Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #9

JohninMK wrote:
Fair enough but once ships are out of range of shores they become very difficult for civvies to place them. Turkishnavy.net is good for the Dardanelles but the other main one, the Straits of Gibralter, is a bit too wide.

Its news to me that subs have to be surfaced, I thought that that was only in areas like the English Channel where the 12 mile limits of England and France overlap so there is no actual International waters and convention dictates they are on the surface. Apart from the need in some for air supplies in some, it is much more comfortable for the sub to be running well under the waves.

I believe it's the law of the sea when you perform ''innocent passage''. Subs have to be visibly on surface. All 3 straits leading in/out of the Med are terr. waters of three different countries, Spain (claim is challenged iirc), Turkey and Egypt.

I know the turkishnavy blog, pretty interesting site indeed! Gibraltar is probably more flexible as you can cross at night (preferable for subs I guess), but also risky in terms of accidents.

KiloGolf wrote:

sepheronx wrote:Forgot about those carriers. Wonder if Russia will transfer Bashton or other anti ship missiles to Syria.

I don't think it would make much of difference, US carriers operate well afar, at the south-west of Cyprus. Right now CVN-75 USS Harry S. Truman is comfortably operating in the Med against IS, with LHD-4 USS Boxer, simultaneously striking from the Gulf.

There's also CVN-69 Dwight D. Eisenhower further West, in Naples, Italy.

JohninMK wrote:Almost certainly Russian assets are carefully watching the operations pattern off the US carrier so the aircraft can be watched all the way in.

Which assets exactly?

JohninMK wrote:This is another really good training opportunity! It is a fairly rare chance to do so in an area where there are a significant number of Russian naval assets. Previously US activities like this have been in the Gulf.

What exactly has Russia deployed between Crete and Cyprus right now?
Nothing serious on the surface as far as I know.

Your right about that. Then ideal for anti ship missiles onboard jets. Since Syria still operates Su-24's.... But of course, they are all geared towards fighting on mainland. Really puts them in a tough spot.

sepheronx wrote:Your right about that.  Then ideal for anti ship missiles onboard jets.  Since Syria still operates Su-24's....  But of course, they are all geared towards fighting on mainland.  Really puts them in a tough spot.

The Med is fine for them as long as they well stay away from the Syrian shores, the rest is sort of their lake with bases all over the place. What puts them in tough spot imo is the airspace over Syria itself! When they need to withdraw for refuelling, say over Eastern Syria, Russians came in and bombed Al Tanf crossing. That is trolling of geopolitical proportions. Also I'm not so sure on how good of a loiter time these F/A-18E/F have. I bet the F-14D would come handy in these situations.

Too bad for the Americans they got rid of all their F-14's all because of Iran. lol.

sepheronx wrote:Too bad for the Americans they got rid of all their F-14's all because of Iran.  lol.

I still can't believe that those idiots replaced F-14's. And with F-18 of all things.

Dumbest military decision since Joe Stalin ignored Barbarossa.

PapaDragon wrote:

sepheronx wrote:Too bad for the Americans they got rid of all their F-14's all because of Iran.  lol.

I still can't believe that those idiots replaced F-14's. And with F-18 of all things.

Dumbest military decision since Joe Stalin ignored Barbarossa.

Iran wasn't a contributing factor in the F-14's retirement. The Tomcat was mostly designed in the 60's and was getting rather dated with the last new airframes being built in the 90's and still a good portion of the USN still using even older builds, and it wasn't a cheap aircraft to use and maintain by any means. The near fleet commonality that came with adopting the Super Hornet saves a ton of money for the USN but they pay the price when it comes to capabilities.

Here is an old but good article about the Super Hornet if anyone wants to read it: http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1009583

On the road to Tabqa 2days ago.

calm wrote:On the road to Tabqa 2days ago.

I would not brag about this little fiasco if I were them.

Wonder where those guys are now?

Probably standing firmly till the end, while SAA run like crazy...

sepheronx wrote:Wonder where those guys are now?

If I take the liberty of using words casually as some guys love to do on the forum..... I'd say... they are planning to run back to Latakia along with the Desert Hawks.

Btw, those are probably the men embedded with the Desert Hawks and they are pulling out of Raqqa offensive. Considering that Dersert Hawk is a para military group created by Mohammed Jabbar he is probably not interested in loosing men? I dont know what else is the reason behind this sudden withdrawal from the theatre in the middle of a battle.

Good luck and prayers for all the men in uniform fighting the jihadi/terrorists.

Ivan the Colorado wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

sepheronx wrote:Too bad for the Americans they got rid of all their F-14's all because of Iran.  lol.

I still can't believe that those idiots replaced F-14's. And with F-18 of all things.

Dumbest military decision since Joe Stalin ignored Barbarossa.

Iran wasn't a contributing factor in the F-14's retirement. The Tomcat was mostly designed in the 60's and was getting rather dated with the last new airframes being built in the 90's and still a good portion of the USN still using even older builds, and it wasn't a cheap aircraft to use and maintain by any means. The near fleet commonality that came with adopting the Super Hornet saves a ton of money for the USN but they pay the price when it comes to capabilities.

Here is an old but good article about the Super Hornet if anyone wants to read it: http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1009583

any genuine comparisons between Super Hornet and Su-35 ?

Didn't Russia disagree with SAA push to Raqqa? Something that they were arguing with Iran over?

Anyway, they seem to concentrate in Aleppo more so than SAA. Probably best now to fall back.

sepheronx wrote:Didn't Russia disagree with SAA push to Raqqa? Something that they were arguing with Iran over?

Anyway, they seem to concentrate in Aleppo more so than SAA. Probably best now to fall back.

We cant be sure on whats going on behind.

But one thing that I'm sure and willing to bet is that almost all the problems can be solved if the strike aircrafts are increased so that there is enough frames to service every combat zone simultanetouly rather than whats happening now (which is severe) and what we saw since last Oct.

It should not be something like ---- Oh no we cant strike that area now coz our aircraft is striking the other one.


Btw, anyone know how many modern/combat capable aircrafts can Russia deploy outside of their border without affecting Russia's own needs???

A lot more than they currently have in Syria.

curious if they will move previous assets back?

Also, where was SyAF? they should have supported SAA advance.

max steel wrote:

Ivan the Colorado wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

sepheronx wrote:Too bad for the Americans they got rid of all their F-14's all because of Iran.  lol.

I still can't believe that those idiots replaced F-14's. And with F-18 of all things.

Dumbest military decision since Joe Stalin ignored Barbarossa.

Iran wasn't a contributing factor in the F-14's retirement. The Tomcat was mostly designed in the 60's and was getting rather dated with the last new airframes being built in the 90's and still a good portion of the USN still using even older builds, and it wasn't a cheap aircraft to use and maintain by any means. The near fleet commonality that came with adopting the Super Hornet saves a ton of money for the USN but they pay the price when it comes to capabilities.

Here is an old but good article about the Super Hornet if anyone wants to read it: http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1009583

any genuine comparisons between Super Hornet and Su-35 ?

Never that I found. Difficult looking for one since the comparison has to be relatively recent and the only thing that seem to pop up are dumb Battlefield 3 comparisons.

PapaDragon wrote:

calm wrote:On the road to Tabqa 2days ago.

I would not brag about this little fiasco if I were them.

They were doing fine until Shoigu came to Syria. Then they pulled out. Nothing embarrassing but definitely a little disappointing.

PapaDragon wrote:

calm wrote:On the road to Tabqa 2days ago.

I would not brag about this little fiasco if I were them.

Maybe it's time to stop the selfies and go back to work.
At this stage the IS snackbars have made them look like a bunch of amateurs. They probably are.

calm wrote:On the road to Tabqa 2days ago.

So I am guessing the circled guys with no patches are the real russians, and the one guy is just some poser?

x_54_u43 wrote:

calm wrote:On the road to Tabqa 2days ago.

So I am guessing the circled guys with no patches are the real russians, and the one guy is just some poser?

Or a gucci-kitted interpreter of some sort.

it is unacceptable , ...Russia supported troops  in a desert flat land in east Syria,  to be cough by surprise.
There is an obvious lack of air surveillance by UAV or other means.  
These areas should be 24/7 monitored to the last detail .. and any attempt of counter attack to be handled by air..

If Russia doesn't want to keep  humiliating it self , must asap deploy these means of surveillance and air attack by using  uavs or even using SU25s...  

Leting troops getting killed by Talibans in the desert is no good at all...  

[even 15-20 YAK130 (3groups X6pcs on rotational 3 minutes readiness every 8 hours duty , based in Palmyra) would do the job of preventing this kind of counter attack .. but UAV surveillance is 100%  needed ASAP!!!]

Go feck yerself Ultron wannabe. SAA are shitarabs what do You expect. They can't even shoot straight, look at this
http://coub.com/view/91dx6
No UAVs will help them, they are human garbage, even worse than those retard terrorists.
What You are saying is Americunt way of fighting. Real and best recon is done up close and personal. Terrorists dress like civvies and blend in so humin is best way to track them and You just can't expect it from shitheads in Syria.
Russia should take over SAA command and use Iranians as cannon fodder they are. And don't worry Russia will kill every last of them motherfucker Isis as they did with chechens terrorists

Regular wrote:Go feck yerself Ultron wannabe. SAA are shitarabs what do You expect. They can't even shoot straight, look at this
http://coub.com/view/91dx6

That is a rebel.