Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Zangi]

Oh right, isn't radio contact a thing?

[miljan]

Ground radars have the weakness of having blind areas around them at low altitude even if they're set on mountain tops. This is one of the reasons why radar planes are used.

S300 and S400 have a lot of qualities on their marketing brochures indeed. They're still ground-bound and rely on active sensors. Yes, like certain Western systems they can target smaller ordnance as well(cruise and artillery missiles) but they remain vulnerable: AGM-88 and equivalents are relatively cheap and cruise missiles fly nap of the earth. Huge range is useless without targeting data which needs radars... And with S400s longer ranged missiles, basically needs the radar between the target and the launching platform.

It could be that they developed those for Europe, for firing over Poland and Lithuania to targets acquired from Kaliningrad.

On jamming systems: you usually dont want to jam when under attack because everyone and their mother, even us, have lock-on-jam, riding the beam down capable weapons in their arsenals. Jamming is for denying range and velocity information for self defence(aircraft ECM) at long range before the plane "burns through" and jamming becomes harmful, or blinding a sensor with overwhelming transmission power.

Ground radars weakness is very depending from area you are fighting in and actual in most cases does not have a huge effect on modern radars. The main reason for radar planes is their mobility and offensive potential in the first place.
 
Also about s 400, you are looking at them as just a missile, every s 400 and s 300 come with thor and panser-s defenses that are primary design to aim for the interception of PGMs as AGM-88 HARM and GBUs. They never deploy only s 300 as alone battery , but combined it with others systems  so its very hard to penetrate its defenses. This is a standard package of all s300 and s400 from the start.

Anyway there is unofficial information that there will be a case fire of two weeks that all parties will follow.

[smjjames]

Anyway there is unofficial information that there will be a case fire of two weeks that all parties will follow.

That was supposed to have started last week, or are you talking about a different one?

[miljan]

Anyway there is unofficial information that there will be a case fire of two weeks that all parties will follow.

That was supposed to have started last week, or are you talking about a different one?

The same one, just updated version as the case fire did not start yet.

[Erkki]

I wonder what the Russian cease fire will look like this time.


http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/nato-worried-about-possible-turkey-russia-hostilities-a-1078349.html

"NATO cannot allow itself to be pulled into a military escalation with Russia as a result of the recent tensions between Russia and Turkey," says Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn.

Apparently Turkey has been warned from several directions now. They'll likely be on their own in any adventures in Syria. Erdogan should have been aware of that the whole time, perhaps hes just step by step seeing how far he can go.

--

Modern radars retain the limitations of not being able to see beyond the horizon or behind terrain obstacles.(lets ignore the massive, static over the horizon radars). A low flying object such a a cruise missile is relatively much more difficult to see even over water. This becomes a problem if said plane carries something that can touch you from beyond the range it can be seen, say, with cruise missiles(US problem of protecting their CVBGs from supersonic Soviet bombers during the Cold War). Radar planes are very expensive, yet even nations such as Sweden who in no scenario will need to fight a proper war on anyone else's turf have bought a number of them. Its not just the convenience of having a mobile radar: the look-down ability is important. They provide situational awareness and supplement the limitations of ground assets.

A couple of A2/AD missile sets in Syria. So what? Oversaturate them, take perhaps a few casualties and move in. No problem for Turkey or the Saudis.

[miljan]

They do have those limitation, but the thing is unlike in the past modern radars have a lot better detection of the noise near the ground. And also multiple radar in high position and different locations  makes it very hard to do anything without detection. And cruiser missiles as said before are easy targets for thor and panser systems. Systems as s400 and s300 are mainly used for elimination plane threats.

It's actually a huge problem for turkey to do anything, because a huge part of its territory is under surveillance both from sea and ground, and the anti air system go very deep in its territory. Not only would they have huge casualties trying to go through the air defense, they would have problems on the ground itself as they are in range of multiple ballistic and also cruise missiles from fleets, in fact their territory is in a way flanked making any move for them extremely hard now and expensive. So its not easy to do at all as you assume here or with low casualties.

Anyway Syrian "Tiger Forces" retake the Aleppo thermal power
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfIwzjFo4WY

MAP showing encircled IS in East Aleppo

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Assad said he is ready for a case fire but:
"We have said that we are ready to stop military operations, but the issue relates to more important factors ... such as preventing terrorists from using it to improve their positions," an official online media outlet for the Syrian presidency quoted Assad as saying.

He said any truce must ensure that "other countries, especially Turkey, are prevented from sending more terrorists and weapons, or any kind of logistical support".

[Loud Whispers]

Oh yeah, we all would take cover. You dont want to mistake a C-130 gunship(they still use those things) for a transport about to drop cereals.

I love the description from that one pilot who said it was like listening to God farting destruction

MAP showing encircled IS in East Aleppo

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

DOOM APPROACHES

Assad said he is ready for a case fire but:
"We have said that we are ready to stop military operations, but the issue relates to more important factors ... such as preventing terrorists from using it to improve their positions," an official online media outlet for the Syrian presidency quoted Assad as saying.
He said any truce must ensure that "other countries, especially Turkey, are prevented from sending more terrorists and weapons, or any kind of logistical support".

With everyone having different definitions of terrorist being of paramount importance here :/
Still, progress!

[Erkki]

They do have those limitation, but the thing is unlike in the past modern radars have a lot better detection of the noise near the ground. And also multiple radar in high position and different locations  makes it very hard to do anything without detection. And cruiser missiles as said before are easy targets for thor and panser systems. Systems as s400 and s300 are mainly used for elimination plane threats.

It's actually a huge problem for turkey to do anything, because a huge part of its territory is under surveillance both from sea and ground, and the anti air system go very deep in its territory. Not only would they have huge casualties trying to go through the air defense, they would have problems on the ground itself as they are in range of multiple ballistic and also cruise missiles from fleets, in fact their territory is in a way flanked making any move for them extremely hard now and expensive. So its not easy to do at all as you assume here or with low casualties.

Surveillance? Lol. Russia can be fighting in Syria but they wont be attacking within Turkish borders. That would end Putin's autocracy real quick, so I figure any accidental violations would be dealt with in crisis phone line to Brussels and Washington, past the problem member of the alliance.

Those same radars are also themselves "easy" targets(easier than what they try to track) because they need to radiate to operate, and they rely on yet more radiating missile defenses for their own protection. Anyone blinking is seen further than they themselves see. Why do you assume unreal capabilities from of just a couple of launchers, no matter what they are?

And those long range missiles arent very maneuverable. The short ranged ones too don't have a higher load factor than Western missiles that have scored a Pk of about 50% only, and against much lower tech opponents to boot. The Pk has been only high against friendly helicopters. An S300/400 launcher vehicle only has 4 tubes, the potential of kills one can shoot before its dead is rather low, if cost effective. Pk is a thing and saturation works because defensive systems can only track and shoot so many targets at once.

No system is perfect, planes and missiles get through. Turkey and Saudis will have massive superiority in numbers if they decide to move in, it likely wont be even a cost effective to trade whatever Russia has in Syria away in combat unless the Turks screw up(which they shouldn't as a NATO member). Similarly, those A2/AD systems are operated by people too and thing.

Made in Russia plaque and marketing speeches dont make stuff magic.

[Erkki]

Heres a lengthy article on some of the Syrian government's atrocities... I need to find time to read it too.

https://www.hrw.org/report/2015/12/16/if-dead-could-speak/mass-deaths-and-torture-syrias-detention-facilities

[Sergarr]

Erkki, if we agree with your assumptions and your conclusions that ground-based anti-aircraft complexes are basically useless, then why do you think people have ever developed them?

And if you think that they have capabilities that they'll never get to use in practice (like 300-400 km range on these missiles), then why did people spent thousands of hours of engineering time to add those capabilities in?

We're speaking about modern military technology. It's only natural that there will be some undisclosed stuff about it. Up until previous year, Kalibr missiles were only listed with maximum range of 300 km, for export variants. Then, when they've launched them from Caspian sea to Syria, it turned out that their actual range is at least 4 times greater than that. And no one knew about it, until they've been actually used.

So don't think you know everything your opponent can do.

[Sheb]

He's not arguing they're useless, he's arguing that in their current number and with relatively little airborne radar support, Turkey and/or Saudi Arabia could easily outnumber them. As for the longer range, Erkki had that to say:

Huge range is useless without targeting data which needs radars... And with S400s longer ranged missiles, basically needs the radar between the target and the launching platform.

It could be that they developed those for Europe, for firing over Poland and Lithuania to targets acquired from Kaliningrad.

So the 300 km ranke is not always useless, but not really useful in the Syrian theater.

[miljan]

They do have those limitation, but the thing is unlike in the past modern radars have a lot better detection of the noise near the ground. And also multiple radar in high position and different locations  makes it very hard to do anything without detection. And cruiser missiles as said before are easy targets for thor and panser systems. Systems as s400 and s300 are mainly used for elimination plane threats.

It's actually a huge problem for turkey to do anything, because a huge part of its territory is under surveillance both from sea and ground, and the anti air system go very deep in its territory. Not only would they have huge casualties trying to go through the air defense, they would have problems on the ground itself as they are in range of multiple ballistic and also cruise missiles from fleets, in fact their territory is in a way flanked making any move for them extremely hard now and expensive. So its not easy to do at all as you assume here or with low casualties.

Surveillance? Lol. Russia can be fighting in Syria but they wont be attacking within Turkish borders. That would end Putin's autocracy real quick, so I figure any accidental violations would be dealt with in crisis phone line to Brussels and Washington, past the problem member of the alliance.

Those same radars are also themselves "easy" targets(easier than what they try to track) because they need to radiate to operate, and they rely on yet more radiating missile defenses for their own protection. Anyone blinking is seen further than they themselves see. Why do you assume unreal capabilities from of just a couple of launchers, no matter what they are?

And those long range missiles arent very maneuverable. The short ranged ones too don't have a higher load factor than Western missiles that have scored a Pk of about 50% only, and against much lower tech opponents to boot. The Pk has been only high against friendly helicopters. An S300/400 launcher vehicle only has 4 tubes, the potential of kills one can shoot before its dead is rather low, if cost effective. Pk is a thing and saturation works because defensive systems can only track and shoot so many targets at once.

No system is perfect, planes and missiles get through. Turkey and Saudis will have massive superiority in numbers if they decide to move in, it likely wont be even a cost effective to trade whatever Russia has in Syria away in combat unless the Turks screw up(which they shouldn't as a NATO member). Similarly, those A2/AD systems are operated by people too and thing.

Made in Russia plaque and marketing speeches dont make stuff magic.

Sorry if turkey attacks russian forces , be sure that they will be a retaliation on the turkey itself to limit its capabilities to continue the invasion. Phone call does not help when you go and start invading other country where your forces are in. You are here talking about turkey and saudi invading syria, than russia from main land and iran will join also in the mix. So turkey will be mostly fucked, including most of the world as it will be very close to world war 3. So little more though put in this and what will result in it would be good. I know that you want to make it so that if turkey attacks syria and russian forces nothing will happen and they cna do it easy, but that is very illogical to think like that.

Its not exactly a couple of launchers, but it includes fleet, russian ground air defense that is among the most advanced systems at the moment, the aviation, the syrian air defense, the additional russia support from the black sea. It will not work as you say because they would not be fighting only ground air defenses. Less looking at individual systems, and more looking at the system as a whole.
 
Normally that its operated by people and there are mistakes, but that counts on both ends, and is turkey in nato or not doesnt make it somewhat magical.
Yes no system is perfect, they will have superiority in syria at the moment they move if they move with full force and overrun them (thats the only way they can do it anyway), , but than will be in big problem when the same happens to their territories. 

Made in russian doesnt make things magical, but little more logic and looking at the position of turkey and the system placed in syria makes it a lot hard thing to do. There is a reason why russian air defense is considered one of the  best in the world.

Anyway I think its enough throwing around wild assumption of can turkey invade  syria what casualties it will have and how would they go through after russian and iran response, and let's stay on topic. I think there is similar thread where people talk about fictional wars and who will win or what not, but I am not exactly interested in continuing those conversation or nor am here for that type of conversation of us trowing around wild assumption what will happen and similar, as this thread is actually not about it.

[Sergarr]

They do have those limitation, but the thing is unlike in the past modern radars have a lot better detection of the noise near the ground. And also multiple radar in high position and different locations  makes it very hard to do anything without detection. And cruiser missiles as said before are easy targets for thor and panser systems. Systems as s400 and s300 are mainly used for elimination plane threats.

It's actually a huge problem for turkey to do anything, because a huge part of its territory is under surveillance both from sea and ground, and the anti air system go very deep in its territory. Not only would they have huge casualties trying to go through the air defense, they would have problems on the ground itself as they are in range of multiple ballistic and also cruise missiles from fleets, in fact their territory is in a way flanked making any move for them extremely hard now and expensive. So its not easy to do at all as you assume here or with low casualties.

Surveillance? Lol. Russia can be fighting in Syria but they wont be attacking within Turkish borders. That would end Putin's autocracy real quick, so I figure any accidental violations would be dealt with in crisis phone line to Brussels and Washington, past the problem member of the alliance.

Those same radars are also themselves "easy" targets(easier than what they try to track) because they need to radiate to operate, and they rely on yet more radiating missile defenses for their own protection. Anyone blinking is seen further than they themselves see. Why do you assume unreal capabilities from of just a couple of launchers, no matter what they are?

And those long range missiles arent very maneuverable. The short ranged ones too don't have a higher load factor than Western missiles that have scored a Pk of about 50% only, and against much lower tech opponents to boot. The Pk has been only high against friendly helicopters. An S300/400 launcher vehicle only has 4 tubes, the potential of kills one can shoot before its dead is rather low, if cost effective. Pk is a thing and saturation works because defensive systems can only track and shoot so many targets at once.

No system is perfect, planes and missiles get through. Turkey and Saudis will have massive superiority in numbers if they decide to move in, it likely wont be even a cost effective to trade whatever Russia has in Syria away in combat unless the Turks screw up(which they shouldn't as a NATO member). Similarly, those A2/AD systems are operated by people too and thing.

Made in Russia plaque and marketing speeches dont make stuff magic.

Sorry if turkey attacks russian forces , be sure that they will be a retaliation on the turkey itself to limit its capabilities to continue the invasion.

Actually, no. Russia should not attack Turkey itself, because there's little in Turkey that can be hit without striking nearby NATO installations and equipment. Besides, it would greatly increase possibility of Article 5 being invoked.

It's much better to do what USA has did in 1980s Afghanistan war, and ensure your long-term victory by allowing your opponent to enter the quagmire unopposed, and then using your and your allies assets to constantly maintain said quagmire until your opponent retreats by demands from its internal population.

[miljan]

They do have those limitation, but the thing is unlike in the past modern radars have a lot better detection of the noise near the ground. And also multiple radar in high position and different locations  makes it very hard to do anything without detection. And cruiser missiles as said before are easy targets for thor and panser systems. Systems as s400 and s300 are mainly used for elimination plane threats.

It's actually a huge problem for turkey to do anything, because a huge part of its territory is under surveillance both from sea and ground, and the anti air system go very deep in its territory. Not only would they have huge casualties trying to go through the air defense, they would have problems on the ground itself as they are in range of multiple ballistic and also cruise missiles from fleets, in fact their territory is in a way flanked making any move for them extremely hard now and expensive. So its not easy to do at all as you assume here or with low casualties.

Surveillance? Lol. Russia can be fighting in Syria but they wont be attacking within Turkish borders. That would end Putin's autocracy real quick, so I figure any accidental violations would be dealt with in crisis phone line to Brussels and Washington, past the problem member of the alliance.

Those same radars are also themselves "easy" targets(easier than what they try to track) because they need to radiate to operate, and they rely on yet more radiating missile defenses for their own protection. Anyone blinking is seen further than they themselves see. Why do you assume unreal capabilities from of just a couple of launchers, no matter what they are?

And those long range missiles arent very maneuverable. The short ranged ones too don't have a higher load factor than Western missiles that have scored a Pk of about 50% only, and against much lower tech opponents to boot. The Pk has been only high against friendly helicopters. An S300/400 launcher vehicle only has 4 tubes, the potential of kills one can shoot before its dead is rather low, if cost effective. Pk is a thing and saturation works because defensive systems can only track and shoot so many targets at once.

No system is perfect, planes and missiles get through. Turkey and Saudis will have massive superiority in numbers if they decide to move in, it likely wont be even a cost effective to trade whatever Russia has in Syria away in combat unless the Turks screw up(which they shouldn't as a NATO member). Similarly, those A2/AD systems are operated by people too and thing.

Made in Russia plaque and marketing speeches dont make stuff magic.

Sorry if turkey attacks russian forces , be sure that they will be a retaliation on the turkey itself to limit its capabilities to continue the invasion.

Actually, no. Russia should not attack Turkey itself, because there's little in Turkey that can be hit without striking nearby NATO installations and equipment. Besides, it would greatly increase possibility of Article 5 being invoked.

It's much better to do what USA has did in 1980s Afghanistan war, and ensure your long-term victory by allowing your opponent to enter the quagmire unopposed, and then using your and your allies assets to constantly maintain said quagmire until your opponent retreats by demands from its internal population.

Article 5  is not something binary that you can do. You can not abuse your NATO membership. If a NATO country invades other country illegally like we are talking here, be sure that there is higher chance of that country getting kicked out of NATO.

If you are a member of NATO you do not have a right to do illegal stuff and abuse you're NATO membership. People are not dumb, and will not risk a global war because someone went nuts

[Sergarr]

Turkey cannot get "kicked out" of NATO, at least right now, because there are way too many NATO installation of Turkey's territory. Coalition's aircraft operate from Turkey's territory, losing that would be unacceptable.

That said, NATO leaders have already said that Turkey is not going to receive NATO's help if it decides to attack Russia. But that doesn't mean that this gives Russia a card-blansh to attack Turkey's territory in case of Turkey attacking Russian forces in Syria. International politics should not work that way.