Syria is a really complex matter, but from my perspective there’s no gain for either SAAF or RuAF in attacking a UN convoy. In addition, the timing is just too convenient for me to believe that it was actually attacked by the loyalist forces. I mean Assad and Putin may not deserve the peace nobel price, but attacking UN convoy is just plain silly, none of the two looks like a fool to me.
It looks like an attack intended at diverting attention from the bombing on SAA positions in Deir Ez Zor, in fact it served that purpouse by shifting the center of concerns at the UN summit. But it would have been silly by the USAAF to strike from the air, I believe some proxies on the ground did the actual job.

+1 excellent post.

Nic

So no one took any videos of the ammo dumps on wheels going off like a fireworks display as they all burned off after the mortar/predator/a-10 strike?

You guys really need to learn to stay on target, because “it was someone else who did it!”… followed by “they were carrying fireproof ammunition anyway” makes Russians look stupid as well as FOS.

Nothing suggests that the bombing of the convoy & the picture of bogus humanitarian aid are even remotely linked.

Nic

…and the APG-77 itself can be detected and tracked from even even longer distance by RWR

No because the APG-77 is magic.

france24 is a propaganda outlet, not trustworthy in the least.

Moving radar plate = increased RCS. Moving parts always increase RCS or have the laws of physics changed after the swash-plate was invented?

Now as for mid course guidance.

You’re going to have a 4 ship formation most of the time.

1 plane uses offboard & passive sensors to get tactical picture. Consolidated track may or may not be enough to have a firing solution, so he needs to use his AESA LPI radar only to gather missing data, which means he doesn’t need to scan the whole sky in front of him because he has a clear idea where to look, and only needs to illuminate the target long enough to get whatever data it needs to get lock, or to confirm firing solution of other sensors. Meteor fired.

Shooter receives by link 16 all consolidated tracks from all of the 3 other ships in the formation which are probably several dozen km apart, at least for two of them plus the eventual awacs & ground radars.

In these conditions I’m pretty sure you can fire & turn around while receiving updated data from other planes, including radar data from a plane a few dozen KM away out of reach of the target, which in any case will be busy trying to dodge a meteor coming from another direction entirely.

Advocating swash plate is like being stuck in 1 vs 1 air combat from the past.

Nic

Some of you are quick to forget what sensor fusion is all about.

The aircraft systems don’t chose the sensor track that is the most effective between the Radar, IRST, ESM or Link 16 or weapons sensors (datalink, sensors while still on the aircraft). They consolidate a track with all the data coming from all those sensors together.

Sensor fusion means that the question of which sensor gives the best data is moot.

Not at all, I am well aware of the mistakes made by the U.S. and know the price that family and friend have paid serving abroad in a conflict without end.

Calling them “mistakes” is enough for all to realise that you are not aware of much at all.

Nic

You aren’t going to emit in all directions constantly. You do as they do in star trek and apply your power when you need it.

And anyway the Rafale is very cool 😎 so cooling won’t be an issue obivously.

Nic