AndraxxusRed Star is back on the Su-24s.
I don’t think they are back, there were red stars on few Su-24s and a single black-painted Su-25. Do we have photos we can make before/after comparison on same bort numbers?
Hmm. :31, Su-30SM with covered up weaponry on the pylons. Wonder what it is.
On stations 3,4 IMHO, its R-27RE or TE; its length, wing size fin size all match. If thats the case, outer pylons are likely to be R-73.
My guess it that they erased them for the ferry operation to Syria. It was done before the official Russian involvement and was considered more or less secret. They probably wanted to keep some denyability till they start operations. Now that there is an official campaign they are putting them back on.
Its possible, but then again, who else oparates (blue paint + canard) Su-30s or Su-34s? Nobody. I would say Su-34 is much more easy to visually identify as Russian, than recognizing the relatively tiny Red stars.
And these aircraft are hardly small in their RCS, no one needs to get within visual range to ID them.
The sovereign state of Syria doesn’t have to justify itself to ISIS supporter , Turkey.
Your ‘expansion of theme’ was nonsense due to two points.
#1 There is nothing on earth to prove Turkey provides support to ISIS. Turkey’s position is at best neutrality. Isolationists are not evil, they just don’t want to face the consequences of interfering. All in all, Turkey critisize Russia for NOT bombing ISIS, how does that translate to Turkey supporting ISIS?
#2 Even IF you said was true, that Turkey is a dedicated supporter of ISIS, then that means Turkey is even more hostile againist Russian presence, and that would need more, not less, diplomacy and show of goodwill from the Russians, to prevent things from escalating out of control.
AndraxxusWhy Russian aircraft are flying without Flags, Red Stars or not even serial numbers on them?
AndraxxusThat’s true but with Russian ADS in the area, the airspace around the border is effectively a no-fly zone anyway.
It appears, many events don’t get to Russia’s (or wherever you are living) media.
Turkish-Syria border events related to this topic, surfaced today:
-3 October 12:08, a Russian aircraft crossed Turkish border at Hatay/Yayladağı while conducting bombing operations at Yamadiya. Aircraft was intercepted by two F-16s and locked on by radar, but was not shot down as Russian aircraft retreated back to Syrian side of the border.
EDIT: According to military sources, aircraft was not using IFF but identified as Su-30 type which is only used by Russian air force, and rechecked as not being Su-24 or MiG-29 types Syria uses. Aircraft strayed several hundred meters into Turkish side, Russians claim it happened due to “navigational error”.
Turkish Ministry of Foreign affairs called Russia’s ambassador and strongly protested: “We demanded to avoid reccurance of such intrusions, and Russian Federation will be responsible for any undesirable event that may occur, and reminded the current Turkish rule of engagement that any military asset that approaches within 5 miles of Turkish border from Syria will be regarded as a threat.”
-4 October, Turkish Armed Forces daily events report:
Air force command:
Along the Turkish-Syria border CAP mission is conducted with 10 F-16 aircraft. During this mission, two of our F-16s were threatened by maintaining radar lock for a total of 5 minutes 40 seconds, by a MiG-29 aircraft *whose nationality cannot be identified*.
Regarding both events President Davutoğlu said today (translates as):
“We warned Russia through diplomatic channels, to not interfere with Turkish border affairs. Our rules of engagement are clear and applies to everyone and TSK is instructed as such. … We, at first, warn anyone who crosses our borders in a friendly manner, but we dont recommend anyone, friend or foe, to cross our borders.”
Russian response was throughly diplomatic;
“We will have to verify the data given to our Ankara ambassador, we don’t think Turkish-Russian relationship will be shaken by our air operations as our mutually benefical relationship is based on solid grounds.”
As a side note: Last time a Syrian MiG-29 challenged a Turkish F-16 was in May 2015 IIRC. Such events happened twice in last 3 days and recent “Whose nationality cannot be identified” statement is an expected event which is more concerning for Russians than anyone else. IMO, Russians must not only operate with IFF, but also force Syrians to operate with their IFF active, because their Syrian “friends” are deliberately antagonizing Turkish side, and by doing so Syrians are playing with Russian pilots’ lives.
Does Russian air force have ANY MiG-29 aircraft currently flying in Syria?
AndraxxusBut why would you carry 500 kg bombs with a CAS plane if you have tactical bombers at your disposal?.
I don’t know, ask Russians. Su-25s in Syria are constantly pictured with 4xFAB-250s.
Personally, I would think best munition for non-MAWS, non-DIRCM Su-25SMs would be Kh-29L, and maybe Kh-25L for softer targets.
AndraxxusHappy to hear it, you have to excuse me, it is the problem of intervening in a thread discussion, you read just the latest posts and so miss the beginning of it.
Su-30SM has also the advantage of having greater ECM and networkcentric capabilities, so they can with all probabilities offer a multiple kind of support in just one platform.
Obviously this is just one more good reason to deploy them in the first phases of an intervention, not contradicting ANY of the good thing you said.
No need to apologize at all.
Don’t get me wrong, I do believe Su-30SM as an aircraft eclipses MiG-29SMT in any area. It has better maneuverability, Radar, ECM, RWR, range, payload, combat persistance, etc etc. It has better & more numerous chaff&flare dispansers, its a twin seater to facilitate coordination or target designation. It also has some gizmos (like the one below IRST) which maybe MAWS. My subjective opinion is its probably faster, and better in climbs/acceleration with significant A-G payload. There is no comparison there.
I just question do Russians need any of this in Syria, thats all. Note that they are pictured flying CAP with a simplistic payload of 2x R-27s and 2 or 4 R-73s.
AndraxxusWe still have videos with conventional FAB-500s on Su-24s. Thats OK, a Su-34 or a modernized Su-24 could probably operate from 6000 meters altitude to avoid MANDPADs and still hit a building or a camp sized target with sufficent accuracy.
However, I would be more worried about Su-25s regarding MANPADs. Its high altitude kinematics are ill suited to operate in such fasion, I doubt if Su-25 can even climb to 6000meters with full fuel and some FAB-500s.
AndraxxusIf actual differences are that low, why F-16 or MiG-29 is built in the first place? Then both US and Russians must be fools operating those types.
AndraxxusCivillians living at Al-Bab protesting Russian aggression. I don’t know arabic, but what he says in around 0:50 second mark goes in the lines of “Syria does not belong to Russians, Syria does not belong to PKK.”
AndraxxusThe Su-30 is a much better air defence platform than any MiG-29 airframe – much bigger and powerful radar, greater warload, greater range and time on station in the CAP role.
If you are talking about on paper, of course it is. Then again what difference does it make, really? You are missing my point. Actual performance does not matter here.
Free Syrians, Kurds, Turkmens, Al Qeadah, El Nusra, PYK, ISIS etc etc. NONE have a single aircraft to speak of. So for “air defence” actual target is US, and politically opposing neighbors, Turkey and Israel. Militarily, US has George HW Bush carrier group, along with 100+ USAF aircraft stationed on various bases. TuAF can field more than 300, IDF can field close to 400 combat aircraft. Russia can bring 4, 10, 30, or ALL Su-30SMs they have built so far, and it would be still insufficent to defend againist, or achieve air superiority over these parties.
Russia’s show of force in Syria relies upon not their military strength in region but the assumption of Russias overall strength would grant them immunity aganist any country. This is a valid assumption, so there will not be any air-to-air combat in Syria anyway. So why use Su-30SM? MiG-29SMT can carry the Russian the flag at half to 1/3 cost.
Only valid reason for using Su-30SM is field testing. They’ve already brought in 4, they can test them anyway they like.
AndraxxusSu-24 & -25 are IIIgen specialized strike planes, respectively for Deep Strike and CAS, so they are the best for their respective roles, above all if you are using conventional weaponry and not JDAM ones (so also to get rid of gergal terms like dumb.or all encompassing term like PGM).
Multirole fighters are instead basically A2A planes able, usually with an extensive use of said JDAM, to cover also the role of the old IIIgen generic/BAI attack planes, like SU-17, Jaguar, A-7 or Jastreb/Orao.
So, given that SyAAF just have the latter in good numbers but only an handful of Su-24, Russia has send this more capable workhorses + an handful of more modern Flankers and Fullbacks for when the high tech stuff are really needed.
Mig-29 would instead be good in a future perspective of a permanent deployment in Syrian or Iraqi territory, after rebellion would be hopefully crashed.
I am well aware of what Su-24/25 is and its capabilities. You are totally missing both my point the original post I’ve answered:
As expected, Russian Su-30M are giving air cover to Su-24/25/34 during their strikes. Considering the western opposition to Russia’s anti-terrorists ops in Syria, Russia probably will be increasing their fighter strengths in the coming days or months. In that case which fighters – MiG-29s, MiG-31s, Su-27/30?
To summarize, I’ve said, bringing in air-to-air *only* types like Su-27 or MiG-31 would upset US and regional players like Turkey and Israel among others, which Russia doesn’t need, or may not even afford right now.
Again, If Russia IDs their aircraft to other parties, MiG-29SMT is the best choice. From US POV, there will be flying dozen *Russian* aircraft, instead of 4-5 (Su-27 or MiG-31s). MiG or Su, no one will dare attacking a Russian aircraft.
If not, there will be dozen unidentified “MiG-29” in the air which will be mistaken as Syrian unless Russians specifically say “hey we transferred MiG-29s to Syria and we are flying them at this location!”. I don’t have stomach to discuss it further (especially with JSRs idiotic comments), but this inherently carry a great risk of getting shot by Turkish and Isreali, who routinely shot Syrian aircraft. And such mistakes DO happen; Most recent such conflict (ie different parties using same aircraft) was Russia-Georgia war; Russians lost 4 Su-25s, 3 were shot down by friendly fire.
So in this case Su-30SM, which can be readily identified as Russian, is the best choice for reinforcing the current Russian expedition. Got it?
AndraxxusSeeing Petr Veliky, any news/pictures about the Nakhimov’s upgrade?
AndraxxusSay what? You do realize that the Su-24 is indeed by design made to be operated from poorly maintained front-line airfields, right?
So does MiG-25, including virtually all Russian aircraft. Question is to what extent? I find MiG-29 to be several times more suitable.
Russia will be conducting ops which best suits its need inside Syrian airspace to fight the terrorist, so is there even a need for that?
Everyone makes mistakes, I am 100% sure those Syrian MiG-23 and Su-24 pilots weren’t specifically ordered to cross borders. At M0,9, a sustained 5G turn takes 7 km diameter. Distance between FSA controlled Az Zawf and Turkish border is 2 km. One mistake, one wrong maneuver and you are in deep sh!t.
But we’ll see if both will be insane to attack Russian assets and stupid enough expecting nothing in return. Mistakes can happen from the so-called trigger happy Israeli/Turkish side, but then, mistakes can happen from the Russian side also.
Like I said Turkish/Israeli really would not WANT to shoot Russian aircraft and would be upset about doing it (it would have undesirable political/economical implications). But if Russians do not give them means to identify their aircraft, they can (and will) mistakenly do it.
If Russians miscalculate as you do and such incident do happen, political fallout would be Turkish/Israeli apologizing first, and accuse Russians of not giving relevant data, hiding their identity and violating airspace. Their apology will go in the lines of “How we are supposed to know”.
Getting shot at Russian a/c will likely see couple of Kh-31P on their way inside Israeli or Turkish borders.
Lol are you 7 years old? A Russian Su-24 cross Turkish border, Turkey honestly makes a mistake and shoots an aircraft down and apologize. Then Russia goes mad and openly attacks Turkish soil (a NATO country) for revenge? Really?
Lets play it in your way then; No reality, only shooting game…
Assuming with only 4 truly Air-to-Air capable aircraft, Russians manage to bypass two dozen F-16s conducting CAP and GAI and bomb Turkish soil, then what happens? If you look at the map, Latakia directly borders Hatay. Thanks to ongoing clashes, bulk of 106th Artillery Regiment sits ~2,9 km away from the border with more than 90 self propelled artillery and around 60 multi-rocket launchers. Latakia airbase Russians based is just 53 km away from their position, also in range of SRBMs of 2 additional rocket battallions of 7th corps, lifting total SRBM count that can target Latakia airport to around 120. This combined firepower can shell/bomb entire Russian presence in Syria to extinction in what? 20 minutes? And in the aftermath, Turkey can easily play “self-defense” card to UN, and “mutual defense” card to NATO, and get away with such atrocity.
Fortunately, Russians are way smarter than that. In fact to quote a scene from the film The hunt for Red October: “Russians don’t take a dump without a plan.”
I am pretty curious about the exact action Russians are planning. Surely mere bombing of a few camps and trucks will not win them this war.
AndraxxusOT Question is hardly something to be discussed.
Militarily, ie on paper confrontation? Are you kidding? Russian expedition consists of what; 4 Su-30SMs, 6 or so Su-34s, a dozen Su-24s and a dozen Su-25s, an S-300 battery 9 or so Tanks and several APCs. You don’t need any asset of US Military. Even one tenth of Turkish Armed Forces or Israeli Defense Forces, who are already in the region, can wipe such force several times over.
Politically, ie real world scenario? There is nothing that can “force” Russia out of Syria. Granted, Nuclear War or WW3 is unlikely, but what could be gained by attacking Russians? One missile, one aircraft down, excused as accident and Russia can bring in one hundred aircraft next day. Any open and deliberate aggression againist Russian forces and US Risks *severe* retailation to its carrier groups, submarines, strategic bombers conducting routine patrols throughout the world. So “firepower” to defeat Russia in Syria is irrelevant.
If you are talking about converntionally fought war between US and Russia with zero outside intervention? Neither are fools to go to war because some terrorists and a dictator. If it comes to that, neither Russia or US has the military strength to wage war in the adversaries soil.
AndraxxusOT Question is hardly something to be discussed.
Militarily, ie on paper confrontation? Are you kidding? Russian expedition consists of what; 4 Su-30SMs, 6 or so Su-34s, a dozen Su-24s and a dozen Su-25s, an S-300 battery 9 or so Tanks and several APCs. You don’t need any asset of US Military. Even one tenth of Turkish Armed Forces or Israeli Defense Forces, who are already in the region, can wipe such force several times over.
Politically, ie real world scenario? There is nothing that can “force” Russia out of Syria. Granted, Nuclear War or WW3 is unlikely, but what could be gained by attacking Russians? One missile, one aircraft down, excused as accident and Russia can bring in one hundred aircraft next day. Any open and deliberate aggression againist Russian forces and US Risks *severe* retailation to its carrier groups, submarines, strategic bombers conducting routine patrols throughout the world. So “firepower” to defeat Russia in Syria is irrelevant.
If you are talking about converntionally fought war between US and Russia with zero outside intervention? Neither are fools to go to war because some terrorists and a dictator. If it comes to that, neither Russia or US has the military strength to wage war in the adversaries soil.
AndraxxusAs expected, Russian Su-30M are giving air cover to Su-24/25/34 during their strikes. Considering the western opposition to Russia’s anti-terrorists ops in Syria, Russia probably will be increasing their fighter strengths in the coming days or months. In that case which fighters – MiG-29s, MiG-31s, Su-27/30?
Most important question would be, “is Russia planning to inform Turkey and Israel for each operation they conduct?” Or at the very least, “do Russian aircraft fly with IFF active?” This is very important as both Israel and Turkey have demonstrated both will and ability to shoot down Syrian aircraft that violates their borders. If Russians operate same type of aircraft as Syrians (like Su-24 they are using now, or MiG-25RBT or MiG-29), and not ID themselves, they carry a great risk of getting shot. And looking at the history of Israel, and current aggresive stance of Turkey, i really don’t think they will hesitate shooting down a Su-24 merely because it MAY have the possibility of belonging to Russians.
If yes, then no one, not even US, would dare shooting down a Russian plane knowingly, even if they dislike their politics. Then my choice would be MiG-29SMT. In fact I would chose it above Su-30SM. Why? MiG-29SMT’s maintenence will be cheaper and simpler with existing Syrian infrastructure (which already operate MiG-29), they are multirole fighters with PGM capability, they have sufficent range to cover Syrian soil from Latakia, and they are cheap to operate. For the same costs, Russia can operate almost twice number of MiG-29s in to show their flag in the air, which would lead to better air cover than few Su-35/MiG-31 could provide.
Plus, in my subjective opinion, MiG-29 is better designed to handle harsh conditions than any other aircraft currently flying. There are dozens of abandoned airbases throughout Syria, which could be used as forward bases as Russians advance. Personally, I wouldn’t land a 25+ ton Su-30/34 on a already damaged airfield, and other aircraft like Su-24 would not survive operating from unmaintained, half-wrecked air bases covered with dust and debris.
However, if the answer is no, then the answer to your question is more Su-30SMs; They are multirole, so it would not be regarded as targeting western aircraft only, and they can be easily identified as Russian aircraft and not get shot down by some overzealous Turkish F-16s or Isreali Patriots.
Sign In
