dark light

JangBoGo

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 226 through 240 (of 1,463 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2177393
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    The Russian military police in Aleppo. Commanded by a Chechen/Sunni with his deputies being Shia among other in his battalion being Buddisht, Orthodox Christian. Thats what the real Russia is about, a multi-cultural nation… Good exposure of the KamAZ Typhoons also.

    With the stupid Russian not investing in any armed drones over the years, its all on the shoulders of the infantry to clean up the whole barren lands (not just Deir-Ez-Zor, but all of Syria). With armed drones at disposal, it would have been easy to overrun the defenses of the Jihadi’s. US with its drones would have had a hell lot of targets in those areas. One thing which is most telling is the complete lack of armed drones (bar those Iranian drones) and the very limited gunships to aid the advancing units. Gunships and armed drones would have saved many uniformed men in all the battles. I still cant understand why the hell the morons cant understand that its a war of attrition and you simply cannot continue to loose your men. Whats required is heavy firepower so that the forces move forward with zero causality.

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2177414
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    There was a big airborne insertion to Deir-Ez-Zor to stabilize the situation.

    ^ Again, my humble opinion is that it was the result of poor thoughts on the situation earlier. I myself has been saying months back that what need to be done in Deir-Ez-Zorr was to enlarge the safe corridor around the airport so as to get the transports to come in with supplies in terms of men and material. But that never happened and the IS cut the already besieged Deir-Ez-Zor into two with fresh arrival of men/material from Mosul/Iraq.

    More Details On The Effort To Insert Syrian Airborne Troops Into Deir ez-Zor

    By Valentin Vasilescu; Translated by Alice Decker; Submited via Algora Blog following this article at SF

    On December 9, 2016, columns of Islamic State armored cars left the city of Mosul and crossed the border into Syria.IS fighters launched a fierce offensive on the Syrian army garrison in Palmyra and conquered the city.The IS had 4,000 fighters in this operation, who came via Toyota pickup trucks equipped with machine guns, armored vehicles, artillery and tanks. On January 14, 2017, part of the IS group in the area of Palmyra traveled 100 km east to join the Islamic State group attacking the city of Deir ez-Zor. In a few days, the 7,000 IS fighters managed to break in two the defensive formation of the Syrian army at Deir ez-Zor.

    https://southfront.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/262.jpg

    The situation became critical for the defenders of Deir ez-Zor and Russian aircraft operating from the Hmeymim base executed 80–100 missions a day to stop the Islamic State attacks. Even so, the Syrian army headquarters decided it was necessary to supplement the military contingent fighting in the Deir ez-Zor encirclement. It was not possible to land Syrian transport planes at the Deir ez-Zor airport, as they would be vulnerable to MANPADS (Man-portable air-defense system)and to machine-gun fire from the terrorists, especially during take-off and landing, and while taxiing. Therefore it was decided to send only soldiers, without arms and munitions, by transport helicopters.

    The first group of Syrian soldiers was delivered on January 23 to Qamishli in Hasakeh governorate (in northeastern Syria), using four Il-76 military aircraft. Qamishli Airport, with its runway of 3,615 x 46m and its aerial navigation protection systems, is guarded by members of Regiment 154 of the Syrian army. One risk factor was the fact that Hasakeh governorate is controlled almost entirely by the armed wing of the Kurdish Democratic Union Party (YPG), supervised by US military instructors. Qamishli Airport is 50 km northwest of Rmelan, where three security platoons (100 men) of the US 101st Airborne were deployed on January 19, 2016. The US military has set up a 700m-long runway and a platform that is occasionally used by several MH-60 helicopters and MV-22 tilt-rotor aircraft. These US aircraft are used in the fight against IS in Syria’s Raqaa governorate and in the siege against Mosul in Iraq.

    On the night of 23/24 January, at Qamishli Airport, the Syrian military group was transferred aboard 20 Russian-made Syrian Mi-8/17 helicopters. Two otherMi-8/17 helicopters were held in reserve and took off after the first 20 to execute search and rescue missions, if necessary. Many of the helicopters had experienced Russian crews. The helicopters took off four or five at a time, in formation, and maintained a distance of 4 km between formations. Flying over territory occupied by the Islamic State, their flight path bypassed all locations under terrorist control. The 250km flight path included several changes of direction to avoid giving away what was the final destination. En route Qamishli–Deir ez-Zor, none of the helicopters used its position lights and they did not descend below the altitude of 2,500 m.The formations of Mi-8/17 helicopters were tracked by Russian military air traffic controllers and were displayed on the Syrian army’s radar screens.It is assumed that an Il-20M1 ELINT may also have been flying in the airspace over eastern Syria, monitoring these formations and other aircraft in the area. The Ilyushin-20M1 is equipped with Kvalat-2 radar, which can spot aircraft and land vehicles up to a distance of 300 km. Since the Mi-8/17 helicopters’ flight path was intersected by the bombing routes used by the anti-Islamic State terrorist coalition led by the US, two RussianSu-35 fighters gave them air cover.

    One of defensive measures used to secure the landing area was, again, the Russian Su-25 close air support jet. Located in the service area above Deir ez-Zor, their primary mission was to strike Islamic State terrorists approaching the landing zone.In the event that one of the Mi-8 transport helicopters was shot down or damaged,the mission of the Russian bombers was to provide air cover to the two reserve helicopters that would conduct the search and rescue operation. Other support missions over the Deir ez-Zor air base were executed by Russian reconnaissance drones. They monitored the landing procedure of all the helicopters from a high altitude. Through images transmitted in real time, the mission coordinator at the headquarters of the Hmeymim air base had a complete picture, and so was ready to intervene in case of any special situation.

    The Mi-8/17 helicopters made a steep descent from 2,500 m, flying in close circles above Deir ez-Zor airbase, covered by Syrian soldiers. The helicopter crews had night vision equipment and the Deir ez-Zor air base had Russian laser equipment.They marked rectangles to indicate the landing sites for the Russian helicopters. The laser beam was invisible to the IS terrorists but was visible from the air, using the crews’ night vision equipment on the Mi-8/17 helicopters.The helicopters were on the ground for 30–50 seconds to land the ground troops.

    The detachment that was thus transported by the Mi-8/17 helicopters was made up of about 500 Syrian soldiers, in other words a tank battalion from Brigade153 / Division 1 Tanks (minus their tanks) and two companies of special ops forces (minus weapons and ammunition). The defense formation at Deir ez-Zor comprises 4,000 to 5,000 soldiers.They belong to the T137 Mechanized Brigade (BMP-1 IFV, T-72, T-55 tanks, and the ZSU-23-4 Shilka — a lightly armored self-propelled weapons system), the 104 Airborne Brigade, 121 Artillery Regiment (M-46 Field Gun, D-30 howitzers, BM-21 Grad MRLS-multiple rocket launchers) and reservists from the national defense forces.

    Those defending Deir ez-Zor had the advantage of large stocks of arms and ammunition. Deir ez-Zor was the headquarters of the 17 Mechanized Division that was just formed for this war and was meant to defend northeastern Syria. The 93 Tank Brigade (100 T-55 tanks and 40 BMP-1 IFV) and Special Operations Forces Brigade 154 had battle equipment stored in depots in Deir ez-Zor but not the men to use it.

    As a result of this move to increase the fighting forces, Syrian soldiers were able to execute a successful counter-attack and restore the connection between the two formations to the north and to the south of the city of Deir Ez-Zor. [SF editor: This is NOT confirmed. However, the Syrian military is now able to provide some supplies to the Deir Ezzor Airport.

    ————

    One of the major battles, which seldom got reported in the propaganda outlets, was the one for Wadi Barada to restore water supply to Damascus and its over 6million population. The fresh water supply was cut off and also “poisoned” by the Euro std angels as a last resort. The Syrian army special forces operation finally led the terrorists to delay getting their 72s…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjXis2K_oKA

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnISh__zx50

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2177475
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    Roughly two months ago, a news report quoting an “unnamed source in TSK” (as usual), claimed there was an agreement of cooperation between Turkish Army and Russia, for them to coordinate the actions of FSA and SAA againist ISIS..

    That source claimed plan is for SAA to take Tadif, and FSA will be allowed to take Al-Bab, and the highway will make the new border between FSA and SAA…

    I did take this as half-BS, half “falsified journalism” back then and I still take it with a grain of salt, but this could explain a few things today.

    1-Assad regime initially feared sharing a border with Turkish-backed FSA forces, used YPG forces as a buffer… Actually even TSK didn’t support the FSA’s offensive towards YPG, but now both sides have deliberately moved into each other, effectively cuting-off YPG’s advancement and there is already a 6 km border between these forces today.

    2-Both Assad regime and FSA made a pincer movement in perfect coordination at the east of Al-Bab. This would also explain why there was literally no attempt for advancement for 2 weeks on FSA side, and it all started concurrently with SAA acts.

    3-Russian-Turkish coordinated airstrikes now assist both FSA factions and SAA. This wouldn’t be possible as Russian aircraft still use Syrian Regime airbases, why help the enemy anyway? Same goes to Turkish airforce..

    These all point at a truly coordinated act, and benefits both sides; For Syrian side, FSA is not really a threat so long as Turkish side puts a leash on them, and dealing with Turkish side ensures FSA/TSK will not advance any further than they promised… For Turkish side, it guarantees air supremacy without any political entanglements and makes SAA do some of the difficult tasks otherwise would have been difficult with these rag-tag groups doing all the fighting… win-win.

    Good points, but the cooperation will depend on how the Turkish regime behaves. Its better for the Turkish regime to have all those jihadist getting wiped out in Syria itself rather than entering Turkey.

    in reply to: Russian Navy Thread 2. #2009488
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    Service Life Extension of Project 667BDR & 667BDRM Submarines Makes No Sense – Rubin CEO

    http://navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2017/january-2017-navy-naval-forces-defense-industry-technology-maritime-security-global-news/4812-service-life-extension-of-project-667bdr-667bdrm-submarines-makes-no-sense-rubin-ceo.html

    Well….I would like to disagree and post my humble opinion.

    The 667 has evolved from 667A, B, BD, BDR and the final and with a completely different bow from BDR, the BDRM. I don’t know in what context they are saying it makes no sense. Probably as a ballistic missile submarine. But my view has been (and I think I had posted it earlier as well) to convert the BDRM into a cruise missile carrying platform. Its better to have a 667BDRM with atleast 64 x Kaliber missiles at its disposal rather than having to send small corvettes or a 636 with just 4-8 x Kaliber to an operational theatre. This option need to be explored rather than doing away with it.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2182351
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    http://cdn.vedomosti.ru/image/2017/r/xb0jo/fullscreen-175y.jpg

    http://cdn.vedomosti.ru/image/2017/r/xcikr/fullscreen-177v.jpg

    Useless morons! If they are copying the western way of unvieling a new product, copy it fully or just don’t bother.

    Have you guys ever seen in recent (or not too distant) time any western fighter being unvielied with just air-to-air armaments?? …its an eye sore looking at those very “light” and “negligible” payload on a new frontline fighter.

    The dumbos should have gone with a mix of air-air/strike weapons package. They could have also installed (or showcased) the proposed Zhuk-AhE for the demo. But the stupids never learn.

    Consider the case of Isreali’s, they showcased a “brick” ELT-2052 AESA @ AeroIndia and the clueless fanboys (the usual anti-Russian teams in Indian fora) were having orgasm just seeing/hearing it, which at that time probably was not even in its real physical form and also started testing probably around/only after Zhuk-AE was already airborne. The stupid Russians only displayed their first AESA only much later after 10s of real flight test has been completed even though NIIR Phazotron was working on their AESA in 2004-2005 period.

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2182354
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    what is this 4.5ton with MIG-29K?. MIG29K with just just 3ET and 2 Ashm exceed that load.

    Lazy morons who cant even do their work properly. Why the Russians pay and keep such lazy clueless people in their PR department is beyond my understanding.

    in reply to: Why is the J79 30% heavier than the R-25? #2182425
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    From published numbers all of the following fit with space to spare, are lighter, give more thrust & have better sfc than the R-13.
    EJ200
    F414
    RM12
    M88
    F404

    I expect that they’re also much more reliable.

    Can you also put the unit cost of each of those engines to give a clearer picture as to what kind of upgrade in financial terms we are looking at?

    in reply to: Why is the J79 30% heavier than the R-25? #2182429
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    Since those engines actually have more life than the airframes, you only need one engine for every four or five airframes. 🙂

    Since you are generally talking about Western engines in comparison to the Russian ones. A simple oogle search and wiki gives us these approx figures…

    Limiting it currently to American fighters and PW F-100 powerplants.

    Total F-16 (all blocks) produced till now – 4,573 nos
    Total F-15 (all blocks) produced – 1,198 nos

    Of that

    62% (approx 2,835) of all F-16 uses PW-F100 series engines = 2,835 engines
    99% (approx 1,186) of all F-15 uses PW-F100 series engines = 2,372 engines

    Total = approx 5,207 x PW-F100 engines for 4,021 x F-16/15.

    But PW says that they have produced over 7,200 x F100 engines for the teen fighters till now.

    And your theory says there is hardly any need to change a western engine for the entire life of an aircraft. If that is the case, for what purpose did the PW make those extra 2,000 x F100 engines for???

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2138585
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    What is this Mif-31?

    Letter F is adjacent to G on the keyboard.

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2138587
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    Another seasonal rear end anal-ysis…. last year, around this time we saw similar garbage on S-400 deployment to Syria from this same “expert”.
    But then, there are no shortage of fanboys eager for this vomit.
    The target as usual was the “crappiness” of Russian systems and in particular the 29K. Since they also include a convert and club the 29K with – incomplete – Indian reports and a future deal, the intend is clear.

    Taking couple of quotes from the garbage.

    The Russian explanation of events seems to imply that the engines shut down because ‘they were no longer receiving fuel’. However, media reports stress that the jet ‘had absolutely no technical failures’ when it fell into the sea.

    This raises questions about the actual sequence of events. First, the Russian suggestion that a lack of fuel was to blame for the crash is contradicted by other versions of the events. US intelligence sources (allegedly monitoring flights leaving the Russian carrier) reported that the jet turned away from the mission almost immediately after take-off. Initial official Russian reports also noted that ‘the aircraft has interrupted the training mission due to malfunction’, and specifically referred to an engine fault as the possible cause of the accident.

    In addition, the pilot of the MiG that crashed, Colonel Igor Matkovskiy, apparently reported a sudden fault in his jet’s engines. Colonel Matkovskiy is the chief of combat training service for Northern Fleet aviation and has completed over 200 landings on the Admiral Kuznetsov, making him one of Russia’s most qualified carrier pilots.

    Wonder-fool!

    So the only fault as per the “experts” was with the MiG-29K and its engines, but the poor Su-33 got shifted to the land base due to problems with MiG-29K/KUB.

    For example, in September 2005, a Su-33 fighter was lost when the arrestor cable snapped as the aircraft was in the final stages of deceleration; nevertheless, the next plane landed in just under 15 minutes. Carrier landing safety control footage shows that all four cables were restored within that time.

    As per the reports that came out on the incident on Kuznetsov, the sequence of event was like this.
    1) 1st 29K/KUB trapped normally.
    2) 2nd 29K/KUB trapped the reserve cable, it snapped but the hook grabbed the next cable and arrested the a/c.
    3) The broken cable got entangled with the other cable(s)
    4) The 3rd 29K was instructed to hold on while they cleared the deck of the fouled & broken arresting wires.
    5) The 29K ran out of fuel/engine shut down waiting for the deck to be cleared.

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2142165
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    Wasn’t it already confirmed a few days ago that the MiG-29K just run out of fuel while waiting for the cables to be fixed and it wasn’t a mechanical fault?

    Yes, thats what the recent info suggests.

    IMHO, the decision to make the returning 29K (probably with 30-45min fuel) to wait for the deck to be cleared was stupid. Who in their right sense could have correctly assessed the time required to complete the work on the arresting system..

    They could have launched a tanker to help the incoming 29K and let both of them to land in Himiem airbase. But they risked to take the risk with time and also with the optical landing system. I’m saying it coz, AFAIK, the optical landing system on Kuz is optimised/calibrated for a 4-wire arresting system.

    I will help you out with your confused state due to getting exposed to your exclusive “first hand info” on the events. Your backside info (underscored) is covered by your quote (bolded).

    Nothing was officially confirmed IIRC, just rumors. For all we know, the low fuel state might have e.g. shown some fault with the fuel management system rather than the jet just stupidly orbiting the carrier until the fuel went out completely.

    Nothing was officially confirmed IIRC, just rumors.

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2142187
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    I think that I read somewhere (printed press or internet portal) that they managed to recover the jet from the water.

    Is that really possible? For the 29KR to stay afloat until they pick it up. Sounds highly unlikely to me.

    Or it was clumsy reporting…

    I’d posted this news report 5 pages back which covered almost everything post that accident.

    http://www.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=2821568

    14 Nov 2016 19:53
    The MiG-29 with “Admiral Kuznetsov” crashed in the Mediterranean sea

    When landing on Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov off the coast of Syria fell the MiG-29K. The plane did not reach the ship for several miles. The accident occurred during a training flight over the Eastern part of the Mediterranean sea.

    The fighter pilot ejected, reports channel “Russia 24” with reference to the defense Ministry. The pilot was not injured, his life and health threatens nothing. The pilot is ready to execute new tasks. He is on the Board of “Admiral Kuznetsov”.

    Wreckage discovered and is already aboard ship. According to preliminary data, the plane crashed due to technical malfunction.

    Russian aircraft carrier group off the coast of Syria is on track despite the accident. Flights of naval aviation continued in compliance with the previously approved plan.

    The MiG-29K (Fulcrum – “Point Opory”) – Soviet and Russian multi-role carrier-based fighter of the fourth generation. On Board takr “Admiral Kuznetsov” can accommodate up to 36 aircraft of this type. The MiG-29K can refuel in the air, which compensates for the shorter range of this aircraft compared to the su-33.

    Now, with the latest info regarding the circumstances surrounding the crash, we can infer that this event was to an extent planned once it became clear that the jet had no other option than to land on water. So preparation was likely initiated beforehand. Lets wait and see what happened to that jet.

    Few things to consider.
    1) The 29K/KUB was returning after their recce mission over Syria and we can assume that they really flew over their intended areas of operation to their max permitted endurance.
    2) Usually a/c return to their base/deck with 30-45 minutes of fuel.
    3) The latest report also mentioned that the engine got shut down before the splash which is good. A working/running engine is likely to suffer more damage/destroyed beyond repair when ditched in water.

    The earlier rumours is entirely the fault of the Russian MoD who did not issue a proper statement on the accident which inturn gave clueless media to write what they thought likely happened and the trolls a field day…

    I’m specifically mentioning the headlines and wordings which said that the MiG-29s crashed after take off from the carrier. This gave trolls enough room to claim yet again about the STOBAR and payload. Trolls are even now claiming that the Su-33 is now based on land coz they cannot carry much payload from Kuz and not due to the fact that a/c cannot land on the Kuz due to the arrestor apparatus currently being under maintenance/repair/replacement..

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2142199
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    It was earlier reported (based only on what was visible on the deck) that Kuz carried only 4 x 29K/KUB, but this screen grab shows 5 x MiG-29K/KUB on the decks of Kuz. It remains to be seen how many more MiG-29K/KUB the Kuz might have actually carried during its current deployment.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CyM-8wOXAAUsULS.jpg:large

    in reply to: RuAF News and development Thread part 15 #2142202
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    C-27 class?

    No. AN-32 class.

    IL-20M @ Zhukovsky

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CyMNNWMXcAAidT-.jpg:orig

    in reply to: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria #2149979
    JangBoGo
    Participant

    Couple of pics from the Admiral’s deck, before the start of the campaign.

    https://pp.vk.me/c604830/v604830004/12220/i_JLgtTqm5U.jpg

    https://pp.vk.me/c836231/v836231605/f83f/PaFAmfgrlC4.jpg

    Su-33 with that 2 x 500Kg centreline payload. And we hear the Jihadi media claiming Russia carries out indiscriminate bombing. 🙂
    Little do these experts realize that Russia do not waste ordinance, they carry just what is required for the mission, even though it gives the trolls enough space to claim that the Russian aircrafts cant carry anything more.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxYZOM0UcAE2QAx.jpg

    The in-built ladder for Su-33 and MiG-29K/KUB, I wasn’t aware of this facility earlier..

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cxay-ozXcAAKIej.jpg:large

    The MiG-29s feature a compact telescopic one.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxekCu6WIAEMJ87.jpg:orig

Viewing 15 posts - 226 through 240 (of 1,463 total)