plan to create lower cost nuw generation of UAV to substitute today MQ-9 "Reaper" considered totally unsiotable for a conflict also against a moderately armed opponent.


    https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/03/11/air-force-looking-successor-its-mq-9-reaper-drone.html


    UAV/UCAVS are today used for the almost total absence in theirs use of risks of human losses and therefore of the related political backlash among internal public opinion against a military operation; in substance UCAV employment in today operation is nothing more than a trade-off where someone exchange operational and cost-effciency for internal political viability of a military operation.  

    Modern warfare is called low intensity warfare. A few hundred losses in manpower and pickups turns the tide of war. Drones is what enabled SAA to advance so fast.

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6199
    Points : 6191
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  Isos on Tue Mar 17, 2020 5:28 pm

    Today's Mavic Mini is smaller than a smart phone, weighs half a pound, fly 30 minutes at 50 km/h to strike a plane on the tarmac from 25 km away. On autopilot there is no radio link between pilot and drone so it can't be jammed. The drone can hit the plane on the top where the damage can't be discovered by the damage to the electrical system in the fuselage can cause the plane to malfunction and crash shortly after takeoff. This is what today's drone can do. What can drones do say 10 years from now? You can have a such a small drone strike from 50 km away or more, making Khmeinum airbase at risk due to range to rebel territory is less than 50 km away. Su-30 was destroyed by DJI suicide drone in 2018 killing both crew before shelters were finally built at Khmeinum to counter the DJI drone threat.

    A) They use civilian GPS that is already jammed in Syria. Even military GPS is jammed by Russia. Civilian GPS jammers can be bought for 200$ on internet. Put them around the base and your drone will crash after taking off.

    B) They are not made to attack aircraft and have nothing to detect the aircraft. GPS is not enough.

    C) Russians control everything around Hmeimim and local population will report anyone carrying such drones.

    Isos
    Isos

    Posts : 6199
    Points : 6191
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  Isos on Tue Mar 17, 2020 5:30 pm

    Drones is what enabled SAA to advance so fast.

    No it's russian bomber that helped them. Drones would need another 50 years to do what sukhois did.
    ultimatewarrior
    ultimatewarrior

    Posts : 1070
    Points : 1078
    Join date : 2016-09-19
    Location : Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  ultimatewarrior on Tue Mar 17, 2020 6:29 pm

    Isos wrote:
    Drones is what enabled SAA to advance so fast.

    No it's russian bomber that helped them. Drones would need another 50 years to do what sukhois did.

    Wrong on so many levels. The vast majority of strikes on rebels is done by Forpost lazing drones and Krasnopol laser guided artillery. Bombers are obsolete. These days you can have long range laser guided big mobile artillery like Turkish Kasirgas K which can pummel targets with 1000+ pound munitions from dozens of km away with pinpoint accuracy. And these are far more dangerous than bombers since they don't give any early warning unlike bombers which are noisy and slow, and they aren't vulnerable to drone strikes like bombers are which must be parked at static airbases while these are highly mobile. Plus they require far less servicing and have much faster reloading therefore far heavier firepower than bombers can inflict. Modern warfare is low intensity warfare. You park your artillery 30 to 60 km behind the lines. No one can touch those. That's why Orlan 30 lazing drones are entering service this year. In future war it'll be Orlan 30 and Krasnopol M combo. No need to fly bombers like Su-34 in Idlib. Su-34 aren't needed anymore. Orlan 30 and Krasnopol M combo can do everything Su-34 can do, at much lower cost, no early warning to the enemy, faster reloading time, and no risk to pilots lives in case of mechanical failure.


    Sponsored content

    Syrian War: News #22 - Page 2 Empty Re: Syrian War: News #22

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Sep 28, 2020 8:42 am