CV32 Posted December 4, 2016 Author Report Share Posted December 4, 2016 Russia has apparently given up using their carrier for airstrikes. Kuznetsov could never hope to produce the kind of sortie rate that is capable from an onshore airfield at the best of times. With only three (maybe two?) MiG-29KR and the Su-33s only carrying a pair of 500 kg iron bombs, this was going to be even worse. Meanwhile ... Russian MiG-29 Crash: More than Meets the Eye (RUSI) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CV32 Posted December 5, 2016 Author Report Share Posted December 5, 2016 Looks like they have now lost a Su-33 ... Russian Su-33 crashed in the Mediterranean while attempting to land on Kuznetsov aircraft carrier (Aviationist) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CV32 Posted September 14, 2017 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2017 Russia Has Deployed Its MiG-29SMT Multirole Combat Aircraft To Syria For The Very First Time (Aviationist) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CV32 Posted September 14, 2017 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2017 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CV32 Posted September 26, 2017 Author Report Share Posted September 26, 2017 Russian general killed in IS shelling in Syria (Deutsche Welle) Russia airlifts bridging equipment to Syria (Jane's) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CV32 Posted September 28, 2017 Author Report Share Posted September 28, 2017 More Kh-101 cruise missiles from Tu-95MS (NATO Bear H) bombers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CV32 Posted September 29, 2017 Author Report Share Posted September 29, 2017 Second Russian S-400 in Syria confirmed (Jane's) The obvious question is 'why'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncepulido Posted October 1, 2017 Report Share Posted October 1, 2017 Theoreticallly to protect the Bastion placement. Actually to show force, propaganda and support to the Assad regime. And as I suspect from years, only the "big" missile (46N6 I think) is actually deployed in the S-400 complex, and a very scarce number of them. For me only some 4-8 missile by complex, as more or less also described in the Jane's article. No trace of the two others smaller missiles in the launching system (I delete them from my personal DB long time ago). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CV32 Posted October 1, 2017 Author Report Share Posted October 1, 2017 Theoreticallly to protect the Bastion placement. Actually to show force, propaganda and support to the Assad regime. And as I suspect from years, only the "big" missile (46N6 I think) is actually deployed in the S-400 complex, and a very scarce number of them. For me only some 4-8 missile by complex, as more or less also described in the Jane's article. No trace of the two others smaller missiles in the launching system (I delete them from my personal DB long time ago). The Bastion site has been there a while now. And while having S-400 present in-country has already shown support for Assad, adding a second battery does nothing to advance that objective. I suspect there is something else going on here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palex80 Posted October 5, 2017 Report Share Posted October 5, 2017 Well with that US missile strike against Assad's air base in April, perhaps the Russians want to try and see how well the S-400 can track Tomahawks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncepulido Posted October 7, 2017 Report Share Posted October 7, 2017 Interesting considerations in all those points: http://warisboring.com/russias-air-defenses-in-syria-have-some-big-problems/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncepulido Posted October 7, 2017 Report Share Posted October 7, 2017 Interesting considerations in all those points: http://warisboring.com/russias-air-defenses-in-syria-have-some-big-problems/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CV32 Posted October 9, 2017 Author Report Share Posted October 9, 2017 Well with that US missile strike against Assad's air base in April, perhaps the Russians want to try and see how well the S-400 can track Tomahawks? S-400 has been deployed since last year around this time, so it was already present for the cruise missile strike. It would have had difficulty tracking or engaging any of the missiles then or in a new strike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palex80 Posted October 9, 2017 Report Share Posted October 9, 2017 Well with that US missile strike against Assad's air base in April, perhaps the Russians want to try and see how well the S-400 can track Tomahawks? S-400 has been deployed since last year around this time, so it was already present for the cruise missile strike. It would have had difficulty tracking or engaging any of the missiles then or in a new strike. Well the article does state that due to the geography of Syria probably more than one batteries are necessary to cover Russian assets, if I understood correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CV32 Posted October 10, 2017 Author Report Share Posted October 10, 2017 Well the article does state that due to the geography of Syria probably more than one batteries are necessary to cover Russian assets, if I understood correctly. Yes and this is true of any place, not just Syria. Intervening terrain or the horizon will affect any radar detection and engagement, something that HCE unfortunately tends to gloss over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.