Turkish F-4 down

[Italy]

Does the Syrian air defence force have a Facebook page? I would very much like to LIKE their post about shooting down the Turkish RF-4.

Keep up the good job guys!

yes, long live Greek Syria friendship..

[Kapedani]

http://youtu.be/X00UcfrglCI

Sounds like it was ZSU-23 and S-60. Probably navigation error that the plane(s) flew so close to Syria. (at that altitude, if it was a recon flight, it may not have been able to gather much in terms of intelligence)

Dear friend, you said "...they will destroy Syrian air defenses using Tomahawks first then the Rafale/Stike Eagles will do the rest." So would you care to expand a little bit as to how much of Serbian air defenses were destroyed?

Not this again! The war has been over for 13 years now, and the same old internet themes keep popping up. Let me guess, you also believe NATO lost about 78 planes there too. A very large % of Serbian air defense was, in fact, destroyed. The rest, was kept out of the fight. You don't have to destroy something, to render it ineffective.

Clearly, this has no bearing on Syria, because no NATO planes would be flying low enough, just as in Serbia, to be affected by AAA or short-range SAMs. Long-range SAMs, especially the vast majority of Syria's SAMs which are antiquated, are not likely to be a solution. Large radars and SAM sites emit their position to everyone.

yes, long live Greek Syria friendship..

Doesn't this seem a bit "pathetic"? At least try to keep it civilized, instead of gloating over the (hopefully unlikely) loss of two airmen.

[Italy]

http://youtu.be/X00UcfrglCI

Sounds like it was ZSU-23 and S-60. Probably navigation error that the plane(s) flew so close to Syria. (at that altitude, if it was a recon flight, it may not have been able to gather much in terms of intelligence)


Not this again! The war has been over for 13 years now, and the same old internet themes keep popping up. Let me guess, you also believe NATO lost about 78 planes there too. A very large % of Serbian air defense was, in fact, destroyed. The rest, was kept out of the fight. You don't have to destroy something, to render it ineffective.

Clearly, this has no bearing on Syria, because no NATO planes would be flying low enough, just as in Serbia, to be affected by AAA or short-range SAMs. Long-range SAMs, especially the vast majority of Syria's SAMs which are antiquated, are not likely to be a solution. Large radars and SAM sites emit their position to everyone.


Doesn't this seem a bit "pathetic"? At least try to keep it civilized, instead of gloating over the (hopefully unlikely) loss of two airmen.

i was being sarcastic.

[p_shadow]

A few thoughts:

- UN needs (more!) proof of human rights violations in Syria, and some of those can't be found by Mr.Annan and his group by travelling on "semi-touristic" routes arranged by Syrian officials! It's not the first time human exodus is being checked by air reconnaissance (assuming it was a recce Phantom). So, would be naive to think there was no reason for that plane being there where it was at that time....

- Airspace violations between two countries occur very, very often by civilian aircraft (usually light a/c) and less often by mil a/c, but it happens a lot!

- It happens between NATO/NATO countries, NATO/non-NATO countries and non-NATO/non-NATO countries without major incidents other than a QRA jet puting the "violator" on track or forcing it to land. Why?? Because there are PROCEDURES for such situations that don't necessarily include shooting something down right away!

- Turkey and Syria are not at war, weren't even at the brink of a war, their relation surely had better times but it was not that bad either.

- It mustn't have been the first time Turkish airplanes violated Syrian airspace (their president even aknowledged that for us!) and i have no indication of any attempt to shoot down those intruder's before. Why now? Also, i haven't learn of any real Syrian complaints about these incursions (like the Greeks use to complain, for example)

- I wonder how many times Syrian a/c have done the same on Turkish airspace, deliberatly or not... should the "shoot-first, ask later" policy be applied there as well? If so, Turkey and Greece would have no fighter jets by now, given the number of situations like this happening between them almost on a daily basis!

- Anyway, things won't look very good for now on. If they are right with their claims they can evoke NATO's chapter 5 and then there'll be trouble (either by a military response from NATO or by the lack of it and consequential Turkish "weakening" in the organization). If not, they'll be accused and seen as a "de-facto" destabilizing party in this problem.


Abraços

[haavarla]

Lets not blow this out of proporsion.
I've seen an overlay charts of the RF-4E Phantom flight path.
It was fencing Syrian sea borders, and on its way south its suddenly made an 90 deg turn and proceeded well inside the Syrian Borders before its signal was lost.
I think this was an navigation error.
And the Syrians on that Naval assets probably was on high alert and with high tension nerves.
The RF-4E Phantom was flying on a low altitude level and could easily be mistaken for an Israeli jet..

[Italy]

Lets not blow this out of proporsion.
I've seen an overlay charts of the RF-4E Phantom flight path.
It was fencing Syrian sea borders, and on its way south its suddenly made an 90 deg turn and proceeded well inside the Syrian Borders before its signal was lost.
I think this was an navigation error.
And the Syrians on that Naval assets probably was on high alert and with high tension nerves.
The RF-4E Phantom was flying on a low altitude level and could easily be mistaken for an Israeli jet..

very reasonable assessment.

[Alepou 340MB]

These Turkish RF-4 were over Cyprus around 11:30pm that day doing there routine straying violations as Mr Gul has stated. Also an CN235 EW version was in the area as well. They took their pictures of the cypriot defence movements before turning and heading for Syria.

They were tracked by cypriot radar. It was a wake up call for Turkey.

[quadbike]

Hypothetically if Syria go crazy and attack Turkey won't Greece come to the Turk's aid as a fellow NATO member.

[Petros]

Hypothetically if Syria go crazy and attack Turkey won't Greece come to the Turk's aid as a fellow NATO member.

I presume Greece is going to help as much NATO did all these years every time Turks violate Greek national airspace, waters, FIR, even flying over Greek islands... (thousands times annually...)

And by the way the only potential "going crazy and attack" candidate in the area is Turkey.

Well done Syrian's ...

[Petros]

yes, long live Greek Syria friendship..

What's your point?

[Tango III]

What type of 'necessary steps' which can be carried out by Turkey against Syria?

-Turkey said June 23 one of its fighter jets may have violated Syrian airspace after Damascus confirmed shooting it down, in comments seen as a bid to cool the latest spat between the former allies.

http://www.defensenews.com/article/2...text|FRONTPAGE

[Yama]

Other countries normally don't do such things. IF they do then it's cleared by the country, in which case it's not a violation.

Finnish airspace is routinely violated by Russian, Swedish and NATO aircraft, often military aircraft, no biggie. We haven't shot anyone down (yet). I understand that back in the day NATO aircraft used to rather deliberately violate Austrian airspace.

[Nicolas10]

Finnish airspace is routinely violated by Russian, Swedish and NATO aircraft, often military aircraft, no biggie. We haven't shot anyone down (yet). I understand that back in the day NATO aircraft used to rather deliberately violate Austrian airspace.

The difference is that Syria knows that NATO wants to attack, and the fact that it was a reconnaissance plane is quite telling. You can't let your foe perform reconnaissance flights over your airspace freely if you know they're going to attack you soon. It would be suicidal.

In my mind there is no doubt that Syria was justified in shooting down the Turkish RF4. I just hope the crew is found alive and well but I doubt it...

Quoted from the latest article:

“The question that needs to be asked here is if Syria shot down the plane out of animosity against Turkey,” commented Serkan Demirtas, Ankara bureau chief of the English-language Hurriyet Daily News. “The answer will determine Ankara’s approach toward Damascus.”

This sounds like a very sensible way to go.

Nic

[Erlindur]

From here.

"According to our conclusions, our plane was shot down in international airspace, 13 nautical miles from Syria," Mr Davutoglu told TRT television.

13 nm is a bit away. So we are talking about a SAM (or Mr. Davutoglu tells, how should I put it, not the whole truth maybe?).

[HAWX ace]

Not this again! The war has been over for 13 years now, and the same old internet themes keep popping up. Let me guess, you also believe NATO lost about 78 planes there too. A very large % of Serbian air defense was, in fact, destroyed. The rest, was kept out of the fight. You don't have to destroy something, to render it ineffective.

I can't agree more on your first sentence. Not this again!

You are entitled to believe that not giving a battle is winning. But sorry I and many others do not share this view. Live with that.

The difference is that Syria knows that NATO wants to attack

I doubt that.

[rayrubik]

Much needed lesson for Turkish Air Force.They dont seem capable of respecting other country's airspace.
Greek airspace for example..All of the incidents below have TuAF responsible.

Violations of National Airspace – Infringements of Air Traffic Regulations (ICAO)

[JSR]

Folllow the money. Turkey does not have that much choice if it want to avoid currency collapse. we dont know how much will be in private accounts of Erdo for shaping this policy.

http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index...=2010040268135
Kingdom to invest $400b in Turkey over four years

[HAWX ace]

Folllow the money. Turkey does not have that much choice if it want to avoid currency collapse. we dont know how much will be in private accounts of Erdo for shaping this policy.

At this time, the threat of firing even one or two Scuds on turkish soil is enough to ruin the entire turkish tourist season. That's a lot of billion €€€s and $$$s. Noone in Turkey is that stupid.

[Loke]

Finnish airspace is routinely violated by Russian, Swedish and NATO aircraft, often military aircraft, no biggie. We haven't shot anyone down (yet). I understand that back in the day NATO aircraft used to rather deliberately violate Austrian airspace.

To my knowledge Norwegian airspace is never routinely violated by Russian a/c, not even during the cold war.

Perhaps that happened in Finland?

Spy missions etc. happen, but that's not what I would call "routine violation".

Provocations did happen during the cold war, but that was part of the cold war.

[swerve]

Norway is a NATO member. The Warsaw Pact didn't want to start WW3.

Austrian airspace was routinely violated by both NATO (especially the USAF) & WP aircraft, & sometimes by the Yugoslavian air force.

[orko_8]

Mission plan and recorded radar track history of the RF-4ETM. Graphics provided by Turkish Air Force.

http://webtv.hurriyet.com.tr/2/34134...e-anlatti.aspx

[swerve]

I presume Greece is going to help as much NATO did all these years every time Turks violate Greek national airspace, waters, FIR, even flying over Greek islands... (thousands times annually...).

In order to qualify for NATO assistance, a country must (1) be attacked, & (2) ask for help. When was Greece attacked, & when did it ask for help in defending itself against attacks?

Greece is a member of NATO, & is bound by the treaty. If Turkey is attacked, & asks for NATO help, Greece should respond. Are you saying that Greece will break the treaty, & its word? Do you think so little of your country & its people, that you believe they consider their word worth nothing?

[HAWX ace]

In order to qualify for NATO assistance, a country must (1) be attacked, & (2) ask for help. When was Greece attacked, & when did it ask for help in defending itself against attacks?

Greece is a member of NATO, & is bound by the treaty. If Turkey is attacked, & asks for NATO help, Greece should respond. Are you saying that Greece will break the treaty, & its word? Do you think so little of your country & its people, that you believe they consider their word worth nothing?

You speak as if you just read wikipedia and you think that's how NATO works.

FYI, yes, Greece has protested and ask for help many times in the past, always with no result. Basically, NATO unwillingness to stand by Greece was the reason we withdrew from NATO in 1974, and the reason A. Papandreou was elected in 1981, the reason we made an alliance with a Warsaw Pact member (!!) Bulgaria in 1987, and the reason B. Clinton intervened personally in 1996 to avoid an internal NATO war.

If Turkey asks for help on this one, will only manage to humilate itself. Regardless of that though, all members are obliged to help, but there are different levels each one can or will help, and additionally that help must be approved by the parliament, which is far from taken for granted, especially this parliament.

[edi_right_round]

At this time, the threat of firing even one or two Scuds on turkish soil is enough to ruin the entire turkish tourist season. That's a lot of billion €€€s and $$$s. Noone in Turkey is that stupid.

somehow true.it always surprised me how obsolete and without care was the turkish air defense regarding missiles if we compare it with the trend not even with Greece or ever Cyprus.

[swerve]

Mission plan and recorded radar track history of the RF-4ETM. Graphics provided by Turkish Air Force.

http://webtv.hurriyet.com.tr/2/34134...e-anlatti.aspx

So . . . if I've got it right -

On a route which should have kept him out of Syrian airspace but went off course & entered it, flying low. Warned by Turkish ground control. Left Syrian airspace unharmed. Decided to go round again, & requested ground control assistance to avoid a repeat of the Syrian airspace violation. Went off radar & ceased communicating while 13 nautical miles off coast, on corrected route which would not take him into Syrian airspace.

If that's right, the Syrians spotted the activity first time round, but didn't shoot when he crossed their airspace (too slow to respond?), then shot at him the second time without waiting for him to enter their airspace.

If this was a training flight, it would appear to be navigation training.

[edi_right_round]

there is a video around made by some guys at a beach and suddenly you hear AAA fire.
first some slower burst and then an intense one.Do the sirians have 37mm or 57mm deployed there?i heard chicoms have made some sort of network firing device for them,then they also have a lot of Shilkas what would justify the fast bursts in the video

[Erlindur]

If that's right, the Syrians spotted the activity first time round, but didn't shoot when he crossed their airspace (too slow to respond?), then shot at him the second time without waiting for him to enter their airspace.

And I'll ask again. What AA gun did the Syrian air defense used to shoot down an aircraft 13 nm away? Or was it a missile? It can easily be proved if it was AA gun or SAM once they get the plane.

Isn't that the job of an UN investigation maybe?

[orko_8]

So . . . if I've got it right -

On a route which should have kept him out of Syrian airspace but went off course & entered it, flying low. Warned by Turkish ground control. Left Syrian airspace unharmed. Decided to go round again, & requested ground control assistance to avoid a repeat of the Syrian airspace violation. Went off radar & ceased communicating while 13 nautical miles off coast, on corrected route which would not take him into Syrian airspace.

If that's right, the Syrians spotted the activity first time round, but didn't shoot when he crossed their airspace (too slow to respond?), then shot at him the second time without waiting for him to enter their airspace.

If this was a training flight, it would appear to be navigation training.

Yes, that is how the events happened according to the official statements.

Turkish Foreign Minister said that the aircraft was flying for a test of a new radar installation at Iskenderun, Hatay. It's mission was not classified and all comms channels of the aircraft were open.

Additional info on the downed RF-4ETM for reference (from my article on Air International, "Anatolian Phantoms")

... 1st Air Supply and Maintenance Center together with ASELSAN began working on modernising the RF-4E fleet, under “Isik” (Light) programme. This project consists of two phases: Structural and avionics upgrade of 18 RF-4Es and procurement of advanced reconnaissance pods under Turkish Aerial Reconnaissance Program (TARP). Upgrade phase includes structural strenghtening of aircraft and integration of LN-100GT INS/GPS navigation system, CDU-900Z, AN/ALQ-178 RWR and advanced communications systems, produced by ASELSAN. The TARP programme covers the procurement of Elbit Condor II Long Range Oblique Photography (LOROP) and Elta EL/M-2060P SAR/GMTI pods plus ground stations and real time data link systems. The first two aircraft were delivered on May 5, 2009....

The TARP program was cancelled by Israel following the restrained relations after the Mavi Marmara incident.

[MadRat]

It would make most sense if it was a boat mounted gun. The pilot wouldn't have sensed any danger flying within lethal range considering the nature of his flight. The Syrians have rogue elements in their military whereas the Turkish military is professional.

[Alepou 340MB]

First, I would like to say I didn't understand word of what that guy was saying.

Second, am I the only one here that finds it strange that a Turkish language TV program has english language graphics? I wonder who prepared these and who is the real intended viewer?

Third, where are the parts of the flight over Cyprus?