Russia to Turkey: There’s a New Sheriff in Town: Russian Radar Locks on to Turkish Fighter Jets

originally posted by: AceWombat04

originally posted by: Willtell

originally posted by: AceWombat04
In my opinion, there is no sheriff. There is no law. There is no order. No good guys. No heroes stepping in to save the day.

Just an increasingly chaotic gyre of insanity on all sides. With innocent victims caught between, desperate for survival and some glimmer of hope. As those safe in their beds at night in the more developed, less war-torn parts of the world pick a side, and cheer it on.

Apologies for my too-apparent cynicism about this situation. Probably need sleep.

Peace.

One has to always choose the most right side in life in any given time and place

No bodies perfect.

In WWII to stop Hitler--who would kill everybody--the US allied with Stalin.

This is not WW2, and the planet as a whole does not face an existential threat. In my opinion, this is merely two powers jockeying for long term strategic position, using the ISIS crisis as a casus belli to that end, and exploiting the region in general. This is an internal civil war in a country neither side fully understands culturally, in terms of sectarian divides, or in terms of predicting any sort of definitive outcome irrespective of who "wins." It's more analogous to Vietnam than to WW2 imho.

I do not subscribe to the theory of the lesser of two evils unless a situation is far more existentially imminent than this. And even then, there is a distinction I make between deciding what the "least bad" course of action is from a purely analytical standpoint, and emotionally "siding with" one actor or another in terms of any sort of perceived altruism or moral authority.

There are no good guys here. Just national and strategic interests capitalizing on a situation that has emerged in what they would both very much like to be their spheres of influence. If I were an Iraqi or a Syrian, then I would feel the situation to be far more imminent and existential, as ISIS is certainly an existential threat to both states. And then perhaps I could feel compelled to choose a side, out of mere survival. But the West and Russia are not acting solely to defeat ISIS. That much is clear imho. They are acting to - in the case of Russia - prop up a regional ally as a hedge against their competitor's influence and to secure the port of Tartus, and - in the case of the West - improve the security of their regional aspirations footholds, and with the hope of kicking Assad out and establishing a friendly regime in Syria.

Choosing the lesser of two evils works on an analytical level. But the emotional cheering on of either side and the proclamations that one side is heroic while the other is purely selfishly motivated is what I cannot agree with personally. And there has been a lot of that lately. Meanwhile, those caught in the middle are suffering enormously daily. From refugees, to those still trapped or dying, to those who survive but lose family, or homes, or their livelihood. And as such, I cannot side with either major power alignment currently playing chess with human lives in the region.

What everyone else feels/believes is their prerogative, and I do not seek to change their minds. And I no longer engage in protracted debates on the internet as it is fruitless and a waste of time or energy, so this will be my final post in this topic about this. My approach to such discussions today is to simply state my opinion and move on.

But that is my opinion. No hostility or negativity should be inferred.

Peace.

I’m not hostile at all.

It you don’t believe in the “lesser of two evils”

Than can you believe in the most good of a choice.

No one is absolutely good nor absolutely evil

So when one judges any given situation one has to look at what is the best for a particular goal.

My goal in the Syrian crises is the best thing for the Syrian people, imo.

Not what’s best for Russia or the geopolitical schemes of the US.

A little research will reveal a sinister plot of the US to destabilize certain Arab countries to the detriment of the people there.

And subsequent acts by the US has confirmed this

Therefore the approach of Russia imo is more in tune with the goal of assisting the Syrian people, the victims of this, to a peaceful conclusion to their plight.

Following the American design will only lead to more suffering for the Syrian people

Peace

And peace to the Syrian people

I stand by my opinion as posted and will not respond further, as stated.

Peace.

a reply to: Willtell

We should all support this:

www.patreon.com...

a reply to: Xtrozero

So you are telling us you are a pilot and that those systems can diversify between 20 different beam sources and angles?
Wow.

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Xtrozero

So you are telling us you are a pilot and that those systems can diversify between 20 different beam sources and angles?
Wow.

I'm not sure your point... As we flew along the Iran Border our MAWS system would continually light up the whole time as large number of manpads would lock on us. It was just a comment, no need to get snarky...lol

a reply to: Xtrozero

Not being snarky, just wondered because you point out who is pilot or not, while leaving comments like you are.
All the while saying you get up to 20 locks at a time. So I thought, let´s test if

a) you are a pilot
b) it´s possible to know how much lock ons you have

from your answer, I gathered that the answer to those questions are both no.

I believe you flew along borders and witnessed the behavior you are describing.
Just not like you wrote initialy. I´m a little bit OCD with such things so please bear with me. Just think the next one reads your posts and assumes it´s possible to count and diversify the radar lock ons you get on a fighter plane. While that may be possible with the new F-35 sensor suit, I suspect that a sensor/antenna that detects incomming focused EM-radiation can not differ between multiple sources, unless it´s focused to a point that would make no sense or in a crude resolution like the front or back.

So you paint the target with a wide cone to have as much as surface coverage/reflections possible and thus, by overlaying several EM-beams, temporary or not, the only chance to determine different sources is when you have different devices (freq) painting your plane and a high resolved measuring range + the software to determine overlays and sweeps by different attackers. I also conclude those sensors work because a current is inducted into the sensor by the EM-radiation. By taking periodic reading you could determine the frequency, amplitude and detect overlaying signals that fall out of order. Of course you would need hyper fast processing to achieve that, taking the used frequencies into considerations (I think they use GHz range)

Not only would it not make sense unless you can rely on sophisticated targeting solutions that use the beam from the attacker to calculate an angle, guide a missle into the determined direction and let it lock on itself (I bet that´s not a safe enough solution)

I imagine, as a pilot it does not really matter in a combat situation, any lock on is bad. You evade until you break the lock like Zaphod wrote. I´m really not an expert in this field and I may overcomplicate the whole process.

I can see how you could differ between different bands and a crude direction if the sensors are spread out (are they?) but not differ between lets say 10 identical transcievers using almost (as analog circuit tolerances and athmosperic disturbances allow to) the same parameters to paint you.

At least that´s how I think it would be done or how I would come up with a solution.

originally posted by: verschickter

I believe you flew along borders and witnessed the behavior you are describing.

Just not like you wrote initialy. I´m a little bit OCD with such things so please bear with me. Just think the next one reads your posts and assumes it´s possible to count and diversify the radar lock ons you get on a fighter plane. While that may be possible with the new F-35 sensor suit, I suspect that a sensor/antenna that detects incomming focused EM-radiation can not differ between multiple sources, unless it´s focused to a point that would make no sense or in a crude resolution like the front or back.

I was on C-130s at the time. Think of hardly never seeing a warning and then as you fly along the Iran border you have so many that your head unit has these little radar symbols over lapping that you can not count them, so yes the 20 was a estimate just to establish "a lot" .

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Xtrozero

So you are telling us you are a pilot and that those systems can diversify between 20 different beam sources and angles?
Wow.

I'm not sure your point... As we flew along the Iran Border our MAWS system would continually light up the whole time as large number of manpads would lock on us. It was just a comment, no need to get snarky...lol

I thought all MANPADs were infrared targeted, not radar targeted. How would a MANPAD result in an alert?

originally posted by: stormcell
Very interesting dynamics. Turks are known to be very hot-headed when it comes to territory. You'll have businessmen go ballistic because someone cheated them in a contract or cut them off in the road.

With Russia, whatever you do to them, they'll do to you. One time one Arab fighter group seized a good few generals from the Russian embassy, and killed one to send a message. The Russians responded by seizing five generals of that fighter group and killed one of them.

Please sow the Source cz this is 100% FICTION

originally posted by: MrSpad
So wait are the Russians the victim of the aggressive Turks because they accidentally crossed the border and were chased off and at the same time the aggressive new sheriff in town locking on to a Russian plane? Russia has a small air expeditionary force in Syria that is maintain though vital air corridors. It is surrounded on every side by vastly superior air power that could cut its corridors with ease. The Russians are not going to provoke anybody that can shut them down overnight in Syria.

Russia is using the same tactic in Syria as it did in Georgia and Ukraine. It is going carve out small area with an ethnic minority that loyal to Assad and easy to defend. Hit the other rebels around Syria so ISIS takes most everything else and create a problem for Turkey, Israel and the Arab States who will now have defacto ISIS state on their borders. This is why the Russian hit the rebels that holding back ISIS from Aleppo so ISIS could advance on the city and this is why they are pushing to secure the Alawite areas that have been under threat. This has been Russias MO for some time. Small defensible area with a loyal ethnic minority and then sew chaos in the rest of the country.

You've got to be kidding me, over 90% of that Nation loves Pres. Assad not a small ETHNIC minority, why can't you show millions of Syrians calling for help to over throw P.Assad if what you said is true??

originally posted by: donktheclown
a reply to: Willtell

It now has a serious military challenge and it aint going to be messing around with any Turkish or NATO interference in its sphere of influence.

You have no "sphere of influence." Just intimidation from a half punk who bullies your neighbors. And, by the way, Turkey would turn puny, weak russiens into mulch....We'd (US) would turn them into vapor.

WHAT DID USA do after the USS Donald Cook Incident, or after Russia beat Georgia to smitheriens, Crimea Voted but USA says Annexed, so if USA says anexed what is USA gonna do, NOTHIN But complain to the UN and sit down like a WOMAN, and don't give me that Obama is a weak Democrate, if only a tough Republican like Bush Jr. Was in office" crap cuz MIGHTY RUSSIA defeand it's self by beating Georgia to the ground when Red Blooded Tough Republican Bush Jr. was in Office.

originally posted by: angeldoll
No matter how hard I try, I can't think of a scenario in this where the U.S. and Russia don't begin fighting each other.

I wonder when it's over if the Syria's will be speaking English or Russian.

Trust me USS AINT WINNING WW-3, OUR MILITARY IS NO MATCH FOR RUSSIA, YOU SHOULD DO SOME NON-AMERICAN RESEAR H ON THE CAPABILITIES OF THE RUSSIAN MIL.

originally posted by: mbkennel

I thought all MANPADs were infrared targeted, not radar targeted. How would a MANPAD result in an alert?

I'm not an expert on the ground to air, Iraq has a lot protecting it's borders, about 10,000 or better SA-XX I'm sure along it. By saying Manpad I miss spoke in saying it in a general sense.

originally posted by: ATSWATCHER

I wonder when it's over if the Syria's will be speaking English or Russian.

Trust me USS AINT WINNING WW-3, OUR MILITARY IS NO MATCH FOR RUSSIA, YOU SHOULD DO SOME NON-AMERICAN RESEAR H ON THE CAPABILITIES OF THE RUSSIAN MIL.

Have they been at war for 15 years improving their designs in real world combat? The bottom line is Russia has always lacked in performance and reliability. Yes, they may be better now, but that doesn't make them better than the US. I don't see them magically getting better than their track record in the past.

Turkey is violating airspace of its' neighbours all the time, for example:

link

A formation of Turkish fighter jets violated Greek airspace a total of 20 times on Wednesday before being chased off by Greek aircraft, Kathimerini English reports. A total of six Turkish fighter jets flying in formation carried out repeated violations of Greek airspace, according to the newspaper, which is one of the most respected in Greece. The reported violations took place in Greek airspace over the north, central, and southern Aegean Sea.

but you don't see western corrupted media screaming about it...

Turkey is also violating Syria airspace, so Syria (with the help of the Russians) has every right to lock them on their radar...

a reply to: Willtell

No offense to the OP, but this is not news. So Russia locked onto some Turkish jets. Ok. The news worthy part of this if true is that they flew into a sovereign country and threatened the local defence force with murder. War planes shoot things. Its a message, but one sent with death as the signature. I dont see how this is praise worthy except from violent animal men.

Russia would need to actully shoot for me to care. This is the global equivalent of a scrappy jerk kid from the bronx brandishing a gun on some douchebag in staten Island at a club in staten island because he is full of it and thinks the bronx is better than the rest of the whole country.

Oh, and I will sooner remove my organs than trade American exceptionalism for Russian exceptionalism. Thats bat crap insane. Talk about programing.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: ATSWATCHER

I wonder when it's over if the Syria's will be speaking English or Russian.

Trust me USS AINT WINNING WW-3, OUR MILITARY IS NO MATCH FOR RUSSIA, YOU SHOULD DO SOME NON-AMERICAN RESEAR H ON THE CAPABILITIES OF THE RUSSIAN MIL.

Have they been at war for 15 years improving their designs in real world combat? The bottom line is Russia has always lacked in performance and reliability. Yes, they may be better now, but that doesn't make them better than the US. I don't see them magically getting better than their track record in the past.

1. What track record, lets see 9 1/2 years in Astan & just over 15k Soviet Soilder KIA A tad under 36k WIA Killed over 1 Million Afgahns Never had majority of bases captured. never had all those Helecopter/ Planes shot down with weak Stingers like U.S. says on T.V.

U.S. Spent 10 years in Nam lost 58k, 150+ WIA ( Wounded In Action)

DesertStorm Iraq didn't have 1991 era Planes Tanks against Coalition yet we are to believe the Russians BEST tech has been fought and we USA beat it, you sound like U believe lies like Iraq had T- 72 ' s, in 8/8/08The U.S. & IDF gave thier best Tech to Georgia and in : Days the poorly trained/ equiped 58th Brigade of Russia wipped them 100%

a reply to: Xtrozero
No hate:
So what you really should have wrote:

When I was passenger in a plane along the border of Iran, we got a lot lock ons.

No man pads, not being a pilot and certainly from your wording, I conclude, not being an radar operator on that craft.
So with your inital post I adressed you made several false impressions to the reader. Pulling back statement after statement when questions got preciser. Is that right?

Example.
"Serveral times we did that and that, one time we were landing on an aircraft carrier and the hook ripped apart hiting a service men on the deck. Boy that was ugly to see!"
"We were parachuting in there and Johns chute had a hard opening, hurting his back severely, so we had to evac him."
"We were chasing two Migs for around ten minutes but had to fly back because our fuel was nearly empty.

"We = the military"

Reader get the impression I was in the plane/military/there on deck. while I just tell a anekdotal story I heard somewhere but used the "we" in a way it sounds like i was there, leaving the door open to back out an say "we as a military". Get what I mean?

a reply to: verschickter

Our system had about 8 warning lights located below a small screen that had concentric circles that designated by each circle the approximate distance to the radar that had you locked up. The distance was indicated by a computer generate line on the screen that pointed in the direction of the lock on.

I do not remember what each of the 8 warning lights said except for a yellow "READY flashing light, a red "Fired" light , AAA, and G-lardo.. For some reason the G-LARDO was the one that always seemed the biggest and baddest ?

This was in the 1970s so I can only assume the technology has improved. It was not unusual to see the ready light flashing continuously with AAA lit and one or two missile batteries buttons also lighted.

Our scope in the cockpit was only about 3 inches across in the self contained unit; but it worked really well as far as direction and distance to a radar.

I do not remember the military designation of the unit but we calledl ours the RAWS system Radar activated warning system; but that was pilot talk.. it might have been a derivative or the actual AN/ALR-69 but I honestly don't remember... it worked and we used it so enough said... In a high threat area the yellow flashing light was continuously lit and flashing... you got used to it.. When the red "Fired" light went off you had at most a couple of seconds to do your evasion thingy depending on your altitude or just sit there and watch a telephone pole size missile crammed up the butt of the aircraft you are flying. Not Nice..

The RWR system detects, identifies, processes and displays airborne interceptor (AI), surface-to-air missile (SAM) and anti-aircraft artillery (AAA) weapon systems. Situation awareness provides the crew with threat type, emitter mode and threat angle-of-arrival (AOA) information. The RWR system integrated diagnostics provide the crew and maintenance personnel system diagnostics data.

fas.org...

originally posted by: ATSWATCHER

DesertStorm Iraq didn't have 1991 era Planes Tanks against Coalition yet we are to believe the Russians BEST tech has been fought and we USA beat it, you sound like U believe lies like Iraq had T- 72 ' s, in 8/8/08The U.S. & IDF gave thier best Tech to Georgia and in : Days the poorly trained/ equiped 58th Brigade of Russia wipped them 100%

You need to come a little farther than 1991 which was 25 years ago. I was in everyone of those since the early 80s. My point is America has been testing and improving their war capabilities in ALL areas since 2001. Right now would not be a good time to "test" Americas capabilities... you can emote all day doesn't change the fact that we been war minded for the last 15 years and Russia at best plays war games.