They do not intentionally aid the ISIS though , and the “moderate” group that fighting Assad regiem isnt in the same group as ISIS, moreover , you also get group like hezbollah that actually in the side of Assad regiem. And where is the evidence that US ignored ISIS in Syria ?? , they still bomb and attack ISIS group everyday

So it is fine for you to have opinion that support Russian and Assad , but if anyone have opinion support US or Western side then they are a shill ? really? what kind of stupid logic is that ? or do i have to sneaky link jihadists and American in every post like you ?
It said at the start that the attack could be done by Russian or Syria , and Crow said Syria airforce dont have night fighting capabilities , that why i asked about thermal system on their helicopter , what wrong in that ? or i have to blindly accept whatever given without asking any question ?

Why did the Jihadist towing mortar along side the convoy ? may be they hoped that they will not be attacked because either Russian ,US have to care about colletaral damage , arent they doing that all the time ?
There are 4 situation that could have happend:
Case 1: Syria did it , and the moderate saw their heli , that could be explained that the Syrian installed some extra night vision system on their heli or let pilots use some night vision google ( not in a proffesional ways but more in line of temporary solution ) then the moderate may saw their heli either because of the collision light system or because the aircraft use it’s cannon as well

Case 2: Russian did it with their Su-24 , no one see anything but because it is a dive bombing , people can hear jet noise and the unguide bomb of Russian kinda look like the barrel bombs of Syrian regime

Case 3: IED and everyside want to blame someone

Case 4: Attack was done by US with their Predator

Not all bomb after match look the same , it depending on the kind of bomb you used and how many of them you used too, Why that particular convoy was attacked ? could be simple case of target of oppotunities more than anything else

Case 5: Artillery or mortars. Both part have it so no one can ascertain it.

Not from Italian, from Latin.
Congregatio de propaganda fide, more literally: Congregation about the faith that have to be propagated.
It was the “ministy” that overseed both Missions than Eastern rite Catholics. Now they have been separated.

Well Marcello, I am sorry to hear that. It was not my intention for you to take this personally. I did not call you a liar, I think two of your claims are inaccurate that is all:

1. First over the cost effectiveness and accuracy of using unguided munitions. This is not an indictment of the Russian bombing campaign. If they had a stockpile of guided munitions, I’ve no doubt they would be using them whatever the claimed accuracy of the SVP-24 system. GPS guided bombs like the JDAM have a proven CEP, low cost, and are plentiful in western arsenals. An unguided bomb dropped by a digital bombing system,may approach the JDAM CEP in perfect meteorogical conditions and and absence of pilot error. Those are two big IF’s when your talking about an urban environment and close proximity to friendly troops. The few extra thousand in cost is nothing compared to the cost of having to retarget and launch another sortie.

2. The assertion that the rebels, ISIS, terrorists (whatever we label the various groups) are out in the open. The majority of the fighting is in/around the population centers. Even ISIS in eastern Syria are hiding thier fighters and operations centers in cities and towns to avoid drone strikes. They learned the lesson in Kobane, if they are accessible, they get pulverized.

Because of this, collateral damage and combat lines that are in close proximity to the population, accuracy counts.

Again, I’m not attacking you. I disagree with what you are arguing because it does not hold up to scrutiny. I too, have degrees in history and political science.

FBW, I have replyed to you insuch a way to make you understand that it is not just what one said but also the way it use that can make the difference and your post was clearly way under your usual standard. Re-read it and you would notice it easily.
Same about the point you made.
It’s the use of worlds that on my opinion denote an oversimplification of matter on your part. So where I talked about enemies in a military campaign environment, something like OFAB against insurgents in the open, BETAB if in tunnels and pillboxes, FDAB when in trenches and FZAB if in a non populated urban environment you translated it in just ISIS in the open.:confused: and the other ones?
For the rest ISIS but others rebel surely have really used ways to reduce their own visibility, mainly dividing their own forces. disperse them and staying into hiding and moving separatedly just platoon or even less sized units to be reunited only just before starting a battle. Just thet this tactics is very effective against someone like the int’coalition that has not land forces on terrain and cant only rely on drones or SF to call for a strike, when faced instead by a real combat land force you simply can’t use it as they would in this way overrun one village after the other, one platoon after the other.
Russians have a stockpile of guided munition and they are using them quite largely. What they have not is a stockpile made for its own main part by just one type of weapon, guided or unguided. So they use mainly laser guided and TV guided bombs and missiles but also the sat guides KR-500S when they find tactically convenient to use it instead of one of the other types.
Problem is that they consider them to be such in quite rare occasions: when metereological condition are really,really bad (not just simply not perfect as you affirm), something quite rare in sunny Syria and when the target is a fixed strategicallly important object deep into enemy lines but also in this case they found actually better to use a real bomber with an unguided load than a F-16 carrying just two JDAMS and needing to get aerial refuel two times to reach targets.
For all the rest, in their own opinion better OR unguided drops ORother types of guided ammunition.
So they are really getting out of stocks but exactly of this kind of weapons (ie the ones with satellite terminal guidance) and have made public that they would take RPK-500U as this substitute: an INS/Glonass glide cluster that once on the target release different type of submunitions, both unguided than with terminal guidance.

I repeat: this are their own opinion and I more and the less agree with them, you have another opinion , let’s keep discussing them, just politely.

P.S. Vanilla jdams are precisely the ones I ‘ve mentioned here having just GPS terminal guidance not the gliding ones having this as also intermediate course correction.
I eagerly consider that anyone that have given to my post just a minimum of attention would have easily understand it, that’s the reason i made such harsh remarks about your own substandard post.

[

Think again, ISIS learned very quickly that it was suicidal to be out in the open. The groups fighting the SAA in western Syria, again are fighting in the more built up areas of Syria.

What is a vanilla bomb? do they come in chocolate? This whole paragraph is jibberish. The SVP-24 may be the best digital bombing system in the world, but at weapon release, that bomb is at the mercy of countless environmental/meteorological factors. And no, even with the claimed CEP of such bombing systems, they don’t approach GPS/Laser guidance whatever the manufacturer claims. This is literally a non-sense arguement. A GPS tail unit is 22,000 USD! There is zero, zero, justification for your claims that using dumb bombs is more efficient. Just consider cost per flying hour, one missed target that requires an additional targeting order blows the cost efficiency out the window.

The majority of fighting between the SAA and the various groups aligned against are in urban/suburban areas. Your claims are simply false. Have you watched any of the videos from the fighting? Leveling a city block may be an effective method to eliminate resistance points, but it is hardly an eloquent argument in favor of unguided weapons as a more efficient tool.

So , your response to my post is to call me a liar?
Well continue like so, you are doing a great service to your country .:applause:Great heart and mind strategy!:applause:
So, your elective way to get information from outside word is looking Youtube?
Wow, so thanks also for confirming for the umpteenth times all the prejudices the whole world have about ‘muricans !:applause:

Now, allow me to clarify: There are very few area targets in Syria that don’t require precision. Mostly, the targets are embedded in with the population centers, or areas where you want to avoid collateral damage. Second, those engaged on the ground (Russian FAC’s we can assume, are attached to Syrian units, U.S. special forces with the Kurds). They are calling in coordinates very close to their own positions.

Those itty bitty guided bombs your constantly railing against are far more effective, far safer to use in an environment like Syria where the risk collateral damage and casualties to civilians are constant considering the target set. The risk estimate distance for a 500lb JDAM is 185m. Think about that. The CEP for a GPS guided bomb is roughly 5 m. There is no such thing as a accurate unguided bomb (or bombing system), when you are talking about a difference of 10-20 CEP. That could be the difference between destroyed technical, or dead shoppers in a market.

I think the 22,000 dollars for a guidance system is very much worth not killing civilians or allied troops (not that it isn’t going to happen anyway. As I’ve said, smart bombs don’t fix dumb targeting orders, wrong coordinates).

NO, your initial assumption is completely wrong, most of the fighting in Syria like in Iraq happen in not heavily populated areas like arould Palmyra , Latakia province mountain range, East Ghouta horchards, Desert road to Aleppo and so on.
Same in Iraq where front spans for hundreds of km into desert.
It is looking just along the main stream media that made you think that combats happen only in urban environment with lot of civilian around,go instead to some twitter poster like Peto Lucem (filo regime) or Agathocle of Syracuse (western aligned) and take time to look at their excellent maps and your suppositions would be easily corrected.
Vanilla bombs offer you just a marginal better CEP than the even worst one of the several ones I have seen referred to the SVP-24 (but they said after that was maximum CE not average one), so to achieve a real better performance 20K is absolutely not enough, you would need to add another guidance system to do better i.e. EXACTLY WHAT RUSSIAN DO.
Only point I agree with you is the eventual need of a small caliber bomb to be used in very close proximity to your own troops in such an environment.
I’ll explain this better: the usual tactic SAA use to face insurgent offensives (from the beginning of the russian intervention onward) is instead to hold just a little, retreat orderly from the position they occupy and let their combined air forces to bomb them to hell and after it retake what they lost.
It worked flawlessy until it came the tentative to broke Aleppo’s siege. In this case not losing neither a km of territory was at the contrary fundamental.
Still Idlib’s rebels bleed themselves to death for achieve that and territory was taken back by loyalist the same, even if at a consistent price.
After it, this joke of a ceasefire started and the promising offensive they have just begun against a exhausted enemy waned, so please Russia, just doesn’t try it again.

These weren’t the “moderate rebels” saying that they saw the helicopters and heard the jets coming in. These were the Syrian Red Crescent workers. But hey, spin away.

http://time.com/4503600/syria-un-relief-convoy-attack/ there are other reports, but this is comprehensive and new. Of course, I’m sure you will dismiss it as “Time magazine western propaganda”- too bad the eyewitnesses are so numerous.

Emhh, they were white helmets to claim it, not SRC.
And no, they are not “moderate” rebels, just al-Quaeda buddies…
For the rest, I remain of my idea of everyone there trying to play the blame game on the other side as a way to downplay their own wrongdoings.
Just that the one made by coalition in Deir el Zour risk to have much more negative consequences as it put a city of 200k persons in jeopardy of being taken by ISIS.

The one about the convoy instead completely forfeit IMHO the main suspects i.e. the same rebels that for an entire week have denied access to the same UN aids in their own controlled zones because the red crescent wanted to directly distribute them to population instead to just give it to them for selling back at an hefty price.

wow how did i miss this dive bombing ..

Don’t worry, seems that posters coming from allied countries ALWAYS forgot about it when it come to discuss unguided bomb accuracy…

It just a non-engineer at a company struggling for superlatives. That aside since 2000 no Western fighter developer with HMCS+HOBS+LOAL has been much interested in enhancing dogfight manoeuvring in case you haven’t noticed. Therefore it’s likely to be for other reasons, like carriage of currently awkward loads.

To be precise, from the apperance of Aim-9 Lima & Mike and on the other side of the R-73 NO PLANE both in West than East has been designed with sustained turn as a prime requisite and also the later versions of F-16 happily left it go.
So your consideration about the age difference between the Su-27 and the Typhoon just doesn’t make sense as we are here comparing just a single flight paramether, and one that have been somewhat shifted from main focus, and not the whole package.

Just take another paramether, like the climb rate, this instead essential for an A2A plane and you will found how Typhoon reach 315mt/sec, Su-27 about 300m/sec, our old F-104S 277m/sec while of all teen fighters just the F-15 is credited with something more than 254m/sec…
Change it into max speed and F-15 would jump to the top and Typhoon to the bottom…