Syrian Air Defence Force

They said 4 launchers so it's on s300 that may consist of 1 long range radae, 1 engagement rdar and 4 launcher and command post.

hoom wrote:

They said 4 launchers so it's on s300 that may consist of 1 long range radae, 1 engagement rdar and 4 launcher and command post.

But if its just that then its not going to defend anything much, maybe Damascus but it'll be easy to saturate.

I guess it could be mainly another warning level to Israel: you pissed us off so some S-300 delivered, its not enough to really hamper you attacking Iran which we're not here to be involved with but each time you piss us off again we'll deliver another firing unit.

But if its only 4 launcher trucks then why have there been such an abnormally large number of An-124 & Il-76 flights? The reported numbers seem too large for only that minimal level of gear.

hoom wrote:

They said 4 launchers so it's on s300 that may consist of 1 long range radae, 1 engagement rdar and 4 launcher and command post.

But if its just that then its not going to defend anything much, maybe Damascus but it'll be easy to saturate.

I guess it could be mainly another warning level to Israel: you pissed us off so some S-300 delivered, its not enough to really hamper you attacking Iran which we're not here to be involved with but each time you piss us off again we'll deliver another firing unit.

But if its only 4 launcher trucks then why have there been such an abnormally large number of An-124 & Il-76 flights? The reported numbers seem too large for only that minimal level of gear.

Syria has received a division of anti-aircraft missile system S-300 wrote:

Ramos 2 wrote:Israel airforce flies without any problem in Syrian's airspace . The Syrian air defence force : (Wikipedia)

25 teams defense (130 batteries) Including:

   Self-propelled
       62 batteries:
           11 teams - 27 batteries - SA-6 Gainful (PU SAM 2K12 Square);
           14 Battery - SA-8 Gecko (PU SAM 9K33 Osa);
           12 Battery - SA-22 Greyhound (96K6 Pantsyr S1E);
           9 Battery - Buk-M2
   Towed
       11 teams - 60 batteries with SA-2 Guideline (CP-75 Dvina / S-75M Volga) and SA-3 Goa (S-125 Neva / S-125M Pechora) (Being upgraded);
   Two SAM regiment with SA-5 Gammon(in each brigade to 2 divisions for 2 batteries each).
       Four SAM battalion
           Eight Static/Shelter SAM batteries

   Two independent SAM Regiment
       Four SAM batteries with SA-8
       Four SAM batteries with SA-10

These weapons don't seem to be very effective ! Could someone explain ?

GarryB wrote:The S-300 is a very capable missile, but the important thing is that they are not just sending S-300 they are giving them an integrated air defence system... IADS... that means each battery is not just looking at its own radar view of the battlespace and each battery is not working on its own to protect its own little piece of territory.

What it means is that all the batteries are linked together and get a shared picture of what is out there... it means that once detected a target will get a unified label across all batteries so when there are 4 F-16s all batteries will see 4 F-16s, and if there are civilian aircraft using civilian transponder signals they will also be clearly displayed in the system as civilian aircraft... Russian aircraft will be displayed as Russian aircraft... US aircraft not transmitting signals will be displayed as not being civilian aircraft and potentially hostile... US aircraft transmitting the agreed signal will appear as neutral, Israeli aircraft faking US transmitter codes will appear as neutral too.

If an Israeli aircraft using US codes attacks a Syrian target now then all US aircraft would be put at risk of coming under fire... but the point is that it is not just the local battery making decisions or tracking targets... there is a management system that keeps track of aircraft in Syria from take off to landing that should be able to detect targets well out into the Med and Israeli territorial airspace.

When they spot a target that appears to launch standoff weapons against Syrian military targets shorter ranged missiles can be used to engage the incoming weapons while heavier long range missiles can be used to deal with the launch platforms... Israeli aircraft approaching Syrian airspace from the med can be warned not to enter Syrian airspace... if they fail to comply then shots can be fired if deemed necessary... they could launch S-300s or they could launch S-125s for low level threats like standoff missiles.

GarryB wrote:The S-300 is a very capable missile, but the important thing is that they are not just sending S-300 they are giving them an integrated air defence system... IADS... that means each battery is not just looking at its own radar view of the battlespace and each battery is not working on its own to protect its own little piece of territory.

What it means is that all the batteries are linked together and get a shared picture of what is out there... it means that once detected a target will get a unified label across all batteries so when there are 4 F-16s all batteries will see 4 F-16s, and if there are civilian aircraft using civilian transponder signals they will also be clearly displayed in the system as civilian aircraft... Russian aircraft will be displayed as Russian aircraft... US aircraft not transmitting signals will be displayed as not being civilian aircraft and potentially hostile... US aircraft transmitting the agreed signal will appear as neutral, Israeli aircraft faking US transmitter codes will appear as neutral too.

If an Israeli aircraft using US codes attacks a Syrian target now then all US aircraft would be put at risk of coming under fire... but the point is that it is not just the local battery making decisions or tracking targets... there is a management system that keeps track of aircraft in Syria from take off to landing that should be able to detect targets well out into the Med and Israeli territorial airspace.

When they spot a target that appears to launch standoff weapons against Syrian military targets shorter ranged missiles can be used to engage the incoming weapons while heavier long range missiles can be used to deal with the launch platforms... Israeli aircraft approaching Syrian airspace from the med can be warned not to enter Syrian airspace... if they fail to comply then shots can be fired if deemed necessary... they could launch S-300s or they could launch S-125s for low level threats like standoff missiles.

d_taddei2 wrote:after the war, Syria if it has any money to do so or puts aside some money for procurement will most likely be spend on air defence and aircraft as both will be in a sorry state. Its navy has seen very little action during the war and should still be relatively in tact although could have suffered from neglect due to the conflict but basic patrolling along with Russia forces should be enough. Ground forces will have to make do with whats left over from the war, and any donations given by Russia. For short range AD they will most likely keep soviet systems in place but could also upgrade such systems as ZSU-23-4, Zu-23-2 with new radar and MANPAD or strela 10, as has been done by other countries. The 52-k (85mm) and KS-19 (100mm) could be upgraded similar to the Iranian Sa-ir system. ZSU-57-2 turned into iranian Bahman system, and any left over Zu-23-2 could also be used as Mesbah-1 system, these could all be done fairly cheaply and with help from Iran. The systems such as S-125, Sa-6, Sa-2, Sa-5 could be upgraded with help from, Russia, Belarus, Iran and China, but missiles stock would be dependent on what Russia has left in stock if any, as they have been shipping masses of these stocks into Syria. Syria if they have any money to procure will most likely buy more S-300, Buk-M2, Pantsir, and maybe Buk-M3, If there lucky S-300VM. its very unlikely to buy/receive S-400 or Tor-M2 due to the cost, and Israel throwing a hissy fit about S-400. Although a good radar network is equally important to network everything together. And although a decent AD network also needs the aircraft element of AD, buying ground based AD systems are cheaper buy and maintain than aircraft and are purely self defence system which makes it more difficult to other countries to complain or place sanctions, in compared to aircraft which can be used as a means of attack/aggression.

anyone elses views very much welcome

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:

d_taddei2 wrote:after the war, Syria if it has any money to do so or puts aside some money for procurement will most likely be spend on air defence and aircraft as both will be in a sorry state. Its navy has seen very little action during the war and should still be relatively in tact although could have suffered from neglect due to the conflict but basic patrolling along with Russia forces should be enough. Ground forces will have to make do with whats left over from the war, and any donations given by Russia. For short range AD they will most likely keep soviet systems in place but could also upgrade such systems as ZSU-23-4, Zu-23-2 with new radar and MANPAD or strela 10, as has been done by other countries. The 52-k (85mm) and KS-19 (100mm) could be upgraded similar to the Iranian Sa-ir system. ZSU-57-2 turned into iranian Bahman system, and any left over Zu-23-2 could also be used as Mesbah-1 system, these could all be done fairly cheaply and with help from Iran. The systems such as S-125, Sa-6, Sa-2, Sa-5 could be upgraded with help from, Russia, Belarus, Iran and China, but missiles stock would be dependent on what Russia has left in stock if any, as they have been shipping masses of these stocks into Syria. Syria if they have any money to procure will most likely buy more S-300, Buk-M2, Pantsir, and maybe Buk-M3, If there lucky S-300VM. its very unlikely to buy/receive S-400 or Tor-M2 due to the cost, and Israel throwing a hissy fit about S-400. Although a good radar network is equally important to network everything together. And although a decent AD network also needs the aircraft element of AD, buying ground based AD systems are cheaper buy and maintain than aircraft and are purely self defence system which makes it more difficult to other countries to complain or place sanctions, in compared to aircraft which can be used as a means of attack/aggression.

anyone elses views very much welcome

do you mean that tor m2 is more expensive than Buk?