57 replies to this topic

[Habitat]

747400, on 25 June 2012 - 07:09 AM, said:

I see that the British foreign Secretary, the little bald chap who looks like a teletubby, has been in full Warrior mode, going ona bout how Outrageous it is and how NATO will respond Robustly and all the rest of it.

So I'm assuming that, according to the Turkish chap, it must have been shot down by a SAM; a very long range and peculiarly persistent SAM, able to pursue it doggedly for that distance. So are the Turkish trying to say that they fired at it after it had left syriana airspace? That's the only way it would have been able to get that far, surely. if they'd fired while it was over their airspace, it surely wouldn't have taken 15 minutes for the missile to reach it. Something sounds fishy.

Seems like a perceptive analysis to me, it does not make a lot of sense the way it has been explained.

[spud the mackem]

I would like to bet that the Turks will retaliate in their own time,they are usually happy and peacefull until they are upset, then ,you dont poke the bear !

[Habitat]

It might occur to a suspicious mind that the Turkish plane was on a mission to light up Syrian missile radar for the purposes of information gathering about frequencies and whatever, in the event of NATO action in the future against Syria, such knowledge could be important. I wonder what missile system shot it down, clearly the Turkish plane either did not have situational awareness that it had been targetted, or countermeasures did not work.

[Knight Of Shadows]

a prelude for a buffer zone ? meeeeh we're not that lucky

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

Habitat, on 25 June 2012 - 10:13 AM, said:

It might occur to a suspicious mind that the Turkish plane was on a mission to light up Syrian missile radar for the purposes of information gathering about frequencies and whatever, in the event of NATO action in the future against Syria, such knowledge could be important. I wonder what missile system shot it down, clearly the Turkish plane either did not have situational awareness that it had been targetted, or countermeasures did not work.

Yes, it's a pretty good advertisement for Russian air defense systems, isn't it. You might suppose that, old as it was, the F-4 would have the latest NATO ECM kit.

[The New Richard Nixon]

It was Artilliary not SAM

[Habitat]

Erix, on 25 June 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

It was Artilliary not SAM

It crashed 15km out to sea, AAA can't reach that far, but I suppose it could have flown on damaged for a while after being hit over or near land.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

Erix, on 25 June 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

It was Artilliary not SAM

if that's what turkey is claiming, that doesn't give their protestations that it was minding its own business and was completely unprovokedly attacked by Syria much credibility, does it? You'd have to come pretty close in to be able to be hit by AAA; and I find it very hard to imagine that long range heavy AA could have much chance of hitting something the size and speed of a jet fighter, only short range automatic fire would have much chance (or if it did, Syria (and hence Russia) must have a pretty impressive fire control radar.)

[Yamato]

747400, on 25 June 2012 - 01:09 PM, said:

if that's what turkey is claiming, that doesn't give their protestations that it was minding its own business and was completely unprovokedly attacked by Syria much credibility, does it? You'd have to come pretty close in to be able to be hit by AAA; and I find it very hard to imagine that long range heavy AA could have much chance of hitting something the size and speed of a jet fighter, only short range automatic fire would have much chance (or if it did, Syria (and hence Russia) must have a pretty impressive fire control radar.)

If the target is barely moving relative to its frame of reference (e.g. coming straight at you) it's also a lot easier to hit.   I think our presumption of low altitude is sound unless they also have pretty impressive gravity defying bulletry.

[Yamato]

There's an aircraft, obviously a supersonic military jet, flying out of Syrian airspace.  Is it plausible that Assad ordered any such aircraft to be shot down, given the defections he's dealing with?

The Turk's excuse...who knows.  A careless pilot, instrument failure, major blackout or redout, heart attack or seizure, a demanding recon mission....?

[The New Richard Nixon]

747400, on 25 June 2012 - 01:09 PM, said:

if that's what turkey is claiming, that doesn't give their protestations that it was minding its own business and was completely unprovokedly attacked by Syria much credibility, does it? You'd have to come pretty close in to be able to be hit by AAA; and I find it very hard to imagine that long range heavy AA could have much chance of hitting something the size and speed of a jet fighter, only short range automatic fire would have much chance (or if it did, Syria (and hence Russia) must have a pretty impressive fire control radar.)

No this was Syria claims very early on when the news just come out

Edited by libstaK, 30 June 2012 - 10:34 AM.
removed triplicate quote

[Knight Of Shadows]

this is old news .. they shot down another plane just now which was searching for the wreck
ohhh yeah ! rise the heat !! it's going to blow yes !

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

Erix, on 25 June 2012 - 05:14 PM, said:

No this was Syria claims very early on when the news just come out

yes, so the likelihood of it being, as the Turks claim, innocently in international airspace, is probably fairly slim, isn't it.

[The New Richard Nixon]

Knight Of Shadows, on 25 June 2012 - 05:26 PM, said:

this is old news .. they shot down another plane just now which was searching for the wreck
ohhh yeah ! rise the heat !! it's going to blow yes !

Source or you joking?

[Knight Of Shadows]

Erix, on 25 June 2012 - 05:37 PM, said:

Source or you joking?

meh am not joking let me look it up for u

edit : sorry couldn't find it i saw it on the news .. probably not avilable online yet .. should be tomorrow

Edited by Knight Of Shadows, 25 June 2012 - 05:53 PM.