Real world, not one Tomahawk shot down by Syria

[stilesw]

Primarchx,

Interesting document, thanks. I've included it in the unofficial CMANO reference library. Anyone who would like access please PM me and I'll set you up.

-Wayne Stiles

[Gunner98]

Thanks, I'll have to read that in detail but from a cursory glance it seems that improvements were made by adding GPS and by automating mission planning. So the reason for the fixed lines seem to be both a technical limitation of the missile at the time - AND the limitation imposed by airspace planning and de-confliction.

Thanks for that.

B

[ZoroastroBR]

I got one question for you guys. Wouldn't the Syrians or even Russians have an AEW flying over Syria at all times? An A-50 would be able to "spot" and track the missiles from a distance of 80 nm (tested in CMANO). After that, the S-400 would have a party...

Am I wrong?

[mikmykWS]

ORIGINAL: ZoroastroBR

I got one question for you guys. Wouldn't the Syrians or even Russians have an AEW flying over Syria at all times? An A-50 would be able to "spot" and track the missiles from a distance of 80 nm (tested in CMANO). After that, the S-400 would have a party...

Am I wrong?

It would definitely help but for some reason they're not regularly deployed there.

Mike

[Cik]

more than likely it has nothing to do with the actual SAM capabilities. no matter how good a radar gets it can't see through a hill. likely the readiness rate on syrian SAM batteries is low enough that there are ways through and it's very likely USN knows where all the holes are, all you have to do then is pick a hole.

a civil war takes a toll, who knows how many of the SAMs they have are operational, crewed, or both? I'd wager it's significantly below 50%.

[Rhygin00]

ORIGINAL: ZoroastroBR

I got one question for you guys. Wouldn't the Syrians or even Russians have an AEW flying over Syria at all times? An A-50 would be able to "spot" and track the missiles from a distance of 80 nm (tested in CMANO). After that, the S-400 would have a party...

Am I wrong?

The question is what is a reason to even use S-400. As soon as they fire, their real capabilities are out of the bag, because the US then has first hand radar measurements of their kinetics and ELINT on their electronic systems. That's probably reserved for attacks on more vital targets.

[Primarchx]

Frankly the whole presence of the S-400 in Syria makes little sense with regard to the Russian's stated mission. ISIS and anti-Assad factions have no aircraft to sortie. So they're really just there to establish in situ dominance over Syrian airspace with regard to NATO and Israel and provide propaganda value because of that threat. They're not there to actually be used (except for protection of Russian positions), IMHO.

[Gunner98]

I believe the presence of the S-400 was an escalation after the Su-24 shoot down. Logic or not it was political sabre rattling. Does give planners something to think about though..

B

[Tomcat84]

I'm pretty sure they deployed it after Turkey shot down that Russian Fencer, probably as a signal.

edit: beaten by ten seconds

[Primarchx]

ORIGINAL: Gunner98

I believe the presence of the S-400 was an escalation after the Su-24 shoot down. Logic or not it was political sabre rattling. Does give planners something to think about though..

B

I thought the deployment predated the Turkey shoot but that makes sense.

[Gunner98]

Yeah they put in the S-400 and started escorting the bombers.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34976537

Can't believe that was 18 months ago already!

B

[Primarchx]

Yeah, you really need to protect yourself when you violate another country's airspace with armed aircraft... [:D]

[Panther Bait]

Regarding AEW, it is time-consuming and expensive to maintain 24-hour AEW coverage over even a single area. A minimum of 3 AEW aircraft and if you're going to do it permanently, probably a lot more to cover maintenance and breakdowns. Russian only has something like 20 AEW aircraft. Not sure how many are deployed in Syria right now.

[ZoroastroBR]

I still think the Russian picked up the missiles and choose not to shoot them down. It would be too much of a direct confrontation between Russia and the US. And the Russians would still need 80 or so missiles to shoot down all 59 tomahawks, more than what a single S-400 battery would be able to fire at ounce.

[mikeCK]

ORIGINAL: VFA41_Lion

so not to rain on the parade or anything but do we know 100% for sure all 59 missiles got through?

No rain here. 58 of 59 made it to the base. The one was a misfire. Additionally there have been no claims by Syria or Russia that any tomahawks were intercepted

https://www.google.com/amp/www.cbsnews. ... nt-astray/

[Tailhook]

ORIGINAL: mikeCK

ORIGINAL: VFA41_Lion

so not to rain on the parade or anything but do we know 100% for sure all 59 missiles got through?

No rain here. 58 of 59 made it to the base. The one was a misfire. Additionally there have been no claims by Syria or Russia that any tomahawks were intercepted

https://www.google.com/amp/www.cbsnews. ... nt-astray/

I've seen this on other non-Russian news sources as well. 60 were actually launched in total against 59 targets(Believe one went into the water right away or failed to launch). One missile was lost somewhere over Syria (there's a photo of it's warhead in a field). The rest hit 58 targets on the base.

[redcoat]

ImageSat International (iSi) used high resolution satellite imagery a few hours after the missile strike to do a damage assessment. They believed 58 missiles hit the base and struck 44 targets within it.

http://www.imagesatintl.com/us-strike-syria/

A 59th missile came down near the village of Karto in the Tartus Governorate, Syria. It was reported by locals on facebook.