'Russian-made' missile explodes into fireball in Cyprus near capital city

#81
Israel have been attacking Iranian supplies to Hezbollah in Syria for years. A lot is on this thread:
https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/syria.161743/
There's also the 'green on blue' thread:
https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/t...llance-aircraft-lost-at-sea-off-syria.286446/

Tbh, it's a fairly common occurrence and whilst it hits the MSM, nobody appears to take a great deal of notice. It's only when F16's or Il-20s are shot down or if (as in this case) the S-200 (SA-5) missed its target and kept on going as above re the Russian civilian airliner shot down.

Both sides have a right of 'self defence' or do you disagree?
Of course both sides have a right to self defence but they also both have responsibilities to the rest of the world. The world does not owe Syria and Israel a living and if they are both abusing neighbouring neutral airspace they are both in the wrong. A shocking concept for holier-than-thou partisans of either side in the Middle East conflict I realise, but nonetheless a fact. Both sides owe the rest of the region a duty of care, both sides need to stop playing silly buggers with the lives of neutrals.
 
#82
No...it's a missile designed in the 1950s and fielded by numerous former Soviet client states. The fact that current operators (apart from Syria) include Libya and Myanmar should tell you all you need to know.


Soviet engineers began to develop the S-200 surface-to-air missile system during the 1950s, primarily to counter the U.S. B-58 supersonic bomber, U2 spy plane, and other reconnaissance aircraft.1

Since its initial deployment in 1966, the S-200 received multiple upgrades to increase the system’s range and accuracy.



This is a big powerful obsolescent system , which wouldn't even see 'the best protected Western ac' - but it has awkwardly long-range and is surprisingly good at bringing down civilian jets accidentally.

Source

Siberia Airlines Flight 1812
On October 4, 2001, the Ukrainian military accidentally shot down Siberia Airlines Flight 1812 flying from Tel Aviv to Novosibirsk. As part of an air defense exercise, two antiair missiles, one from an S-200 and one from an S-300, were launched at a target drone off the Black Sea’s Crimean coast. The missile from the S-300 successfully intercepted the drone, but the errant S-200 missile flew an extra 240 km before hitting a Russian Tu-154 commercial airliner.27The plane was hit while flying 35,000 ft above the Black Sea, killing all 78 crew and passengers.28


Best you ring up the IAF who lost an F-16I to one.

Its old, but it fast, has a long range and has a frigging huge warhead, its a very dangerous thing to share the sky with, and they've developed TTP's to limit the effectiveness of ECM.
Salvo fired ballistically at the targets predicted location and command detonated works - hence the IAF's habit of taking out the command vans
 
#84
Of course both sides have a right to self defence but they also both have responsibilities to the rest of the world. The world does not owe Syria and Israel a living and if they are both abusing neighbouring neutral airspace they are both in the wrong. A shocking concept for holier-than-thou partisans of either side in the Middle East conflict I realise, but nonetheless a fact. Both sides owe the rest of the region a duty of care, both sides need to stop playing silly buggers with the lives of neutrals.
The solution would be for Iran to stop supplying Hz thru’ Assad’s govt controlled Syria. The Syrians could also stop flinging a dozen or more missiles at the IAF and noting that all they’ve hit in that part of Syria is N Cyprus and a Russian Il-20. Israel could of course stop attacking Iranian supplies, but that’s not going to happen. Neither are the first two options tbh.

I don’t know of many civilian airliners that fly over the area. Do you?
 
#85
I mentioned Lebanon in ‘82 and you used your ‘mong button’. You were allegedly in the Army, so what’s the best COA? Interdict supplies or try and hit them when in amongst the civilians?

You said earlier Israel has a right if self defence. Now you’re changing your view as usual. Both sides have the right of self defence, that is what we’re seeing. Assad’s Forces defending Iranian supplies to Hezbollah.

Hezbollah are a terrorist organisation, recognised as such by much of the world apart from ‘the usual suspects’. It gives the Arab states as much of a ‘green light’ as Chinese supplies to both sides in any war.
One had hoped that the first and hardest lesson of the ME, is dropping bombs just makes things worse.

Your idea any COA is best, is a demonstration of why I gave you a dumb.. By the way, 82 was a tactical and strategic success, it achieved the goal of driving the PLO out of that country with a client army buffering the Israeli border and it left utter utter chaos in its wake.

Self Defence works both ways and you seemed fixed on who the good and bad players are in this story. All I actually whinged about was using Cyprus in the strike flight path and you seem tone deaf to that being my point.
 
#86
The solution would be for Iran to stop supplying Hz thru’ Assad’s govt controlled Syria. The Syrians could also stop flinging a dozen or more missiles at the IAF and noting that all they’ve hit in that part of Syria is N Cyprus and a Russian Il-20. Israel could of course stop attacking Iranian supplies, but that’s not going to happen. Neither are the first two options tbh.

I don’t know of many civilian airliners that fly over the area. Do you?
Like I say, a partisan will always take one side and assume they can do no wrong. I believe both sides need to take stock of their actions, I am generally pro-Israeli but they don't simply get a free pass because, well we're Israel, the ordinary rules don't apply to us.

Do no civilian airliners fly over Cyprus or the Eastern Mediterranean? Really?
 
#87
One had hoped that the first and hardest lesson of the ME, is dropping bombs just makes things worse.
Yet they still do it, all of the time. Dropping bombs is a COA. What really needs to happen is the measures that lead to bombs being dropped aren't taking place.
Your idea any COA is best, is a demonstration of why I gave you a dumb..
Crack on using your button. I think of them as little tears of frustration.
By the way, 82 was a tactical and strategic success, it achieved the goal of driving the PLO out of that country with a client army buffering the Israeli border and it left utter utter chaos in its wake.
That's a bit simplistic and doesn't consider other players in Lebanon.
Self Defence works both ways and you seemed fixed on who the good and bad players are in this story.
I think the supply of internationally acknowledged terrorist organisations is bad personally. Don't you?
All I actually whinged about was using Cyprus in the strike flight path and you seem tone deaf to that being my point.
One missile out of the dozens fired actually hit N Cyprus over the years.
 
#88
Like I say, a partisan will always take one side and assume they can do no wrong. I believe both sides need to take stock of their actions, I am generally pro-Israeli but they don't simply get a free pass because, well we're Israel, the ordinary rules don't apply to us.
I agree. But then Iran is supplying an internationally agreed terrorist organisation. Internationally as in more than one country. Some countries obviously don't think so
Do no civilian airliners fly over Cyprus or the Eastern Mediterranean? Really?
Of course they do. I'm talking about the area of eastern Lebanon that joins Syria where Iran are sending their supplies to Hezbollah. Perhaps Assad's govt should use shorter range missiles?
 
#89
Yet they still do it, all of the time. Dropping bombs is a COA. What really needs to happen is the measures that lead to bombs being dropped aren't taking place.

Crack on using your button. I think of them as little tears of frustration.

That's a bit simplistic and doesn't consider other players in Lebanon.

I think the supply of internationally acknowledged terrorist organisations is bad personally. Don't you?

One missile out of the dozens fired actually hit N Cyprus over the years.
Your probably right about the frustration, less so the tears :)
We agree on the pointlessness of bombing without a plan, the problem is in the ME their is always another player and because most of the wars are essentially client conflicts (war is expensive business), no end of it.

On terrorists I dislike the same groups you dislike, but I also dislike many of our allies and friends to the extent I am not sure who is bad anymore.

On this happening again, lets hope both sides learn some lessons.
 
#90
We agree on the pointlessness of bombing without a plan, the problem is in the ME their is always another player and because most of the wars are essentially client conflicts (war is expensive business), no end of it.
I don’t know of any Middle East plan that will satisfy everyone. In fact even the latest has been (verbally) shot down. Until we don’t need their oil, it’s pretty much going to continue and will probably get worse without any western involvement imo.
On terrorists I dislike the same groups you dislike, but I also dislike many of our allies and friends to the extent I am not sure who is bad anymore.
Some ‘allies’, yes. But it tends to be who’s in charge. Same on ‘some’ enemies. It will always be that way until their govts accord with ours, or even ours with theirs.

Terror organisations, especially internationally recognised ones are different though. The trouble is, not everyone agrees that they are such an organisation
On this happening again, lets hope both sides learn some lessons.
I doubt it personally, but there’s always ‘hope’ :)
 
#91
So there was no electronic "jamming" device that sent the missile haywire? (...)
Who knows? We can come with multiple scenarios which would lead to the same results.

Is it also reasonable to suggest that if both sides don't stop playing silly buggers a civil airliner is likely to get shot down? (... )
There's a war on, in case you haven't noticed. There has been fighting against rebels of various flavours on the territory of Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon. Numerous outside powers from various parts of the globe have been directly and indirectly involved in the fighting. A number of powers have been feeding all sorts of arms to whatever factions they have been backing, with little regards to where they would end up.

Most flights seem to avoid flying over Syria and western Iraq, likely because of the above. However, the airspace over the Mediterranean between Cyprus and Lebanon and Syria seems to have a fair bit of civilian traffic. If the war zone has expanded over the Mediterranean, than the area to be avoided perhaps should be a bit larger. Anyone flying into or out of Beirut or Tel Aviv will just have to get used to the idea that they're flying through a war zone.
 

Goatman

ADC
Book Reviewer
#92
Best you ring up the IAF who lost an F-16I to one.

Its old, but it fast, has a long range and has a frigging huge warhead, its a very dangerous thing to share the sky with, and they've developed TTP's to limit the effectiveness of ECM.
Salvo fired ballistically at the targets predicted location and command detonated works - hence the IAF's habit of taking out the command vans
Perhaps...I was taking issue with your statement that

' it’s a very competent design capable of knocking down the best protected western aircraft. '

Balderdash*....it's the old Soviet equivalent of the GWS2 - which also had a H-u-u-u-ge warhead, did Mach 2 and had a ceiling of 60,000 feet .

We don't use them any more....sold the last operational ones to the Chilean Navy along with our viable County - class back in the late 80s.

The REASON we don't use them anymore is because modern agile mil ac can see them coming from a long way away and can take relatively simple avoiding action.

And , FWIW the F-16 has also been in service since the 1970s.





* a modern highly effective term, with an enormous payload,capable of taking down several divisions of crack dezinformatziye shock troops at the touch of a button
 

Top