Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 212 of 220 FirstFirst ... 112162202208209210211212213214215216 ... LastLast
Results 6,331 to 6,360 of 6590

Thread: Russia moving tac air troops to Syria

  1. #6331
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    565
    Erdogan has switching sides in this conflict several times, his loyalty is to the highest bidder, which will be the Coalition
    he could have stopped this shipment, closed the border, kicked out the Coalition from his air bases...
    but he hasn't, because an independent Kurdistan is the last Coalition option here, so he'll have to accept that

    nor is this a bad thing for him, it allows him to keep his country in a perpetual state of war, every dictator's wet dream

  2. #6332
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,377
    RT Arabic Victory Day parade video from Khmiemim airbase gives us a glimpse of 3 Russian special aircrafts - 1 x A-50 and possibly 2 x IL-20M (one looks like an upgraded variant) and another smaller turboprop with high mount engines which I cant recognise. Probably an An-140?

    Yesterday Syrian blogs posted an aircraft claiming it to be a Tu-214R...from the pic it doesn't look so..
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C_hzYPjXoAArfhL.jpgrig



    Good report from Russian airbase.




  3. #6333
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,377
    Syria as of 11th May 2017



    Syrian army and allies are advancing in parallel in the south east direction to reach the Iraqi border, this was initiated as a response to the Jihadi coalition moving along the Jordanian border.



    The Syrians are progressing slowly towards the Iraqi border with some old Russian AD stuff taking into account the Jihadi airforces. But these are not adequate, they need few Tungushka or Pantsir and Buk-M2s to really have some decent bubble considering that not much of an air cover is going to be there.


  4. #6334
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,377
    The long march towards Iraqi border without much of an air cover.



    Russian Special Operations Forces (SSO) servicemen were awarded for repelling murican allies attack on their position in Aleppo. 16 men were on a mission to aid the VKS in their strikes on Jihadi positions, and in the course of their deployment, they had to fight off almost 300 Jihadis over a period of 2 days. Not sure when and exactly where it happened, but this was most likely before the start of the final Aleppo battle when the Jihadis made gains on the Syrian defensive positions in the western sector. These guys act independently of the Syrian forces.


  5. #6335
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    I'm going to ask an utterly stupid question. Are there any Russian nukes in Syria?

    I know it's a ridiculous question but I have someone telling me that there are.

  6. #6336
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,135
    That someone is a moron. No they dont have any nukes in Syria.

  7. #6337
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    5,844
    There is zippo need for tactical nukes in Syria. Even as means of deterence. I don't think Russia has strategical Subs in Middle terrainien eigther. VKS bomber fleet is deterence enough.

  8. #6338
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    4,362
    I'm going to ask an utterly stupid question. Are there any Russian nukes in Syria?

    I know it's a ridiculous question but I have someone telling me that there are
    i will think they will have nukes. you cant rely on ICBM and bomber for short range work.

  9. #6339
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Nizhny Novgorod, Russia
    Posts
    1,107
    There is no Russian nuclear weapon in Syria. Only chemical. Russians bombed by zarin of unfortunate terrorists

  10. #6340
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    I'd imagine Israel would have been more than a little upset if Russia had moved nukes into Syria too.

  11. #6341
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Cataclysm
    Posts
    8,727
    Quote Originally Posted by JangBoGo
    RT Arabic Victory Day parade video from Khmiemim airbase gives us a glimpse of 3 Russian special aircrafts - 1 x A-50 and possibly 2 x IL-20M (one looks like an upgraded variant) and another smaller turboprop with high mount engines which I cant recognise. Probably an An-140?
    Which minute?

  12. #6342
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    There is no Russian nuclear weapon in Syria. Only chemical. Russians bombed by zarin of unfortunate terrorists
    I've been told now to ask about Yauza ship sighting wrt nuclear weapons and Syria.

  13. #6343
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    870
    Berkut taking the classy road like usual.. Even when the poster was open about the question.

    Anyway. There was rumors on Twitter awhile back that Russia was bringing in tactical nukes as a deterrent and as a defacto human shield of sorts. These rumors were going around just after the western axis shot missiles over the Russian's heads in Syria and then started talking regime change.

    Laugh all you want about the rumors. What options did Russia really have if the US was planning on contesting Russia's no fly zone ? Would the US not be a bit more cautious if they knew that there was tactical nukes sprinkled around Russia's presence ? That might get hit by bombs if a hot war started ? It wasn't about using them. It was about the risk of hitting them in a hot war

  14. #6344
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    5,844
    It doesn't matter. Russia don't need NC deterence around Syria. Everybody know Russia has Nukes located elsewhere and in numbers.
    Its much more important to have other means of deterence like S-400 Systems.

  15. #6345
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    5,844
    Quote Originally Posted by KGB View Post
    Berkut taking the classy road like usual.. Even when the poster was open about the question.

    Anyway. There was rumors on Twitter awhile back that Russia was bringing in tactical nukes as a deterrent and as a defacto human shield of sorts. These rumors were going around just after the western axis shot missiles over the Russian's heads in Syria and then started talking regime change.

    Laugh all you want about the rumors. What options did Russia really have if the US was planning on contesting Russia's no fly zone ? Would the US not be a bit more cautious if they knew that there was tactical nukes sprinkled around Russia's presence ? That might get hit by bombs if a hot war started ? It wasn't about using them. It was about the risk of hitting them in a hot war
    1st
    If US pulled such stunt (which they won't!), then the US has some weak spots themself in Syria. One is the Airbase in eastern Syria which US use to supply the Kurds.

    2nd
    would be the static USMarines artilery camp close to Raqqah. US knows these two locations are legally very weak on UN charts. As well as any other law arena. US has not been invited in to Syria, but Russia have.

    3rd
    Russia can with ease strike those two US locations from well outside the Syrian borders.
    Last edited by haavarla; 17th May 2017 at 19:05.

  16. #6346
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    The allegation was pretty ridiculous in also claiming a nuclear-tipped S-400 missile, which I'm pretty sure doesn't even exist operationally, only in stockpile.
    Last edited by Ryan; 17th May 2017 at 18:01.

  17. #6347
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,377
    Last weekend, the Syrian army captured Jirah airbase in north east Aleppo and pocketed few villages surrounding it this week and continue to advance with the help of a handful of Russian and Syrian airstrikes. Its almost a wastage to use hight flying aircrafts to fight the guys in deserts, the helo gunships would have been the best assets in these areas.



    The southern deserts info is getting blacked out and some reports say the Syrian army is around 25Km from the Iraqi border. It remains to be seen what the Jihadi coalition is going to do whose main objective is to create a safe sanctuary for Jhadis along the borders and keep the Syrian theatre hot for as long as possible. Below shows the likely position last week.



    Ariel shots of murican/Jordanian base inside Jordan to support the moderate jihadis was shown last week, courtesy the Hezbollah drones that went inside Jordan. I wonder what drones they are using.


  18. #6348
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    1,377
    @ MSphere,
    Starting around 8.55 in the RT Arabic video.

    A Ruskie Ka-52


  19. #6349
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    9,138
    Yes there is a nuclear payload for 48N6 missiles, but there is nothing to suggest it has been deployed to Syria.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  20. #6350
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Split, Croatia
    Posts
    213
    FFS you can't 'detonate' a nuclear weapon with bombing.

  21. #6351
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    5,844
    Quote Originally Posted by Zare View Post
    FFS you can't 'detonate' a nuclear weapon with bombing.
    I think there was a doctrines during the 60's where you detonate a NC tipped SAM missile to take out formations of enemy flights. Safe to say this is highly inpractical and downright idiotic way of operate NC weapons.
    Last edited by haavarla; 18th May 2017 at 06:57.

  22. #6352
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    9,138
    That's not a doctrine from the 60s only, S-75s in the 80s had nuclear warheads on-site, S-300 of every type had a nuclear payload as well.
    http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/9098/rsz11rsz3807.jpg

  23. #6353
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    5,844
    Ehh.. i'm i missing something here, what about the NC Fallout from such detonation, seems to me you would have to put such missiles and SAM systems on far remote area, or pointing out towards sea or whatnot.. it just seem completly off by any standards.
    Thanks

  24. #6354
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    394
    Well. The assumption is detonation would take place up and high. There would be fallout. but it won't be as intense as when the nuclear weapon is detonated on the ground.

  25. #6355
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    NI, UK
    Posts
    490
    what about the NC Fallout from such detonation, seems to me you would have to put such missiles and SAM systems on far remote area, or pointing out towards sea or whatnot..
    Which is why Canada ended-up with Bomarc missiles in the 1960s; there's a whole story about NORAD's basing-options that led to that. "Lovely country you have there, be a shame if we had to use our nuclear-tipped missiles to drop irradiating wreckage on it."

    However nuclear-tipped SAMs have different warhead designs and terminal effect to nuclear-tipped ABMs, which attempt to render the inbound nuclear warhead inert through frying its electronics with x-rays.

  26. #6356
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    Well. The assumption is detonation would take place up and high. There would be fallout. but it won't be as intense as when the nuclear weapon is detonated on the ground.
    And then you've just EMP'd yourself.

    That's not a doctrine from the 60s only, S-75s in the 80s had nuclear warheads on-site, S-300 of every type had a nuclear payload as well.
    Are they still operational under START II or just in stockpile though?

  27. #6357
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    394
    Then ? I think Military installations already built with EMP resistance in mind.

  28. #6358
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    EMP resistant does not mean EMP proof.

  29. #6359
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    1,465
    Boys, now the **** are REALLY to hit the fan: coalition planes have pourposely attacked SAA convoy.

  30. #6360
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    609
    Yep.

    https://twitter.com/mike_giglio/stat...42676421169152
    https://twitter.com/miladvisor/statu...803841/photo/1
    https://twitter.com/sommervillebbc/s...64006436712448
    https://twitter.com/leithfadel/statu...65396911419393

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mi...idUSKCN18E2JU?

    A member of the U.S.-backed Syrian rebel forces told Reuters the strikes hit a convoy of Syrian and Iranian-backed militias that were heading toward a base used by U.S. and U.S.-supported forces.

    Muzahem al Saloum, from the Maghawir al Thwra group, told Reuters that the jets struck after some rebel forces clashed with Syrian and Iranian militias after they had advanced to about 17 miles (27 km) from the base.

    "We notified the coalition that we were being attacked by the Syrian army and Iranians in this point, and the coalition came and destroyed the advancing convoy," Saloum said.
    Last edited by Ryan; 18th May 2017 at 18:57.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 14 users browsing this thread. (4 members and 10 guests)

  1. aLx,
  2. medo,
  3. sepheronx,
  4. TR1

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES