09 aprilie 2017

Thanks for the exercise, Donald. US missiles seemingly impotent against Russian defences.

61% dintre Tomahawk-uri (36 din 59) nu şi-au atins ţinta. Excluzând posibilele erori sau defecţiuni, se poate observa o eficienţă relativă a apărării AA ruso-siriene, chiar şi fără prea multe instalaţii "de proximitate" (specializate contra ţintelor "stealth"; Pantsir, de exemplu). O parte din rachete se pare că au fost trase pe deasupra Libanului şi fără acordul acestuia (?). Libanul, nu c-ar putea "crea probleme" americanilor, dar măsuri, tot va lua (Hezbollah e în coaliţia guvernamentală libaneză).

Russia Cuts Off Last Contact With US, Orders Pilots To “Attack At Will”:
According to this report, with the suspension of this memorandum of understanding between the Federation and US, Aerospace Forces (AF) operating in the Levant War Zone (Syria) are now operating under rules of engagement (ROE) allowing them to “attack at will” any American and/or NATO air or ground target they “feel/decide” threatens them without their first having to submit to higher command authority—and leading Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev to grimly warn that America is now “on the verge of a military clash with Russia”.

The Tap Blog:

TAP – The mystery of the disappearing 36 Tomahawk missiles is puzzling military commentators.  Russia won’t be letting anyone know what happened of course.  In fact Russia will no doubt be laying a few false trails to keep her opponents guessing.  No mention of high powered laser anti-missile systems anywhere, but how else could missiles effectively disappear?  All the talk is of anti-missile missile systems being used.  They would explode an incoming missile as well as exploding themselves.  There would be missile carcasses to find and damage done where they fell.  As for hand led MANPADs as featured in the below article, no chance.  No doubt helpful against helicopters, and worth deploying, for which Russia now needs no excuses.  She can send in the lot.  Donald’s really been most helpful.  All cooperation deals are off.  US flies at risk from hereon same as Turkey.  Russia is tooling up for the job.

Russia’s had a great opportunity to test out Tomahawk missiles against its defences, and found that they can win.  By knowing what kind of attack they face, next time they can no doubt do better.   By launching an ineffective attack against Syria, the USA is merely growing the confidence of her supposed enemies.  This is early stage sparring.  There’s a long way to go, no doubt, but you can smell the confidence of Russia’s media channels like Sputnik and RT that the combined array of NATO weaponry is handleable.  What will come next from this blundering enemy?


Without Pantsir, Buk and Tor, S-400s Alone Not Enough to Cover Syria’s Skies

In the aftermath of Thursday’s Tomahawk cruise missile attack on the Ash Sha’irat airbase in Homs, Syria, Moscow vowed to strengthen its air defense umbrella over the country. Experts have already explained which systems need to be deployed to ensure Syria’s safety against future US attacks.

Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov has confirmed that Moscow will be strengthening Syria’s air defenses following the massed US cruise missile attack on a Syrian airbase Thursday night.

“In order to defend the most sensitive objects of Syrian infrastructure, a number of measures will be implemented in the near future to strengthen and improve the effectiveness of the air defense systems of the Syrian Armed Forces,” Konashenkov said Friday at a Ministry briefing.
The spokesman suggested that it was noteworthy that only 23 of the 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from US Navy destroyers made it to their targets at Ash Sha’irat. “It is not clear whether the other 36 cruise missiles landed,” Konashenkov said, without offering any more details.Indeed, an air of mystery now surrounds the three dozen failed cruise missiles, with experts speculating on whether they were simply duds, past their best before date, or if they may have been shot down by Syria’s air defenses.

Russian experts, meanwhile, have also explained that Russia’s own air defense systems deployed in the country are marked for the pinpoint defense of Russian military objects in the country. Furthermore, they’ve pointed out that until Thursday’s incident, the Russian systems had operated in accordance with Moscow’s memorandum with Washington on avoiding incidents over Syria’s skies. This presumably meant that the air defenses wouldn’t target presumed ‘friendly’ US objects. On Friday, Moscow suspended the agreement.
© Sputnik/ Dmitriy Vinogradov

An S-400 air defence missile battery deployed for combat duty at the Hmeymim airbase to provide security of the Russian air group’s flights in Syria.

Still, the 23 missiles were enough to severely damage the Ash Sha’irat airbase, destroying six MiG-23 fighters, a storage depot, training facility, cafeteria and radar station. Over half a dozen soldiers, as well as nine civilians, are also thought to have been injured or killed in the attack.

Moscow’s decision to strengthen Syria’s air defenses is long overdue, says Vladimir Karjakin, retired Air Force colonel and professor at the Defense Ministry’s Military University in Moscow.
“In order to create an air defense system which can defend against any air attack, it’s not enough to use the S-300 and S-400 long-range antiaircraft missile systems,” he explained. “It’s necessary to understand that the supply of these systems to Syria was, first and foremost, a military-diplomatic move. By doing so, we demonstrated, first and foremost to Turkey, that the Russian Federation is capable of introducing a no-fly zone over Syrian territory, thus insisting that the Turkish Air Force should proceed as carefully as possible.”

“All of this is well and good, but for a genuine defense of objects (both civilian or military) from the air, completely different means are needed,” the officer stressed. “Means such as the Buk medium-range air defense system, the short range Tor and Kub, and even portable complexes such as the Verba and the Igla.”

Surface-to-air missile weapon system Pantsir-S1 and Igla-S MANPADS system with 1PN97M Mowgli-2M thermal imager

“Furthermore, I believe that Syrian air bases and garrisons must be equipped with the Pantsir-S self-propelled anti-aircraft missile and gun systems on a priority basis,” Karjakin added.

“This system can detect and destroy any aircraft, helicopter, guided aerial bomb or enemy ballistic missile in a matter of seconds. In addition, the Pantsir-S1…is also designed to destroy ground targets, making it truly universal. The complex combines anti-aircraft missiles and cannons, and there is no analogue…in the world today.”
© Sputnik/ Alexey Kudenko

Pantsir-S1 combined short to medium range surface-to-air missile weapon system. File photo

“If the Syrians had had the Pantsir-S, the outrage of the [US] cruise missile attack on the Ash Sha’irat airbase would not have happened,” the officer noted.

“By the way, another important lesson from this attack was that there needs to be a lot of air defense systems at Syria’s [military] installations. Otherwise, in case of a massed strike, the technical capabilities of the air defense system will not allow for the processing of all targets.”
In the final analysis, Karjakin suggested that thankfully, it doesn’t yet seem that this ‘gesture’ by Trump will become a regular occurrence. “I think that this was a one-off gesture by President Trump. With the missile strike, he improved his rating in the eyes of the US political elite, demonstrating that he is ‘resolute’, and that he is not on Moscow’s leash,” something the mainstream media and his opponents had long accused him of.”If that’s the case, strengthening the Syrian air defenses may not seem necessary. However, as they say, ‘better safe than sorry’. Dense air defense systems around the most important pieces of infrastructure can’t hurt.”

In any case, the expert noted that Russia, and Damascus, learned a valuable lesson Thursday. “Ultimately, everything depends on the resolve of the parties. If, next time, the US is repulsed, this will serve as the best deterrent against the escalation of tensions around Syria,” Karjakin concluded.

© Photo: SANA

Niciun comentariu :

Citate din gândirea profundă a europeiştilor RO

Adrian Cioroianu, 2009 ("Şi totuşi, Europa unită există – deşi nu toţi europenii votează"): Într-o Uniune Europeană ce întârzie să-şi legifereze unitatea (din moment ce Tratatul de la Lisabona nu este ratificat de toate statele membre), într-o Uniune care nu are încă o politică externă comună şi nici o politică de securitate energetică (vezi diferenţele mari dintre state comunitare precum Italia, Germania, România sau Lituania în privinţa relaţiilor lor cu Rusia, de exemplu), într-o Uniune al cărui „euro-parlament” de la Bruxelles & Strasbourg nu prea se ştie cu ce se ocupă, lipsa unui entuziasm comunitar nu poate surprinde. În anul 2007, cu ocazia unei vizite a lui H.G. Pöttering (preşedintele Parlamentului European) în România, în numele MAE român am organizat un prânz în onoarea oaspetelui – la care au fost invitaţi mulţi dintre politicienii exponenţiali ai tuturor partidelor noastre parlamentare. Cu toţii i-am povestit dlui Pöttering cât de unanimă a fost dorinţa românilor de a adera la Uniune şi cât de mult ne-am bucurat, de la mic la mare. Zâmbind, acesta ne-a spus că nu e convins că această unanimitate ar trebui să ne entuziasmeze – cu atât mai mult cu cât nimeni nu poate garanta cât de reală era ea. Date fiind problemele ce or să apară în procesul de integrare, poate ar fi fost mai bine să ştiţi mai precis cine crede într-adevăr în Uniune şi cine nu – a spus, în rezumat, invitatul nostru. Şi cred că acest raţionament era corect. Poate o să-l înţelegem mai bine în următorii ani, în care e foarte posibil să apară şi la noi curente (politice sau intelectuale) care să pună problema în termeni mai tranşanţi: ce aduce Uniunea Europeană unui stat ca România? Beneficiile sunt mai mari decât constrângerile? Avantajele sunt superioare concesiilor? Personal, cred că răspunsul la astfel de întrebări este cert pozitiv. Dar nu exclud eventualitatea ca unii români să nu vadă lucrurile astfel – şi, mă tem, numărul lor va fi, în următorul deceniu, în creştere".

Postări populare (nu P.P.E. !):