Oh and retarded me forgot about Falklands for aircombat, though that was not a good war for Mirage III/Dagger. But then opponent was RN Sea Harrier, not MiG-23.
Bases overrun by various rebel groups:
Taftanaz – 2 Mi-8/-17 squadrons
Al-Ghanto – air defence base – overrun but rebels withdrew.
Al-Jarrah – L-39 base
Al-Dab’a (Al Qusayr) – MiG-21 base
Airfield near Abu Kamal
Many more bases are under siege. This includes Aleppo International which houses overhaul facilities for Mi-8/-17/MiG-21/MiG-23.
Then there’s defection or assassination of many key AF figures.
Finally aircraft losses:
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/Special/2013/03/13/Syrian-air-force-vital-for-regime-sags/UPI-76881363202241/
http://www.ejection-history.org.uk/CONFLICTS/SYRIA_2011_2012/Syrian_Conflict.htm
Not all confirmed of course. But a large number of them are accurate especially helicopter losses – I’ve seen footage of several Hips and a number of fighters being shot down.
Slowly but surely Syrian AF is being destroyed.
I am not sure why Syrian AF will disappear. Arabs will keep sending insurgents and Russia will keep maintaining it in air. Country is still not in choas. Coastal areas are protected as is the capital. Not all countries have same importance.
Because it costs a lot of money and human effort to maintain an airforce – fuel, spares, ordanance, training etc etc.
There’s also things such as training of pilots/aircrew (and several training bases have been overrun), disruption of normal schools (remember you need education to make people suitable for high tech airforce jobs).
Reports are stating that sortie rates are already in decline due to lack of fuel and aircraft being worn out through sustained combat and high level of losses. Furthemore large number of pilots are not flying due to suspicions about their political loyalty.
As stated several air bases have been overrun, especially in North of country. This includes training, helicopter and at least 1 fighter base as well as 2 air defence bases (in one case entire AD batallion defected to rebels but missiles seem inoperative).
If the war continues at current tempo for a prolonged period of time, the air force will run out of resources. It happened in Somalia and Afghanistan post-1991.
n most “civil” wars, you will find that at least one side is greatly influenced by foreign influence.
Of course. My point was to Goldust’s bizarre assertion that apparently foreign fighters don’t count for casualties and that Civil Wars don’t have foreign influence.
Interesting article on Mexican F-5E/Fs.
http://home.eblcom.ch/f5enthusiast/AirForces/MexicoAF.html
Of note, only 4 are meant to be fully operational.
Probably not.
The F-5s were acquired in 1982 as a deterrent to Cuba and Nicaragua. Both of these are no longer threats.
None of Mexico’s neighbours is capable of harming Mexico (except USA!).
Mexico’s main priorities for air power is surveillance (hence C-212 MPA, CN235 MPA, EMB145 R99 AWACS and myriad of light aircraft) and transport.
Such is the low requirement for supersonic combat ability, that these F-5Es have not gone through any major upgrade.
And one day if they do opt to replace F-5, it will probably be with ex-USAF F-16.
Though if bout of procurement madness takes hold it might be ex-Israeli F-4E Kurnass or old Soviet Su-15s or something equally ridiculous. :highly_amused:
The blue Phantom is stunning – one of the best paint jobs I’ve seen.
Only Ar Raqqah city is out of control of the Syrian government, and that is a small provincial capital. Every Muslim country is involved in the Syria conflict. It is not a civil war.
And just about every country was involved in Spanish Civil War – you even had regular German and Italian units fighting there.
Still it was a civil war because main protagonists were opposing sides from same country.
A brigade was never annihilated.
There were never casualties on a brigade level in any short period of time.The unit you mention took heavy losses and was damaged to the point of needing to be pulled out of the theater totally, but it was never “annihilated” in terms of personnel. Half the units were thrown together right before the campaign anyways, and could not be counted as full strength brigades.
131str Motor Rifle Brigade was annihilated (though to be fair it was only batallion strength). However it lost virtually all it’s armour and over half it’s troops.
81st Motorised Rifle Regiment was also savaged.
Still Russians are notorious for having understrength units – I remember reading about WW2 regiments with only a few dozen men as “bayonet strength” and still kept in the line (they usually retained full artillery compliment).
In fact your average Rifle Division was often really a reinforced brigade at best or reinforced batallion/regiment at worst.
Damage to Syrian economy during this “LIC:
http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/business/2013/02/economic-impact-syrian-crisis.html
Don’t worry – after Syrian government arrests the few “terrorists” currently creating shenanigans, they’ll be buying Su-35s and J-20s in their hundreds! 😉
Why don’t you have a little respect for the “stupid” men and conscripts who found themselves ill prepared and sacrificed because of political scumbags?
And no, several brigades were most certainly not destroyed in ambushes. Neither in personnel nor AFV losses.
Russian commanders (this case higher command level) and JNA commanders (this case probably batallion level) were stupid to deploy armour in urban environment without adequate recce or column security in a known hostile combat zone.
At least one Russian brigade was annihilated at the railway station and several others were damaged.
In any case both sides lost men and equipment due to poor officers giving poor orders.
If it was an Australian or Croatian unit doing the same, I’d call their officers stupid too.
This is an estimate only, and includes deaths of foreign fighters. It is not the scale of a civil war. The scale is too small to be called a war. It is a low intensity conflict.
Definition of LIC from Wikipedia:
Low intensity conflict (LIC) is the use of military forces applied selectively and with restraint to enforce compliance with the policies or objectives of the political body controlling the military force. The term can be used to describe conflicts where at least one or both of the opposing parties operate along such lines.
In Syria we certainly don’t have “selective application of military force.”
It also mentions:
1. Restricted usage of weapons including artillery in built up areas and offensive airpower – definitely not the case in Syria.
2.”If the conflict progresses, possibly into armed clashes, the role develops with the addition of the identification and removal of the armed groups – but again, at a low level, in communities rather than throughout entire cities. This is roughly the definition of terrorism.”
Revels are there laying siege to bases and in some cases overrunning them in fierce battles.
Definition of civil war:
A civil war is a war between organized groups within the same nation state or republic,[1] or, less commonly, between two countries created from a formerly united nation state.[2] The aim of one side may be to take control of the country or a region, to achieve independence for a region, or to change government policies.[1] The term is a calque of the Latin bellum civile which was used to refer to the various civil wars of the Roman Republic in the 1st century BC.
A civil war is a high-intensity conflict, often involving regular armed forces, that is sustained, organized and large-scale. Civil wars may result in large numbers of casualties and the consumption of significant resources.[3]
– Well we have organised groups (Al Nusra, Syrian Army, Free Syrian Army)
– We have usage of regular forces including unrestrained usage of heavy weapons and airpower.
– We have primary goal of both parties to occupy territory (notice LIC is more about terrorism).
As for death of foreign fighters, you do realise lots of foreign fighters fought in Spanish Civil War? Do their deaths in combat not count?!?
How absurd.
And pics of Vukovar – also probably not a civil war in Goldust’s eyes:





Stupid JNA drove a tank column through Vukovar without any recce or column security and got annihilated. Several years later, stupid Russians repeated same idiot maneouvre in Grozny and lost equivalent of a couple of brigades.
92,000- 100,000 dead in a very short period of time. This is full scale war with both sides throwing all gloves off.
You don’t get this kind of carnage in LIC (and I was in Croatia in 1991 in a city under siege and constant artillery barrage (Zadar) and it never looked as an eighth as bad as this – in fact only Croatian town to go through such massive carnage was Vukovar which was destroyed and which was also in your definition Low Intensity Conflict :confused:):





Syria is also in ruins cause they’re like fighting a civil war and stuff. :p
Saw footage of a bunch of Syrian T-72s driving through Aleppo. Place looks like Stalingrad. Same with Homs and chunks of Damascus and probably countless other cities.
I doubt there’ll be much cash left for fancy military toys when your country and by default economy are destroyed.
And then there’s the inevitable problem with lots of men with guns and some with extreme ideals.
Libya’s finding about all this the hard way. Hence poor aviation enthusiasts are not being treated with Rafales and Eurofighters or even MiG-29M in Libyan colours. Very sad for aviation enthusiasts. :apologetic:
OP specified “to enter service” which sadly neither CF-105 or TSR-2 did.