hopsalotThis image reveals the actual flight path of the Tomahawks. The circles represent the maximum engagement range of the installed air defense systems against cruise missiles..
[ATTACH=CONFIG]252471[/ATTACH]
So much for this then huh?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]252479[/ATTACH]
According to open sources, the S-400 is capable of shooting down any existing aircraft, helicopter or missile traveling at speeds of up to 4.8 kilometer per second (over 17,000 km/h) The only target the system would have problems with is a nuclear warhead of intercontinental ballistic missile, which flies at speeds of up to 6-7 kilometer per second.
The S-400 engages targets at distances as far as 400 kilometers and heights of up to 27 kilometers (or higher with newer missiles). This is enough to cover at least 75 percent of Syrian territory, along with the airspaces of Lebanon, Cyprus, half of Israel and a vast part of Turkey.
The S-400’s radar has a range of 600 kilometers and is capable of discriminating even objects moving on the ground, such as cars and military vehicles.
S-400 radar covers Syria, western regions of Iraq and Saudi Arabia, nearly all of Israel and Jordan, Egypt’s northern Sinai, a large part of the eastern Mediterranean and Turkish airspace as far as the capital Ankara.
hopsalotA pierced shelter is, of course, a hit, by all means. With an eye closed, I would also claim a hit even if it was empty as from a sat you just can’t see what’s inside..
If it hit the bunker and blew everything inside up then of course it is a hit, regardless of what is inside.
Are you honestly trying to claim that a missile sent to destroy the contents of a bunker, that hits and destroys the contents of that bunker, should be scored as a miss?
:rolleyes:
hopsalotWell, you seem to know what the intended target for each missile was.. Enlighten us, please..
What is even more cute is your article claiming fourteen Su-22s destroyed and significant damage caused to both runways.. so full of sh!t.. :rolleyes:
Even if you decided not to count any missile that was anything other than a direct hit on an identifiable building or piece of infrastructure you still end up with more than double the Russian claim. An airfield is a big place, these hit are not just randomly raining down somewhere in its vicinity:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]252443[/ATTACH]
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4392962/Satellite-images-destruction-Assad-s-air-base.html
Are you really trying to claim that the missiles “missed” and yet somehow landed right on various buildings?
Yet another example of your inability to understand anything you would prefer not to.
hopsalotThis could be anything from a failure to a missile shot down to a false flag operation.
The British consistently reported V-1 missiles landing in the wrong place, to make the Germans
calibrate their targetting, so they would land outside Central London.When You look at where the cruise missiles hit, the precision seems to be within a meter of intended target.
It is cute that that article continues to claim only 23 reached their targets. :rolleyes:
hopsalotUS cruise missile strikes launched against a Syrian air base in the early hours of 7 April have delivered a significant blow to the nation’s air force.
A total of 59 Raytheon Tomahawk land-attack missiles were launched from US Navy vessels in the eastern Mediterranean during the action, which was conducted in response to a chemical weapons attack on the town of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province on 4 April, which killed at least 86 people.
Washington blames the Syrian air force for staging the attack using nerve agents, and assessed that it was mounted from the targeted Al-Shayrat air base using Sukhoi Su-22 ground-attack aircraft.
The US Department of Defense lists targets for the 7 April strike as having included “aircraft, hardened aircraft shelters, petroleum and logistical storage, ammunition supply bunkers, air defence systems and radars”.
Israeli sources indicate that 14 of the Syrian air force’s approximately 40-strong fleet of Su-22s were destroyed in the attack, with additional assets including helicopters also having been struck. Significant damage was caused to the air base’s two main runways, they add.
According to US sources, Russia and Israel were notified about the attack shortly before the cruise missiles hit their targets. Moscow supports the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and has a major military presence in the country, including combat aircraft.
hopsalotSo, in the end both Americans and Russians said something uncorrect.
Or more likely the Syrians and Russians didn’t do a good job coordinating their stories.
Take a look at this, count it up, and tell me how you reach 23.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]252427[/ATTACH]
hopsalotLarge collection of sat photos and pictures of damage from strike:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4392962/Satellite-images-destruction-Assad-s-air-base.html
…and another bunch of Russian lies comes unraveled. This would be funny if it weren’t so sad.
So here is the question of the day. Does Russia:
A. Not realize that these days there are tons of satellites that will quickly prove them wrong.
or
B. Just not care if they are caught lying again because there are always the “Russia Stronk!” crowd who will believe anything they are told to.
hopsalotObviously these canisters have nothing to do with the recent attack.
Remember, Assad didn’t necessarily know of the attack. There were hacked emails from his correspondence to his generals (IIRC) and in them he expressed doubt about some of the claims re. his jail/detention center abuses, saying in essence “oh this sounds like propoganda, we don’t do this”. Point is, the Syrian government is not a centralized, all informed powerhouse today, not by a longshot.
:highly_amused:
Well then he should soon be thanking the US, right? Same for Putin. Just think, all that CW right there at the same base and they never knew!
hopsalotYes,
70+ in the early phase of the show,
59 as time passed by and
after Russian MoD released a figure of 23/59,
the ministry of truth release their own figure of 58/59. 😀No matter how small or big the cruise missiles hit, this is a serious matter and it need to be payed back. Either the drones flying inside the Syrian airspace which have enjoyed a lot of freedom courtesy the US-Russia memo on de-conflict or the aircrafts.
The video of the base from Russian drone during the events.
Ministry of truth huh?
http://www.imagesatintl.com/us-strike-syria/
Thanks for playing. :highly_amused:
hopsalotOne thing to ponder:
why did Russia not shoot down any of the cruise missiles?
Because they choose not to do so, or because they were not able to?
I think their reaction tells us all we need to know.
If Trump was sending a message it is safe to say it was received loud and clear.
hopsalotWhen they were traveling around at trade shows and promoting the Advanced Super Hornet I was told by one of their representatives that they were looking for a 10-15% increase in cost due to the Advanced features but not more.
It would be interesting to know what exactly that cost covered. Does that include the R&D? Does that include the weapons pod and conformal fuel tanks? (or merely an aircraft compatible with them…), etc.
The Super Hornet is basically facing the same problem all 4th generation jets are at this point. You can make them better, but will quickly find your price moving up to 5th generation levels without achieving the same capability.
hopsalotYet another variation on the “buy more Super Hornets” plan…
Super Hornet Block III differs from the earlier proposed Advanced Super Hornet in that Boeing is no longer focused on improving the fighter’s stealth capability relative to the F-35’s, said Dan Gillian, F/A-18 and EA-18 program manager. Rather, it proposes to integrate networking components that along with other improvements would make the Super Hornet an equal partner with the F-35 in future strike formations.
…
In terms of cost, “the delta between a Block 2 and a Block 3 is a couple million dollars,” Gillian said.
Not included in the offering is the F414-GE-400 engine upgrade GE Aviation and the Navy have been developing. “Obviously every pilot wants more thrust; we think there’s a compelling business case based on the fuel efficiency,” Gillian said. “We continue to work with GE and the Navy to fund the enhanced engine. We think there’s a great story there; it’s just not part of the Block III package today.”
The networking system upgrade, matched with the already approved Lockheed Martin AN/ASG-34 long-range infrared search and track (IRST) sensor pod and evolutions of the Raytheon APG-79 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar and Harris AN/ALQ-214 integrated defensive electronic countermeasures (IDECM) self-protection system, prepare the Super Hornet for the future threat environment, Boeing contends. As with the Advanced Super Hornet, the Block III Super Hornet would come with shoulder-mounted conformal fuel tanks containing 3,500 gallons of fuel, increasing the fighter’s range by about 120 nm and/or time on station by about 20 to 30 minutes depending on its mission payload, Gillian said.
So basically the Super Hornet Block III is the budget version of the Advanced Super Hornet offering minus the engine upgrades, weapons pod, and the internal IRST. If it costs 2-3 mil more per plane we can safely assume the Advanced Super Hornet offering is well more than that.
hopsalotAbout as pointless as Hopsalot complaining about a supposed Syrian gas attack and RT in a thread about the VKS- but I don’t see you getting too worked up about that :).
Ah yes, “complaining” that 50+ human being were gassed to death. How silly of everyone… :rolleyes:
As for RT, yes, that was long hanging fruit. At least they didn’t claim that a Ukrainian Su-25 was seen in the area.
hopsalotDo I see a MiG-28 in this picture?:)
[ATTACH=CONFIG]252345[/ATTACH]
F-35 is invisible!
hopsalotNo word on the latest chemical attack?
Who is RT blaming?
Sign In
