Air to Air kill over Raqqa
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: England
Posts: 908
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
https://cdn.liveleak.com/80281E/ll_a_s/2017/Jun/18/LiveLeak-dot-com-e2d_1497820763-21478648_0_1497820773.jpg?oIYq6gQ7kTvhdjpRhteacvyOcrXLTT1iT-LDwu5E2d02meVeGDFa9h3aYykjf7N8&ec_rate=499
Interesting. First US Navy air to air since first gulf war I believe. Guess carrying those sidewinders and AIM-120's over Syria was a good idea after all...
A fine illustration of the mess in and around Syria.
After consulting my dance card, I am not sure who these people are.
Splitters?
After consulting my dance card, I am not sure who these people are.
Syrian Democratic Forces
Simples!
Has any Western Air Force fighter ever been shot down by another fighter in the Middle East ?
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: North Up
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Has any Western Air Force fighter ever been shot down by another fighter in the Middle East ?
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Cazalet, I read the question the other way around. An RAF fighter was shot down by Israeli aircraft in 1949 (one of 5 lost)
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: birmingham
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The loss of a F-18 to a Iraqi MiG-25 on the first night of GW1
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Speicher
Unless anyone knows different this is what happened ?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Speicher
Unless anyone knows different this is what happened ?
westernhero: thanks for that, I'd not seen that point being made before by someone who was on the mission.
Russia warns US-led coalition over downing of Syrian jet
In The Graudian:-
Russia’s defence ministry has said it will treat any plane from the US-led coalition flying west of the Euphrates river in Syria as a potential target, after the US military shot down a Syrian air force jet on Sunday.
The ministry also said it was suspending a safety agreement with Washington designed to prevent collisions and dangerous incidents in Syrian airspace.
The ministry also said it was suspending a safety agreement with Washington designed to prevent collisions and dangerous incidents in Syrian airspace.
As I posted on JB, somewhat edited:
The Russian response is unfortunate, but it is quite understandable.
The situation is a many vs many with a variety of people backing various factions and thus creating chances for error/getting in each other's way. (see the Turk/Russian issue of a shoot down last year)
A variety of forces on the ground are getting air support: except for air support by SAF for Assad's forces, all air support seems to be sourced from various outsiders. Given the mess that this whole thing is, I'd say that something like this was bound to happen. (The Turk F-16 on the Frogger was a clue).
Assad doesn't trust "the West" with much of anything, so an overture like "hey, let's all gang up on the ISIS crew and sort the rest of this out later" is a likely no-sale transaction. Therefore, the many vs many continues.
You are the pilot of a fast jet, and you see some aircraft attacking your ally from the air, or setting up for another target run? What do you do?
I wonder if there was a better way to deal with this than "weapons free" given that (I think) this happened in Syrian Airspace (more or less). Probably not. I suspect this engagement fit a clear RoE.
President Trump authorized the Tomahawk attack on a Syrian air base (some months back, vis a vis the chem weapons attack, reported to be from that base) and I suspect that (given the SU-22 being the delivery platform for that event (alleged)) someone's logic chain at the CJTF (or in DC, since Micro Management is alive and well) was "we are preventing a gas attack" or something like that. Might just have been "stop the attack on our allied ground forces."
It's A Big Freaking Mess that Just Got Messier.
The Russian response is unfortunate, but it is quite understandable.
Russia, Syria's main ally, said it was also halting communications with the US aimed at preventing air incidents.
A variety of forces on the ground are getting air support: except for air support by SAF for Assad's forces, all air support seems to be sourced from various outsiders. Given the mess that this whole thing is, I'd say that something like this was bound to happen. (The Turk F-16 on the Frogger was a clue).
Assad doesn't trust "the West" with much of anything, so an overture like "hey, let's all gang up on the ISIS crew and sort the rest of this out later" is a likely no-sale transaction. Therefore, the many vs many continues.
You are the pilot of a fast jet, and you see some aircraft attacking your ally from the air, or setting up for another target run? What do you do?
I wonder if there was a better way to deal with this than "weapons free" given that (I think) this happened in Syrian Airspace (more or less). Probably not. I suspect this engagement fit a clear RoE.
President Trump authorized the Tomahawk attack on a Syrian air base (some months back, vis a vis the chem weapons attack, reported to be from that base) and I suspect that (given the SU-22 being the delivery platform for that event (alleged)) someone's logic chain at the CJTF (or in DC, since Micro Management is alive and well) was "we are preventing a gas attack" or something like that. Might just have been "stop the attack on our allied ground forces."
It's A Big Freaking Mess that Just Got Messier.
Dan Brown
I am sure the Australian serving personnel will do whatever is required of them. Political masters on the other hand..........
Also, perhaps having a pause to think about the situation may not go astray. Lonewolf put it very well "It's A Big Freaking Mess that Just Got Messier."
I am sure the Australian serving personnel will do whatever is required of them. Political masters on the other hand..........
Also, perhaps having a pause to think about the situation may not go astray. Lonewolf put it very well "It's A Big Freaking Mess that Just Got Messier."