Russian helicopters to Syria
Thread Starter
Russian helicopters to Syria
R/e HR Clinton's claim today - anyone have any insight (if it is true) on exactly what hardware is being sent to Syria?
More Hind 25/35's?
They have 40+ already.
Poor opposition fighters.
I hope the US Stingers are already on the way...
More Hind 25/35's?
They have 40+ already.
Poor opposition fighters.
I hope the US Stingers are already on the way...
Stingers to Syria?
Agree that's a bad idea.
SA-7 should do the trick, and I suspect there are more than a few of those knocking about the international arms market / black market ...
Agree that's a bad idea.
SA-7 should do the trick, and I suspect there are more than a few of those knocking about the international arms market / black market ...
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 13th Jun 2012 at 13:05.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Penzance, Cornwall UK
Age: 84
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The SA-7 Stela is old hat and is easily countered. I think the Mil-8/17 Hip may have been selected for (by?) the Syrians as it carries a heavier warload and can deliver a useful number of troops to where they are required.
Last edited by Rosevidney1; 13th Jun 2012 at 18:43. Reason: correction
Thread Starter
Ha - and now I see the Secy of State is backpedalling - the helicopters may not be new at all.
OK - maybe not Stingers - perhaps a box of Iglas or two...?
OK - maybe not Stingers - perhaps a box of Iglas or two...?
perhaps a box of Iglas or two
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Torygraph: Britain stops Russian ship carrying attack helicopters for Syria
Russian ship believed to be carrying helicopters and missiles for Syria has been effectively stopped in its tracks off the coast of Scotland after its insurance was cancelled at the behest of the British government.
Russian ship believed to be carrying helicopters and missiles for Syria has been effectively stopped in its tracks off the coast of Scotland after its insurance was cancelled at the behest of the British government.
I don't understand why the Russian ship has, even with insurance being withdrawn, not continued on with the delivery. All that has happened is that risk of financial loss has gone up for a different party.
Do they believe that they'll be in an unseaworthy craft?
Are they at risk for legal action if sailing about uninsured?
What is it about commercial maritime ops that I don't understand that would make this more clear to me?
Do they believe that they'll be in an unseaworthy craft?
Are they at risk for legal action if sailing about uninsured?
What is it about commercial maritime ops that I don't understand that would make this more clear to me?
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 19th Jun 2012 at 19:20.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 423 Likes
on
223 Posts
Russian ship believed to be carrying helicopters and missiles for Syria has been effectively stopped in its tracks off the coast of Scotland after its insurance was cancelled at the behest of the British government.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Supposedly the US asked you guys to "Stop That Ship!". One has to wonder about international diplomacy.
Pretty sure all the other ones floating around the oceans blue carrying things that go bang are now checking with their insurance companies, not.
Now the poor things have turned off their ident beacon, see how we scared them. You know if we still had some N, N, N what was the name of that updated airliner, we may even be able to follow them.
Oh well, tune in tomorrow for the next nail biting installment of "Where's that ship?"
Pretty sure all the other ones floating around the oceans blue carrying things that go bang are now checking with their insurance companies, not.
Now the poor things have turned off their ident beacon, see how we scared them. You know if we still had some N, N, N what was the name of that updated airliner, we may even be able to follow them.
Oh well, tune in tomorrow for the next nail biting installment of "Where's that ship?"
Heh, if they stopped squawking, I suspect someone in Gibraltar will eventually report them passing through the straights ...
Lonewolf_50,
Try driving your car without insurance, or operating a HGV with someone's property on board that you are being paid to transport, with no insurance.
Try driving your car without insurance, or operating a HGV with someone's property on board that you are being paid to transport, with no insurance.
I drove my car without insurance for a year and a half back in the 80's.
The car still worked. I got to and from work with little trouble, but I had assumed a great deal of personal risk.
So, what's your point?
There are other people who underwrite ships than British firms.
Who owns the ship?
They can underwrite or take their own risk.
It's a matter of risk management.
The underlying question is:
"How important is this transport mission to the Russians (politically) and whomever owns the ship and material on board?
Is there other material on board that is NOT helicopter parts and helicopters, and are those merchants weighing in on this ship's further operations on this delivery?"
Your response is noted, but insufficient to answer the question.
Got anything more useful to share?
The car still worked. I got to and from work with little trouble, but I had assumed a great deal of personal risk.
So, what's your point?
There are other people who underwrite ships than British firms.
Who owns the ship?
They can underwrite or take their own risk.
It's a matter of risk management.
The underlying question is:
"How important is this transport mission to the Russians (politically) and whomever owns the ship and material on board?
Is there other material on board that is NOT helicopter parts and helicopters, and are those merchants weighing in on this ship's further operations on this delivery?"
Your response is noted, but insufficient to answer the question.
Got anything more useful to share?
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 20th Jun 2012 at 13:47.
