Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #12

An-124 landed at Latakia



2 x An-22's were reported to have landed yesterday

Militarov wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

Since brain activity is clearly not your strong suit let me clarify it a bit: I was praising Kilo subs for getting job done at fraction of a price

Just because you dump less text per post than eehnia does not make you any less of a dumbass fanboy

So in spirit of your reply: piss off!!!

Wanna make KVS go on 5 page rant?

Just yell: "Welding!".

Maybe I should start a T-62 thread with welding spots being better than some current UVZ products.

Chapter OPCW: The substance that was poisoned by the Violins could be produced in any country!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhGLJ82rAFs

Austin wrote:Chapter OPCW: The substance that was poisoned by the Violins could be produced in any country!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OhGLJ82rAFs

Skripal =/= Violin in Russian. This is not even a translator issue. This is some hack vocabulary mapping.
The actual Russian word for violin is skripka. It is likely that Skripal is not even a derivative of the word
for "played the violin" but just has some similarity. You get such coincidences all the time.

As for the OPCW, no sh*t Sherlock.

I understand why it was not Russia air defence that intercepted yank cruise missiles . And I understand why there were no Russian soldiers that were killed in attempted crossing of river . And why there may not be in future in Syrian war any Russian that fires on yank .

But if Syria is being attacked by them . Then Syrian military can fire back . They can say they got killed. They can say that they killed . Only if they had the means .

So Russia can give the means . Not just defence . But offensive weapon . Better to fire ten anti - ship missiles and sink two ships than fire hundred SAM , to hit seventy cruise missile . Better to mine the Pass at Gibraltar to close it against yank ship...... ( intelligent mine recognise sound of each ship ! ) with a couple of mines , than fire ten anti - ship missiles.....

As long as Syrian are pulling trigger . Then Russia has plausible deniablility . Time to go on the attack . And supplies can be brought in by Russian ships for cargo . Both civilian and military goods . And if Turkey and Iran played smart , they also open supply route through north Syria and Iraq . To push yank out of Syria . And save us all from war .


I thought that anti - ship missiles can be equipped with less than lethal charge . Once a ship is hit , then no deaths occur . So no reason for yank to seek revenge . But ship can be " damaged " , needing repair . At least the captain thinks so . Must return ......home .

Russia’s air defenses destroy targets heading towards Khmeimim in Syria

https://www.rt.com/news/425031-russia-syria-base-air-defense/

First of all 105 missiles for three targets?

There was more targets but as they didn't reach them they had to say the only targets were those that were hit. No one beleives that they lunch 70 cruise missiles against 3 building, that just stupid.

Just look how long they needed to say what they attacked. They should have said one hour after the attack but no they waited to see what targets were hit. French said it was a completed mission but they lunched12 missiles instead of 16 which means they failed and that they are liars.

The Russians used S-400 battery radars and S-300V4 radars and airborne A-50U to provide the Syrian Air Defence forces warning of the attack

They should really start producing a smaller AWACS. Ground radar are very limited against low flying cruise missiles and I don't think russian S-400 detected anything because the missile never went Inside their operating range.

A-50 is a big one, something smaller like a Yak-44 or a SSJ 100 size Aircraft would be cheaper to operarte and they could buy lot of them. It is also a better tool to detect lunch plateforms like those bombers and cruiser USA used. They could even equip them with two R-37 with active radar homing to Attack them.

Russians showing a whole Bullpup warhead (looks like a SAP) intact. Told you, if they wanted to put up a show, they would do exactly this. They have enough TLAM's in their archives to put out. But these are weirdly accurate.

Also, they are BSing really really hard. I like this trolling.

Russian Military Shows Wreckage Of Missiles Intercepted In Syria, Says Two Unexploded Missiles Delivered To Moscow



More info and screenshots in link
https://southfront.org/russian-military-shows-wreckage-of-missiles-intercepted-in-syria-says-two-unexploded-delivered-to-moscow/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Where are all the trolls now hiding? that were saying Russia "did not" intercepted any of NATO missiles?

Colonel-General Rudskoy added that according to the updated data only 22 missile hits on targets in Syria can be confirmed. According to the updated data provided by Rudskoy:

only 22 missiles hit targets in Syria;
46 missiles were intercepted by the Syrian Air Defense Forces;
the rest of the missiles failed to reach their targets by different, apparently technical, reasons.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Pentagon’s version of the missile attack:

76 missiles hit “Barzah Research and Development Center”
22 missiles hit “Him Shinshar Chemical Weapons Storage Site”
7 missiles hit “Him Shinshar CW Bunker”

[quote]

https://southfront.org/russian-military-shows-wreckage-of-missiles-intercepted-in-syria-says-two-unexploded-delivered-to-moscow/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

According to Pentagon version ,they "did not wanted" to hit Syria military base.. something they did in 2017
and "only" focused in the "chemical weapons.." ,in 2 places.. So NATO says they used 105 missiles two hit 2 places   and most of their hits was in a civilian center that was abandoned years ago after Rebels terrorist target it
with artillery.. NATO also says "no missiles were intercepted"..and all their missiles hit their targets, but Russia provided evidence, of missiles that for "mysterious reasons" did not exploded ,and missiles parts being hit by fragments of explosives.

So here are the updated numbers.. when adding and substracting..
the only version that makes sense .. the Russia one..

105 missiles launched..
only 22 hit targets...

46 intercepted by Syrian soviet+pantsir air defenses
37 missiles exploded in the sand somewhere else and went of course.. possibly because EW..
and all the attacks on heavily defended military airports failed.. either through interception or EW..


So this is what a ~20% success rate hitting the less defended civilians or storage places of Syria?
and near ~ 0% success rate hitting Syria military airports bases. and Government buildings which
Trump was saying was going to hit... and with 0% Syrian army casualties/military hardware losses
Is no wonder why the Congress wants to remove from Trump the capabilities to launch new strikes
unless the Pentagon can show them ,what strategy and goals and benefits for US the strikes will have..

This is interesting because Trump/Pentagon identified 8 targets to hit in Syria... but they ended only hitting 2.  
and this was facing Syrian soviet era air defenses + Pantsirs air defenses.. To think NATO used 105 cruise missiles
in just 2 places is insanity.. to say the least.. when 3-5 cruise missiles should be more than enough to completely  destroy the places they hit..


Syria is one of the worse possible place to defend from a NATO cruse missile attack for its geography and being already invaded and 1/3 of its territory under occupation and being a country surrounded by enemies.. If this attack was done in a country like IRAN..with large empty zones and flat terrain ,that missiles can't hide and they had exactly the same air defenses inventory used by Syria , the performance of NATO will have been not just ~ %20..  but  completely ZERO.. if the missiles came from Persian gulf or from afghan border that is.. because Turkey ,neither Azerbaijan will allow missiles to travel through its territory. This means that any Cruise missile will need to travel a Long distance over empty flat terrain before reaching its targets.. making those missiles very easy to intercept ,even by regular world war 2 anti air artillery fire. it will be shooting with a shotgun flying ducks contest..  

Photo report from Hmeim Airbase:

https://ecoross1.livejournal.com/716218.html

MoD suddenly invited lots of bloggers on tour, we should be seeing plenty of fresh photos soon methinks

The Russian Ministry of Defense must be following this board.

PapaDragon wrote:
Photo report from Hmeim Airbase:

https://ecoross1.livejournal.com/716218.html

MoD suddenly invited lots of bloggers on tour, we should be seeing plenty of fresh photos soon methinks

Dang, Russians are really good gardeners.
And really like fountains too.

PapaDragon wrote:
Photo report from Hmeim Airbase:

https://ecoross1.livejournal.com/716218.html

MoD suddenly invited lots of bloggers on tour, we should be seeing plenty of fresh photos soon methinks

So they have TOR's backing up the Pantsir's

Cyberspec wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:
Photo report from Hmeim Airbase:

https://ecoross1.livejournal.com/716218.html

MoD suddenly invited lots of bloggers on tour, we should be seeing plenty of fresh photos soon methinks

So they have TOR's backing up the Pantsir's

if im not mistaken.. i think TOR major focus is for the interception of ballistic missiles,
because somewhere i saw it was much fat/heavy missile ,with much faster speed.. and bigger ballistic missiles
like Scuds might require S-300 or S-400 defenses.