Air to Air kill over Raqqa
CNN reporting that a US F18 splashed a Syrian SU22 which was attacking US backed forces near Raqqa.
|
Originally Posted by Timelord
(Post 9805962)
CNN reporting that a US F18 splashed a Syrian SU22 which was attacking US backed forces near Raqqa.
|
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. Syrian Democratic Forces |
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50
(Post 9806031)
A fine illustration of the mess in and around Syria.
After consulting my dance card, I am not sure who these people are. Splitters? Simples! |
Has any Western Air Force fighter ever been shot down by another fighter in the Middle East ?
|
Has any Western Air Force fighter ever been shot down by another fighter in the Middle East ? |
Cazalet, I read the question the other way around. An RAF fighter was shot down by Israeli aircraft in 1949 (one of 5 lost)
|
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 ? |
Originally Posted by Pontius Navigator
(Post 9806168)
Cazalet, I read the question the other way around. An RAF fighter was shot down by Israeli aircraft in 1949 (one of 5 lost)
|
westernhero: thanks for that, I'd not seen that point being made before by someone who was on the mission.
|
F-14 / F-18E
Su-22s have provided first-for-the-type kill opportunities for US Navy aircraft for 36 years now!
|
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. |
As I posted on JB, somewhat edited:
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. :ugh: |
What could go wrong with President chump in charge ?
|
Guns or missile??
|
I believe British a/c will be targeted also.
|
Have we heard from the Pprune Moscow bureau yet?
Anyway, I see the RAAF are staying on the ground for a bit now... |
Less expensive than getting blown out the sky i guess. I thought the ozzies had bigger b**** than that but seems i'm wrong.
|
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." |
Doesn't stop RAAF ops in Iraq...Govt said Syria...
|
Gutless, short-sighted, sh**t-headed, etc. politicians should find a solution because finding a military solution becomes too dangerous. Lock them in a room and not allow to get out until they come to a (compromised) agreement.
E.g., IMHO all sides should admit that division of the Syrian territory is inevitable nowadays. It already happened de-facto. "Former dentist" (Assad the son) is unable to regain the whole territory after the coalition started military support to rebels (no matter who they are and how they are organized). Conversely, all those rebel groups cannot defeat the governmental forces, especially as they are supported by Iran and Russia. So, the separation line(s) should be drawn and agreed upon. Then, the entity controlling each zone should keep fighting ISIS, Al-Qaeda and likes, but not in the fashion like it sometimes happened in Mosul and Raqqa when special corridors were arranged for jihaddists streaming them to fight governmental forces. Maybe in the future, the country could re-unify within the former borders, but some skepticism obviously exists because we all know/read how these borders were established after WWI. |
So Oz decides that the risk of one of their aircraft being shot down over Syria and the pilot being captured by one of the groups that might not be friendly is too great. Who would blame them as the possibility of a internet death would I imagine bring the whole idea of Australian involvement in war zones far away from home to an end.
I'd also be interested if Mrs May thinks the same event might just be the straw that brings her down ? Who backs down now, Trump or Putin/Assad ? Do we get a post Turkish shoot down fudge or do we find out how good S400 is ? And that would lead to ? Slowly the options for a sensible outcome are falling away. This is a cluster*uck cubed. |
Originally Posted by Buster Hyman
(Post 9807275)
Anyway, I see the RAAF are staying on the ground for a bit now... Australian politicians, content with token/virtue signalling commitments over the last decade and a half, have systematically been making cowards of the ADF. |
Avoiding the politics, I do find it was interesting that a Super Hornet got the kill, as I am sure there are other fighters in the area that would have been keen to get in on the action. Perhaps shows some relevancy to carrier borne aviation and that positioning is often key. Somewhere there is an E driver that won't have to buy a beer at the club in Oceana. So Super Hornet joins the kill club before F-22, Rafale, F-35, Typhoon, PAK FA, J-20....
|
Good thing most civilian air traffic stays well clear of Syria or there could very easily be another MH17...
|
According to most internet reports it took two missiles to take down the Syrian jet, first one missed!
|
@downsizer
I suspect that's why they carry more than one. ;) |
And another...(ish)
US jet 'downs drone' near Jordan border - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-40344534 |
I believe an RAF F4 claimed a kill in Germany, unfortunately the kill was an RAF Jaguar.
|
Originally Posted by 1771 DELETE
(Post 9807765)
I believe an RAF F4 claimed a kill in Germany, unfortunately the kill was an RAF Jaguar.
|
Originally Posted by downsizer
(Post 9807609)
According to most internet reports it took two missiles to take down the Syrian jet, first one missed!
Do these reports specify AIM-9 or 120? Just curious. |
sandiego89: I'll be surprised if BVR was the engagement criteria. Most likely a VID needed. Speaks to a Fox 2, but I'm ready to be wrong.
|
Originally Posted by 1771 DELETE
(Post 9807765)
I believe an RAF F4 claimed a kill in Germany, unfortunately the kill was an RAF Jaguar.
"I am going home now, the Brits they are playng for real!" |
I'd wondered if Australia suspended operations thinking that while the Russians might not want to shoot down a US jet, they might not be so hesitant in shooting down a RAAF jet.
Even though an attack on one is an attack on all - in the world of real politick - I would have thought a shoot down of a US aircraft is a more butt clenching moment in the Kremlin than a shoot down of an Oz one. But presumably unless you get a visual ID (and even then, all jets now are grey with low vis markings and you'd never get that close anyway these days) all coalition US and Aussie Hornets look alike to an opposing shooter in terms of flight profile, tactics, electronic signature etc. In situations like this, is the call to suspend flights made by a uniformed RAAF liaison officer on the ground, a VVSO back in Australia or would that have been a political directive from Canberra? |
Originally Posted by tartare
(Post 9808097)
I'd wondered if Australia suspended operations thinking that while the Russians might not want to shoot down a US jet, they might not be so hesitant in shooting down a RAAF jet.
Even though an attack on one is an attack on all - in the world of real politick - I would have thought a shoot down of a US aircraft is a more butt clenching moment in the Kremlin than a shoot down of an Oz one. But presumably unless you get a visual ID (and even then, all jets now are grey with low vis markings and you'd never get that close anyway these days) all coalition US and Aussie Hornets look alike to an opposing shooter in terms of flight profile, tactics, electronic signature etc. In situations like this, is the call to suspend flights made by a uniformed RAAF liaison officer on the ground, a VVSO back in Australia or would that have been a political directive from Canberra? It is one of the reasons RAAF now very much advocate keeping our more recent US purchases updated "in lockstep" with US. |
Interesting insight rjtjrt.
|
Australian politicians, content with token/virtue signalling commitments over the last decade and a half, have systematically been making cowards of the ADF Such was the order that when the troops at the Long Tan battle needed ammo to avoid being totally decimated the senior RAAF bod in HQ refused to supply support, but the US volunteered to go. The senior RAAF bod in HQ offered that he would have to get a thumbs up from Canberra prior to committing. It took a junior pilot to bite the bullet and say "I'm going", and he did, saving the troops. Was a RAAF decision re the hazardous conditions stipulation, not political. |
Originally Posted by rjtjrt
(Post 9808101)
I understand this was the reason they were not committed in GW1 (they were at Diego Garcia) and in GW2 they flew after air dominance achieved.
|
Originally Posted by rjtjrt
(Post 9808101)
I wonder if it is an admission of our Classic Hornets are not equiped EW wise to enter highly contested airspace?
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:43. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.