“Take-off launch” with arresting hook lowered and not using ski-jump but angled landing area instead??

@TR1 can you post the whole video of the screenshots taken from?

After the coup attempt literally almost half of the pilots are in jail or dismissed. I think number is over 300 pilots now!

This means right now Turkey has no way to go against the joint Russian and Syrian air force/air defense. And if it really does try that you have to consider Iran in this equation, too. So your take “Turkey will respond the attack on this soldiers” doesn’t hold much water. I think Turkey do not have the capability right now.

First part is true, probably close to ~330 for all kinds of pilots. Second part is baseless, you have to look at numbers in much greter detail to draw such assesments… Total number of pilots in TuAF and Army aviation is around 1700. Those ~330 pilots belong to both. Also granted, majority of those purges are from combat pilots around ~190 is the most recent number, though some pilots were found innocent and reinstated, that number doesn’t include these…

There are were around 1300 pilots in TuAF, around half were combat pilots so we can take it as ~650. So after the purges, this number should be around 460… TuAF has around 300 combat aircraft, that is a 0,76:1 ratio for 24/7 sustained combat operations… Still, that means all 300 combat aircraft of TuAF can easily fly at the same time, but of those, only 230 can still do 24/7 operations without overworking the pilots.

If all TuAF fleet is active, then pilot fatigue will reduce numbers to 170 aircraft after a first few hours.. Assuming whole SyAAF survive the initial few sorties, even remaining 170 aircraft still 3-folds the number of all other 4th gen aircraft in Syria (~4 Su-35, ~4 Su-30SM, ~8 Su-33, ~6 Su-34 + less than 34 MiG-29B.)

Assuming wartime, usual 2 shift routine does not necessarily hold true. Pilots have 6-8 hour sleep and 6-4 hour rest times. They can easily fly at their rest times to fill the gaps, and adding a single sortie per pilot will solve all the problems you mention.

Also I would be negligent to mention, there is now a program to reinstate former-military pilots that left military in the last 6 months to year depending on their experience. Considering some dozens of purged pilots were also NOT found guilty, and reinstated to air force, the problem you mention may not even exist today.

US doesn’t let it.

Of 217 villages currently under control of Turkish backed FSA, around 18 are taken from PYD. US did let it, why it shouldn’t “let” just 4 villages in Afrin area as I’ve suggested? Technically it would have served US plans better, as Turkish could have declared victory by that small move (and Turkey could still have expanded that region towards dabiq to the east) and have left US-backed Manbij SDF alone.. I think Turkish actions are quite out of US control for sometime now.

And Turkey wants a “larger buffer” zone.

So the Turkish target is not only the PYD afterall? You are contradicting yourself.

Also, I bet that would have been much harder on ground too. Kurds are willing to die for every inch. If you look at Turkish advances, majority happen without much of a fight. Only now we see some fight going on around Bab.

Thats not it. PYD were defeated as swiftly and easily as ISIS at the North of Saruc river, and north of Qabasin. Because during those clashes all faction of FSA acted as a single united body, and ccordingly with TSK planning and as such recieved full Turkish support.

In the afrin region TSK advised FSA to move south of Tal Jihan before ISIS rebuild its defenses, but one FSA faction named “Sultan Murad” wanted to take Tal Rıfat. One other joined (I don’t recall the name), others denied and wanted to move againist ISIS. This may come as a suprise for you but TSK also didn’t wanted that move.. Airstrikes have already eliminated PYD’s offensive capability towards east, and PYD were preparing for towns defense for more than a year. TSK didn’t want to lose time dealing with that. As such, TSK support was minimal; only by artillery fire and just 2 tanks. After 2 days it became clear to those two FSA factions it wouldn’t be as easy they had hoped, (and have lost Tal Jihan to ISIS in the process) and started concentrating on ISIS again.

Your comments are a little brainwashed. Like I’ve said, current priority of Turkey is ISIS, hence PYD (not Kurds, PYD. They are not interchangeable) is relatively untouched, unless their actions interfere with Turkish plans (Clashes at Saruc river was required to advance to a defensible position, and clashes at north of Qabasin was needed to allow a pincer movement towards east of Qabasin…). Lack of progress againisy PYD is not because they are strong or good fighters, but because they are a) not priority and b) ~1800-strong FSA factions are not even enough to fight ISIS at Al-bab, let alone fighting at 3 fronts.

At present, only thing I can grant 100% for SDF/PYD is they much better organised than Turkish backed FSA. They also have sheer numerical superiorty (50k vs 1,8k troops) but since they also have to watch some 700km of Turkish border and currently forced by US to move towards Rakka, its questionable how much advantage this is. Other than these 2 points, calling them good/brave fighters is plain laughable at the moment as this hasn’t been tested yet. They’ve made good advancements toward ISIS with US support. Just like FSA made good advancements with Turkish support. But in all the objectivity, FSA aren’t good fighters.

That won’t change until Al-Bab operations conclude one way (Turkish occupation) or another (SAA occupation). After that, we will see what happens.

For those who are intersted; map of current “little/stalled/failed/prevented by Russians/stopped by Syrians/not allowed by US” Turkish operations from 22 August, then 30th of August, September October and November. Also progress on Aleppo is visible.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]250064[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]250065[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]250066[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]250067[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]250068[/ATTACH]

Lets look at what is really happening:

Turkey is in Syria for only one reason: Stop Kurds connecting their federation.

I don’t know why you (or some others) post this as the uber-secret agenda of Turkish actions. It was crystal clear from day#1 that Turkish intervention is aimed at a) stopping random ISIS attacks (in the form of Rockets, artillery or grenades hanging from a drone) on Kilis or Gaziantep and b) stop PYD from gaining control of whole Syria-Turkey border.

Despite what you or anyone else may think, point a) is deemed more urgent, hence the priortized move againist ISIS towards al-bab. To extend the distance from ISIS presence and Turkish border.

Think about it; If ONLY reason was a move againist PYD, whole action would have been pointless.. Azaz and Mare was already in Turkish backed FSA groups when ES operations started. They could have just moved south from Azaz, taken Minaq airbase, Tall Rıfat first then extended to east by taking Shaykh Isa, Kafr Nasih, and Ahras. That way PYD corridor would be prevented in a single week instead of 4 months.. I am not saying PYD are not the target, they certainly are. Rest assured, actions regarding point b) will come after Al-bab operations are complete, hopefully through a US-Forced withdraw through diplomacy. Everyone here is hoping US would keep the promise they’ve made to Turkey -they were quite candid about it- but certainly not counting on it.

Rest is your opinion; a valid, well-informed and structured argument unlike some others doing on this topic, but I simply don’t share it 100%..

Granted, there is an obvious cooperation between Russia and Turkey, and I agree this makes everything relatively smooth and easy for all parties in Syria, but sending a “message” by killing Turkish soldiers? Nonsense.

I understand posting 10 pages worth faked RT garbage is not considered biased BS but my comment will be considered as such, but I will still say it; Its not even naive but simply ignorant and foolish to think Turkey wouldn’t respond to either party (yes, including Russians) had they knowingly attack Turkish soldiers..

Before dismissing vehemently, think about all the events I’ve been passed as overly biased pro-Turkish clown on this forum:
1- I’ve said it was dangerous for RuAF to operate a same type of aircraft as SyAAF has, I’ve even said “they were playing with fire as Turkey would shoot them down if they cannot ID them as Russian”. That was unanimously dismissed as impossible and just few weeks later, A Russian Su-24 shot down just because its identity was unknown and over a probability it could be Syrian..

2- I’ve said in those discussions, if THAT were to happen Russia wouldn’t and couldn’t respond militarily, could cut the gas flow at worst but that would harm Russia equally, economic sanctions were the only thing Russia realistically could do. I remember long talks about cruise missiles, number of SAMs and their capabilities, F-16 vs Su-30 comparsions or other kind of Russia strong vs Turkey strong…. Now we all see how it all turned out.

3- I’ve said nearly a year ago “if US ignore Turkish concerns, eventually Turkey will enter Syria without US support and move towards Albab and Manbij, and safezone Turkey desired will be created nontheless”. It was also dismissed by most, I can even remember one respected member (I really don’t recall who) saying “Turkey is a bird without wings it cannot do anything without US support”, only one poster accepted the possibility yet he said it would be costly as Dabiq region is of very high religious significance for ISIS. My inital estimate then (of course I couldn’t find the opportunity to share it, as I got lost responding to all trash talking) was Turkey would stop around Aleppo-Manbij road. Direct Turkish intervention into Syria is a reality of today, that road was cut by Turkish backed FSA groups on 27th November. I have my own share of estimates how all will end but I am really talking to a wrong crowd here.

4- Now I say Turkish vehicles and aircraft ARE inside 25-30 km inside Syria and quite active on the front, and I’ve posted videos proving just that. and I am a Turkish biased clown again. Great! (a new video from yesterday, from SW of Qabasin, NE of Albab, showing M-60T tank: https://youtu.be/XbnTn1ot-d8?t=42s)

Perhaps this Turkish stronk! clown knows what he is talking about afterall… Now I am saying on this bombing event or any similar events likely to come: There are 3 options on the table:
#1: If Syrian (or Russian) Army knowingly bomb and kill Turkish soldiers, (or this past event turned out as such) you can bet your house, car and all the money you have in the bank in that Turkish response would come in a military form; It can be shooting down the attacker or some random aircraft, bombing/shelling the base the attack has originated, or even an attack to HQ attack is planned, or any kind of combination of all these.. This response may come immediately, a week later or some months later… I don’t want to go over the exact same idiotic chestpounding discussions like I’ve had on these 4 previous events I’ve mentioned above. This is the up-to-date unfortunate fact. believing it or not is of course optional as was the case in the 4 previous topics..

#2: If pilot did it without direct orders, then Turkey try to find how it happened. If he did it with the directive of another party, a response will be given to whoever organised it, but this may not come in military form. If pilot did it alone, he will be punished in Syria, if unsatisfactory he will be asked to be given to Turkey. More diplomatic tensions but -probably- no one shooting would be involved on this option.

#3: If that was an accident due to lack of intelligence or something, this will be handled behind the doors, in the form of apologies compensation etc, probably organised and handled by Russians. Because if it goes public, Syria cannot openly apologize for killing (from their POV) illegally present soldiers in its territory even if it was really an accident, and accident or not Turkey would HAVE to respond to an open attack againist its soldiers. Neither of these would serve anyone’s interests if could be avoided…

Note that, I haven’t even mentioned the fact Russians could never ruin this currently geniune opportunity tear Turkey off from NATO. Just a week ago, Russian Armed forces Chief of staff said they would be glad to hear Turkey may join Shangai Pact, “but in the long run they must leave NATO”. Dies are cast, why ruin the game now by purposely bombing Turkish forces? It doesn’t make any sense whatsoever.

You can (and probably will) disagree with me on this issue. Honestly, it would be difficult for you to convince me as much as it would for me to convince you… Lets talk again in a few weeks/months after seeing how things will turn out.

I agree, its possible. Those were pretty much contested areas; Just the previous day of the attack, Azraq and Ghuz were taken, but FSA pulled back from those villages on the advice of TSK because they risked encirclement. Azraq was taken again in the morning of 24th, so SAA may have lacked the intelligence about that. They may just hoped taking it themselves (along with SDF) which would have opened the way to Al-Bab.

But that still doesn’t explain why Syrians denied the airstrike, and Lavrow said Syria didn’t do it… They could have said just that, “we did it but by mistake”.

how much is that place from the border and what is range of so called AIM-120C7. this fact that Turkish rapid response (not fast internet) cant deal with L-39 let alone some thing faster.

Your comments are of a 6 year old child who thinks wars are a red alert game scenario… We are not at wartime, pilots are required to visually ID the type of the aircraft they are shooting at. Two F-16s were at the Turkish side of the border. Aircraft was detected, classified as L-39, according to Turkish sources it flew above FSA/TSK forces for about half an hour, then made a pass with unguided rockets and GSh-23 guns, then raced back to its base before facing retailation.

Had that Syrian L-39 was expected to attack, it would be shot down right after its take off from Rasin al Aboud, had such threat from Syrian Armed forces was considered to exist, that aircraft would probably be shelled at its hangar.

In all the objectivity, I will say the exact same things for Turkish army, that I’ve said for Russian army in Su-24 shooting down event: It is still a poor judgement from TSK to NOT expect an attack after political threats. They should have sent their SAMs weeks ago, not after someone bombed their soldiers… Such militarily preventive measures would be needed only once.. If it isn’t there when needed, it would cost lives.

Now, TSK is too jumpy, they are sometimes conducting CAPs inside Syrian territory, their ground-alert-interceptor aircraft caused sonic booms in Gaziantep city -causing panic- while racing into Syria etc. Pointless actions considering one right decision of sending some kind of deterrent could have prevented the bombing altogether…

the strikes happened atleast two times.

Nope, it was a single attack run made by a single aircraft. People like to exaggarate. I’ve heard scenarios up to 2 aircraft making numerous attacks for hours. Funnily some pro-PYD sources even mistook Turkish bombings at Al-Bab on 25th with Assad bombings…

I don’t understand why one may think this is a humiliation for Turkey? It was actually something very bad for SyAAF, or SAA in general. That their pilots can go mad or bought via $$ to do something that had the potential to start a war, cost Assad his regime, or at very least could have made things very difficult for Syria, Turkey, Russia (plus Iran, Iraq etc) altogether…

Turkey hasn’t been able to strike Syrian forces after that. the offensive is practically stalled.

Nonsense, Turkey never strike Syrian forces during the course of operation. Why should it stall because of that? Though if a shell lands on Turkish side of the border, launching battery is targeted. Its not SAA specific, even pro-Turkish FSA positions were shelled more than once for exact same reason..

Offensive on ISIS is relatively “stalled” for a month because of a) the lack of man power on FSA part, b) due to PYD advances and clashes with them to the east, and c) reluctance of Turkish Army to provide infantry for lands that is not and will never be theirs. I am sure you will be writing some alternate versions involving some “Russia strong!”, but these are the facts. Nevertheless, there is no rush, Turkish backed FSA guys are at the doors of al-bab with primary ISIS defense line of tranches and earth fortifications fell just today.. FSA is likely to take it in two weeks at worst, and ISIS part of Turkish-backed operation will (mostly) be concluded..

Maximum G is not equal to maximum attainable G. It can be greater, equal or less. Afterall, why are you even trying to find and prove a Clmax value that contradicts the flight manual? Its clearly written there as 1,85 at M0,5… You can easily use google translate for the texts below to check it yourself; only unclear thing you would be facing is “АБСП”, you could insert the the long version as I’ve typed above.

You know the Clmax, you know the AOA, you can find an attainable 9G limit from that..

You are assuming maximum 8G limit holds true for FCS dictated limit depending on the fuel tank and payload conditions, then you assume G limit equals to attainable G, then you find a Clmax from there which end up contradicting with the flight manual. I am not questioning your math, its perfectly valid within constraints you set up. I question your assumptions before the math.

I feel no need of introducing the thrust component as I am looking at lift capability at limit G. Such limits doesn’t work that way, if thrust allows for higher Gs than lift provides, then AOA must be reduced to not over G the aircraft.

Following your analogy;

Clmax is still factually 1,85 @ 24 degrees. Its factually achieved at M0,48 at H=0. This means wings create 193909 kg lift.

122580N*2/9,8181*sin(24) = 10164 kg lift component of thrust. So by doing this you would find (193909+10164)/21400 = 9,53Gs. That is -obviously- not the condition we are talking about.

Real version is, pilot can pull 9Gs even when the engine is idle, or he can pull 9Gs at maximum thrust, but by reducing lift generated by wings to 182436kg, thereby reducing to Cl=1,74 (still not 1,6) which should correspond to 22,5 deg AOA perfectly within the limits in the graph I’ve posted.

You can verify Clmax=1.6 in high g turns by another page of the flight manual, if my memory serves, which shows a Su-27 under 21400kg weight could pull 8G at mach 0.48.

That is akin to non-OWS limitations on F-15. Su-27’s FCS determines the actual limit.

1.85 is when tailing edge flap is fully deployed (level flight only), which could not be used in High G turns. The usable Cl in maneuvers is 1.6.

This is wrong. Both are maneuvering conditions. First is for air to air configuration; Clmax = 1,85 and 24 deg maximum AOA. Second is for aircraft with 4000kg or more “aerial bombing ordnance” suspension weight. Its directly comperable to CAT-I and CAT-III limiters on F-16.

For better info: АБСП abberation means = авиационные бомбардировочные средства поражения = aerial bombing ordnance…

Further down the page tells about more limits with different payloads. Also, this graph shows better when those AOAs for both conditions are allowed:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]249901[/ATTACH]

As you can see, first condition (Clmax=1,85) is applicable up to M0,48 at sea level, where it will yield;

0,5*62*1,85*(343,1*0,48)^2 / 9,8184 = 193909 kg of lift. Divide that to 21400 kg as given in the manual its 9Gs.

If we are talking about maneuverability of Su-27 (which I would think it won’t be maneuvering with 8xFAB-500 bombs) its the first graph that matters.