It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russian cruise missiles intended for targets in Syria hit Iran instead

page: 10
21
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Just an FYI, the bottom infographic is incorrect. I am not quite sure where the Kalibr and Sizzler titles originated from (in regards to the missiles in question), but it is far more likely that the missiles being used are:

3M-14T (SS-N-30A NATO) Biryuza.

The 'Kalibr' is the 3M-54, which is the smaller, shorter ranged variant, which is code named 'Sizzler' by NATO.

I don't know if the Biryuza has been issued a NATO code name yet, it is quite new.

Basically, right missile 'family', wrong missile 'variant' is listed.




posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: spy66

originally posted by: Indigo5
In case graphics help with the geographic context...

This is Putin looking to revive the Soviet empire and expand territory..





www.dailymail.co.uk... towns-held-terrorists.html


Where is the Russian Aircraft carrier?

This again seams like a western media presumtion of Putins plans/agenda. This also seam to be in line With what NATO thinks.


This is simply actual known Russian deployments..

The fact that you are looking to dismiss physical reality as opinion is telling..



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 11:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Here are pictures of what the Russian deployment really looks like :

How Russian soldiers lives in Syria

Russian forces in Syria (part 2)

And some more details about the Russian fleet in the Mediterranean :

22 Russians warships on their course to Syria



edit on 9-10-2015 by theultimatebelgianjoke because: filled out



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   
a reply to: peck420

Thanks for the insight...



Q. What kind of missiles were they?

A. Moscow has said they were Kalibr ship-launched cruise missiles, also known as 3M-14s or, in NATO parlance, SS-N-30s. They are a fairly recent addition to an established family of ship-launched missiles that are mostly intended for ship-to-ship or shorter-range missions. The new model, intended for land attacks, is reported to have a much longer range than its siblings, perhaps reaching 1,550 miles.

www.nytimes.com...



Four warships of the Caspian fleet were involved in the missile attacks, the Gepard-class frigate Dagestan and the Buyan-M-class corvettes Grad Sviyazhsk, Uglich and Veliky Ustyug. They fired cruise missiles from the Kalibr NK (Klub) VLS launchers. The missiles used are capable of hitting a target within 3 meters at a range of up to 2,500 km.

www.rt.com...



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 11:50 AM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

relax dude! no need for insult (you are just looking to a mirror)



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: FormOfTheLord



Why are you so positive it is a hoax. Both Russia and Iran have strong reasons to cover such an incident up. Rather than listen to what they say, watch what they do. If Russia stops firing missiles through Iranian airspace, it means that the incident happened and Iran has revoked their permission.



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 11:51 AM
link   
a reply to: theultimatebelgianjoke

Something's you just can't miss.



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

old Russian (soviet) boogie man "evil" empire.... no no, it's just the other way around...
The way I see it, If you draw a map with NATO and US bases, you easily find that the US is trying to conquer the world for some time now, using "silent" force in some cases and brutal in other's (my way or the highway).
mirror's mirror's mirror's...



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:15 PM
link   
Less "Hit", more like "Fell on".



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:16 PM
link   
Interesting... Russia has not fired any more missiles through Iranian airspace for the last two days. Maybe there is some truth in this rumor after all....



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:47 PM
link   
I too believe that this news was propaganda all together, both Russia and Iran denies whole thing and even if it were true, it would be a mistake/malfunction etc, not intentional and it would be dealt between Iran and Russia anyway.

Btw Russia has strike over 60 targets in the past 24h against ISILS, so theres that.



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
Interesting... Russia has not fired any more missiles through Iranian airspace for the last two days. Maybe there is some truth in this rumor after all....


There is almost certainly truth to it...

"Andrei Kartapolov of the Russian General Staff told Russian news agencies the strikes were planned so that the cruise missiles would fly "over unpopulated areas." [of Iran]

This, no doubt, was a safety measure Iran demanded understanding Russia's less than stellar record with Missile technology and associated upkeep.

Nearby villages would hear or feel the impact, including broken windows etc. but not be directly hit.

Remote areas also means that debri can be collected/recovered by the Iranians with few prying eyes.

The Iranian Media was not in the know...and thus reports of explosions (3) were immediately reported...after Iranian Gov. clamped down, the reports evolved into (1) Unexplained, (2) a UFO and (3) a Military Fuel Depot exploding...

All during the same time the Missiles were overhead.

I suspect the fourth missile landed in a remote enough region that it went un-noticed by anybody.

All the cover stories came to an abrupt halt...no follow up on any of the explosions.

The Russian Mouth piece RT and Russian Gov adopt the stance "prove it"...which is an obvious tact to take and makes sense.

In order for the US Intelligence community to verify it with Imagery, data, sources etc...they would need to reveal Technology and/or human sources and the Russians want to know exactly what we are capable of and how...inside spies? Satellite technology? etc. etc.

And the Iranians will let Russia do whatever it wants.

I suspect this will be a dead end of he said - she said...We will see.



edit on 9-10-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001
Interesting... Russia has not fired any more missiles through Iranian airspace for the last two days. Maybe there is some truth in this rumor after all....

More likely that they went back to Russia to reload or are awaiting more 3M-14T/S's to be manufactured, lol.

As far as I am aware, there is only 4-5 ships in the Caspian Flotilla that were even outfitted with the Klub launcher system.

I highly doubt their entire load out was 3M-14's, probably carrying some 3M-54's as well.

The 3M-54's can't hit Syria from the Caspian.



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 12:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: romilo
I too believe that this news was propaganda all together, both Russia and Iran denies whole thing


You seem to place a good deal of credibility in the Russians and Iranians?


originally posted by: romilo
and even if it were true, it would be a mistake/malfunction etc, not intentional and it would be dealt between Iran and Russia anyway.


I thought you just said it wasn't true?...Or are you covering all the bases?



originally posted by: romilo
Btw Russia has strike over 60 targets in the past 24h against ISILS, so theres that.


Yah...they bombed stuff...how many and who they blew up is not clear by any measure...



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: romilo

Do you have a source for that? We're they missile strikes or conventional air strikes?



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Google shows many places with same story but this site seem to offer more details at least right now;

sg.finance.yahoo.com...

That is quite allot of targets destroyed!



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: romilo


Conventional air strikes. That pretty much confirms the missile misfire story. A ten to twenty percent failure rate agrees with their space launch failure rate.



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: romilo


Conventional air strikes. That pretty much confirms the missile misfire story. A ten to twenty percent failure rate agrees with their space launch failure rate.



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: romilo


Conventional air strikes. That pretty much confirms the missile misfire story. A ten to twenty percent failure rate agrees with their space launch failure rate.



posted on Oct, 9 2015 @ 01:19 PM
link   
a reply to: romilo


Conventional air strikes. That pretty much confirms the missile misfire story. A ten to twenty percent failure rate agrees with their space launch failure rate.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join