Russian Made Long Range SAM & Syria

Mankyspuds

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22688894

I had a look at this article and thought to myself that the Russians are throwing a sizeable diplomatic punch for the Syrians here. It seems clear enough that it is being aimed primarily at Israel. Is there a realistic chance of this civil war expanding even more? and if so what would be the main realistic worst case scenarios?

Manky.

Victor

From an Israeli perspective, this is about Israel-Lebanon, not Israel-Syria. Israel is worried about proliferation of sophisticated and/or long range weapons being proliferated to Hezbollah and others.

Despite the occasional cross-border incidents over the last two years, the Israel-Syria relationship is essentially stable - both sides know that the other is potentially a hornet's nest and so the conflict is kept at a low level.

However, Lebanon is still unstable and will continue to be used for proxy wars - within the Lebanese and Syrian factions and between them and Israel.

Qardaha

Mankyspuds wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22688894

I had a look at this article and thought to myself that the Russians are throwing a sizeable diplomatic punch for the Syrians here. It seems clear enough that it is being aimed primarily at Israel. Is there a realistic chance of this civil war expanding even more? and if so what would be the main realistic worst case scenarios?

Manky.

I would say it's more aimed at the countries which are proponents of a no-fly zone. That doesn't include Israel, yet.

The decision (by Russia and Syria) to start talking about the S-300 came straight after the EU decision to lift the arms embargo.

Also, today, over a dozen MiG-29M2s announced for Syria:

http://syriareport.net/russia-to-supply-advanced-fighter-jets-to-syria/

Nino Brown

I have my doubts about whether anybody but the US is capable of imposing a no fly zone over Syria right now. And I don't think the S300 and a few Mig 29's would be enough to deter the US if they were that way inclined (which they are not).
This is all just posturing in my opinion, it really doesn't have any real implications for the conflict. Although it would be interesting if the rebels managed to get their hands on anti aircraft weapons.

Qardaha

Nino Brown wrote: »

I have my doubts about whether anybody but the US is capable of imposing a no fly zone over Syria right now. And I don't think the S300 and a few Mig 29's would be enough to deter the US if they were that way inclined (which they are not).
This is all just posturing in my opinion, it really doesn't have any real implications for the conflict. Although it would be interesting if the rebels managed to get their hands on anti aircraft weapons.

You're last paragraph is notable.

The S300 doesn't change much. It doesn't counter the real Syrian problem i.e. approximately one thousand militant groups.

Israel would likely disable S300's somehow.

Plus, the air force, I imagine, could be taken out by a couple of hundred Tomahawks, such is the option of the two different types of no-fly zone.

I find it interesting that most "rebel victories" take place at air defence installations, especially in Dara'a of late. Are they being instructed to do so? Probably.

Victor

Nino Brown wrote: »

And I don't think the S300 and a few Mig 29's would be enough to deter the US if they were that way inclined (which they are not).

While, of course, it depends on the quality / generation of the missiles that Russia supplies, it would be a foolish pilot who challenges a current generation SAM and any no fly zone would need to be both massively resourced and incrementally applied.

Nino Brown

Victor wrote: »

While, of course, it depends on the quality / generation of the missiles that Russia supplies, it would be a foolish pilot who challenges a current generation SAM and any no fly zone would need to be both massively resourced and incrementally applied.

Have current generation SAM's been tested properly against stealth aircraft like the F22?

Qardaha

Didn't know about this till recently

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_F-117A_shootdown

Victor

Nino Brown wrote: »

Have current generation SAM's been tested properly against stealth aircraft like the F22?

Stealth doesn't mean invisible or invincible - just that in the right conditions, principally SEAD, decoys and jamming, the aircraft are much harder to detect.

Russia, Ukraine and India and been working on such missiles for 10+ years. In fact, I imagine they've been working on it since the F-117 first became public or earlier.

As the newest American operational aircraft and an air defence fighter, the F-22 is less suited to this mission than other aircraft

Qardaha

I think this is a big move: syriareport.net/russian-aircraft-carrier-for-the-mediterranean/

Nino Brown

Victor wrote: »

Stealth doesn't mean invisible or invincible - just that in the right conditions, principally SEAD, decoys and jamming, the aircraft are much harder to detect.

Russia, Ukraine and India and been working on such missiles for 10+ years. In fact, I imagine they've been working on it since the F-117 first became public or earlier.

As the newest American operational aircraft and an air defence fighter, the F-22 is less suited to this mission than other aircraft

For taking out the SAM sites it may not be the best aircraft, but for enforcing a no fly zone I would have thought this is exactly what an air superiorty fighter was designed for.
Sure other military's have been "working" on missiles to combat those threats, but have any been proven? The F22 stealth capabilities provide SAM's with a very small window to engage. It would take a lot of missiles to cover a country like Syria.
Bit either way I think these things are more political statements that any type of meaningful military action.

roadmaster

I hope this is right place to post this. I was wondering with the americans going to arm the rebels will with be with with m4s and us kit or aks etc from the ukraine or a country in the former ussr that is us friendly?

Qardaha

roadmaster wrote: »

I hope this is right place to post this. I was wondering with the americans going to arm the rebels will with be with with m4s and us kit or aks etc from the ukraine or a country in the former ussr that is us friendly?

The US and it's allies have armed the insurgency with weapons from Croatia. Specifically:

MLRS, M60 recoilless gun and more.

What now? Small arms and ammunition apparently.

But in the last 2 weeks, a remarkable increase in videos showing ATGM's fired at Syrian armour.

What's more important though, is that America is now overtly arming Al-Qaeda aligned groups.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/12/02/176123/al-qaida-linked-group-syria-rebels.html#.UbtH-fke3up

Victor

roadmaster wrote: »

I hope this is right place to post this. I was wondering with the americans going to arm the rebels will with be with with m4s and us kit or aks etc from the ukraine or a country in the former ussr that is us friendly?

While it seems the rebels have a huge variety of equipment, that imposes a big logistics and maintenance problem. So they will likely supply the simplest stuff possible AK47s, RPG-7s and variants.

They are likely to keep fancy stuff on a tight leash, to prevent it proliferating.