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

a reply to: 727Sky
I enjoyed this post of yours
That´s why I´m still here on ATS, posts like this.
Your mention of RWR will help me figure out how those radar beams are detected. Obviously it has to be some kind of antenna where current is induced. Probably more than one, I conclude three in a wing tip wing configuration or something like that to get them spaced equal and allow for easy triangulation? You would not need them equally spaced but it makes the math easier. Maybe I´m totally wrong with this ^^ But I´ll dig into this, it´s been something I´m thinking about for some time but never really took my time to look up.

a reply to: Xtrozero

You know how cripled and not-emp, hardened most of your (USA) satelites are by now? And not only the USA ones. It takes one small nuke in the kT range from korea at the right place to charge up the ionosphere, kill the already dying satelites either balistic or radiation wise slowly after another. And they can do it without much consequences, because if they do it the right way, they will blind themselves but they do not rely on sat-com like others and everything the USA can do is watch, at least legaly. You can not communicate through a charged up ionosphere to your satelites. You would be blind, your government would start pulling public sources, slowly crippling the own infrastructure because you have to decide if people can pay with their credit cards or if you can get communication to fleets in the pacific. No satcom for any fighter. Then they will be forced to emply micro satelites but with what? Can they get up in time? Or do they have to use their secret assets to bring them out on time?
And what´s that black van doing outside of my hou

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Xtrozero
No hate:
So what you really should have wrote:

I'm a commercial pilot among other things though I do not fly for a living any more, I was aircrew for 28 years in the Air Force C-141s C-130s, and being that we flew and were 99% involved in just flying the mission. So if I say "we" I mean my crew on the airplane, not "we" as just being in the Air Force.

You and others might treat this as a major interest or hobby, wanting to know the ins and outs of all this and it is really not mine, nor was it even when I was activity flying. I made simple comment that flying along the Iran border lite up our defensive systems to the point they were basically uncountable, something that we would never see any other place. Nothing more or less, of my "20" for some reason got some of you arm chair fighter pilots panties in a bunch in thinking I meant I was in a fighter and could discern 20 separate targets at once was not my intent, just your assumption, which I addressed.

originally posted by: verschickter
a reply to: Xtrozero

You know how cripled and not-emp, hardened most of your (USA) satelites are by now? And not only the USA ones. It takes one small nuke in the kT range from korea at the right place to charge up the ionosphere, kill the already dying satelites either balistic or radiation wise slowly after another. And they can do it without much consequences, because if they do it the right way, they will blind themselves but they do not rely on sat-com like others and everything the USA can do is watch, at least legaly. You can not communicate through a charged up ionosphere to your satelites. You would be blind, your government would start pulling public sources, slowly crippling the own infrastructure because you have to decide if people can pay with their credit cards or if you can get communication to fleets in the pacific. No satcom for any fighter. Then they will be forced to emply micro satelites but with what? Can they get up in time? Or do they have to use their secret assets to bring them out on time?
And what´s that black van doing outside of my hou

We can both agree the first nuke to go off any where will be a new game. I think we are the 800 pound gorilla in any game though... Not sure your post though, our military is not totally reliant on sat, and typically operates well without....you would be closer to suggest mIRC went down hehe.

a reply to: Xtrozero
And I thank you for that, not everyone would have done it like you did in a calm manner. If I come over rude it´s never my intention. I was not with anyone and did not notice you were already busy fighting acg´s. I´m not an armchair general, I explained it to you what my reason was in my second post, I think. My wow, by the way was not sarcastic it was a real wow because I´ve not thought it would be possible. To be honest, there was a ! behind the wow and exactly because of that I decided to excange it with a fullstop so it has less "hardness" but that fired back I think.
The wording "So you tell us", if you translate it in my language is not really offensive or sly or anything. It´s just a rehash of what someone said, in your own words and the "So you tell us" equals with something like (translated) "Correct me if I´m wrong".
;-)
I have the feeling you took the other post above yours as a bite (the one about sats). Also, just conversation I think I need to make that clear in a signature or something, do not expect rudeness, expect that I am just tollpatschig (google it ;-) with words. This is not my first language and what we learned in school 40 years ago in english is not comparable with todays english. So bear with me, in general I never ever mean something rude an when I do I make it exceptionally clear so it gets deleted ^^

originally posted by: verschickter

This is not my first language and what we learned in school 40 years ago in english is not comparable with todays english. So bear with me, in general I never ever mean something rude an when I do I make it exceptionally clear so it gets deleted ^^

No problem...hehe

English might as well not my first language either, but unfortunately it is the only one I know. :p

a reply to: Xtrozero
No, of course not. But what I wrote goes deeper. Those are not my own words. Those are the words of the former U.S. Space Command director of wargaming, and a former National Security Agency counterterrorism adviser of the USA and two former navy test pilots.

The predicted results were devastating. No high bandwith data channels to your carrier groups. No datalinks to fighters in the air, no datalink to troops in the field. GPS guided bombs? Rendered useless. tungsten rods in NEO? Not at home. Renderes useless. You may not use satelites directly. But the technical infrastructure you rely on, does rely on satelites. Basically every mobile part of your military does rely on satelites in a way or another. If not directly, then over three corners. Ships and planes definitly need sat com. Without, you have no high bandwith data channels, just the good old radio and even that will not work if you´re out of sight with the coast. You can not use the ionosphere for HAM radio operations. The only thing would be LF or a radio chain all the way to the cost every 30 miles or so. It might be ok for single missions to not use them or not have them aviable. This will last months, until the ionosphere is going back to normal and by then, your GPS degrades every day because the ones that you can not reach can´t be readjusted (has to be done now and then because they need to sync the atomic clocks. So even if you have most of the GPS still running, one or two satelites in sight are enough to crippling signal runtimes making your GPS receiver go haywire.

Yes I have the impression (see what I did there, I´m learning) that the USA has the best hardware and good training. Actual combat knowledge (sounds like it´s a good thing here). However, never underestimate any combatant.

originally posted by: verschickter
This will last months, until the ionosphere is going back to normal and by then, your GPS degrades every day because the ones that you can not reach can´t be readjusted (has to be done now and then because they need to sync the atomic clocks. So even if you have most of the GPS still running, one or two satelites in sight are enough to crippling signal runtimes making your GPS receiver go haywire.

I understand your point, but this affects everyone. My view is I started flying in the early 80s and didn't see GPS common until 20 years later. Our intel and coms will take a big hit, but we would not be crippled and IMHO still better off than whoever. We might still get there with the Kessler Syndrome with one sat taking out others to just grow until most are destroyed and we have a huge belt of space junk.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Only the region the EMP is setoff in the above scenario the EMP does not even reach the ground. True, everyone using GPS will be have problems. When the iraq war started we had to cancel the diving trips because you can only find that special reef with gps or if there is absolutly no wind. They (USA) altered there settings. That was in egypt where we were.

Crippled infrastructure, not the whole country crippled ;-). Because then, when own assets are not reachable or damaged, they have to rely on private sats and landline connections. I know your government has a own network, seperated from the internet but when it needs to allocate private resources, those ports are not aviable to the services they normally manage. I know not everything runs over sat links and depends on it. Image credit card terminals overloaded because the landlines that the private satelites finally connect to are not on a seperate network. Suddenly, not only the parts of the global WAN that would be routed over sats are routed through land and sealines but part of the now military used private sats also need to route through those lines. Sure, that last part is not the big one as normal private traffic would be replaced with that.

They might get there but gps guided bombs will miss their target if they can´t setup the receivers to ignore a certain sat. I´m positive this has been ruled out and it´s basically "just" a software update. If I could find the damned book, I would scan some pages for you.

I´m not mentioning glonas because that system might have the same problem, unless the russians can link their sats with another to reach those above the charged area in the ionosphere.

Give me a little time I´m currently away from my machines posting via remote because I left in the middle of writing this post. I will try to show you what happens if shtf, what then will happen will nearly nullify the continental out and inbound traffic from the american continent to the the east via seacable. Regardless who´s fighting who. Why that is so and why turkey, wich bandwith amounts around 60% of the total middle east bandwith plays a role in this.

And why US bases in Germany are also crucial to this. I´ll have fancy maps and charts to help me get my point across. It actually is part of a mega thread i´m planing for months now. I´m not sure if I get it done this year. Just want to make sure this is free of typos, water proof against the expected haters that just cant comprehend this and understandable. That´s why I was so purposefully assholish to everyone saying one damn wrong thing on all the AI threads some months ago, this was psychologic to filter out the two people here who show enough brain and knowledge to let them peer review the whole thing. Those two people do not know but if they read this here, they will know. There is also a special reason why I came up with EMP. In this whole context.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

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.

Lets see "April 2014" Russia had an Upgraded Su-24 "M" KNOCKOUT ALL the Electronics of The"USS Donald Duck ("Opps I meant Cook") and WHERE IS/WAS this mythical CAPABILITIES of The U.S. Navy, AND I WANT A TANGIBLE ANSWER NOTHING WHICH is emotional?????????

originally posted by: ATSWATCHER
Lets see "April 2014" Russia had an Upgraded Su-24 "M" KNOCKOUT ALL the Electronics of The"USS Donald Duck ("Opps I meant Cook") and WHERE IS/WAS this mythical CAPABILITIES of The U.S. Navy, AND I WANT A TANGIBLE ANSWER NOTHING WHICH is emotional?????????

I do not know what is more impressive, the way you switch between caps and no caps or that you needed four edits for one sentence.

The only source for this information is Russia which is state controlled media and is notorious for age old propaganda tactics. There is no proof of any of this other than an unarmed SU--24 did flybys which Russia likes to do on occasion. The follow-up story that 27 people resigned from the military is also not true and doesn't even make sense, you don't just quite.

If you want to base Russia superior abilities to win on this, then best of luck. I on the other hand will rely on 15 years of real fighting and improving every step of the way. Also, your assumption is that Russia tech is much better than the US and that is just not true either.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: ATSWATCHER
Lets see "April 2014" Russia had an Upgraded Su-24 "M" KNOCKOUT ALL the Electronics of The"USS Donald Duck ("Opps I meant Cook") and WHERE IS/WAS this mythical CAPABILITIES of The U.S. Navy, AND I WANT A TANGIBLE ANSWER NOTHING WHICH is emotional?????????

I do not know what is more impressive, the way you switch between caps and no caps or that you needed four edits for one sentence.

The only source for this information is Russia which is state controlled media and is notorious for age old propaganda tactics. There is no proof of any of this other than an unarmed SU--24 did flybys which Russia likes to do on occasion. The follow-up story that 27 people resigned from the military is also not true and doesn't even make sense, you don't just quite.

If you want to base Russia superior abilities to win on this, then best of luck. I on the other hand will rely on 15 years of real fighting and improving every step of the way. Also, your assumption is that Russia tech is much better than the US and that is just not true either.

"The unarmed flybys" IS THE PROOF tgat the used E.W. Weaponry on that Ship, that was a demo on how our criminal Gov/Mil will be delt with,

Show me what has been improoved, same 'ol C-5/ 130 Transports HEAVILY reliying on "Hoast-Nations" to " ALOW" them to use thier land for bases, small upgrades to IR Capbilities, Same ol usless M-16A2's/ M-4's same 'ol lunky unagiled muscular Soldiers who will NOT fair well against Russian Military in a real fight, I'm sure I haven't mention AH-64 Long Bows, M1A2's with thier DU Skin which has been video taped just 1-2 months ago being Destroyed by a old "Konkors" Soviet Missile, can you imagine what the newer stuffRus has will do, I'm typing faast so please forgive me if I forgot some other stuff to talk about, but now the ball is in your court, please list in 1-2-3 ORDER what are these new Capabilities PPLLEEAASSSEEEE!!!!!!!
If I'm wrong I have no problem admitting it, and I will here on ATS towho ever I have offended, But I' m not wrong, U.S.A AIN'T WINNIN WORLD WAR-3 MAN.

originally posted by: ATSWATCHER

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: ATSWATCHER
Lets see "April 2014" Russia had an Upgraded Su-24 "M" KNOCKOUT ALL the Electronics of The"USS Donald Duck ("Opps I meant Cook") and WHERE IS/WAS this mythical CAPABILITIES of The U.S. Navy, AND I WANT A TANGIBLE ANSWER NOTHING WHICH is emotional?????????

I do not know what is more impressive, the way you switch between caps and no caps or that you needed four edits for one sentence.

The only source for this information is Russia which is state controlled media and is notorious for age old propaganda tactics. There is no proof of any of this other than an unarmed SU--24 did flybys which Russia likes to do on occasion. The follow-up story that 27 people resigned from the military is also not true and doesn't even make sense, you don't just quite.

If you want to base Russia superior abilities to win on this, then best of luck. I on the other hand will rely on 15 years of real fighting and improving every step of the way. Also, your assumption is that Russia tech is much better than the US and that is just not true either.

"The unarmed flybys" IS THE PROOF that they used E.W. Weaponry on that Ship, that was a demo on how our criminal Gov/Mil will be delt with,

Show me what has been improoved, same 'ol C-5/ 130 Transports HEAVILY reliying on "Hoast-Nations" to " ALOW" them to use thier land for bases, Same ol usless M-16A2's/ M-4's same 'ol lunky unagiled muscular Soldiers who will NOT fair well against Russian Military in a real fight, I'm sure I haven't mention AH-64 Long Bows, M1A2's with thier DU Skin which has been video taped just 1-2 months ago being Destroyed by a old "Konkors" Soviet Missile, can you imagine what the newer stuffRus has will do, I'm typing fast so please forgive me if I forgot some other stuff to talk about, but now the ball is in your court, please list in 1-2-3 ORDER what are these new Capabilities PPLLEEAASSSEEEE!!!!!!!
If I'm wrong I have no problem admitting it, and I will here on ATS to who ever I have offended, But I' m not wrong, U.S.A AIN'T WINNIN WORLD WAR-3 MAN.

originally posted by: ATSWATCHER

originally posted by: ATSWATCHER

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: ATSWATCHER
Lets see "April 2014" Russia had an Upgraded Su-24 "M" KNOCKOUT ALL the Electronics of The"USS Donald Duck ("Opps I meant Cook") and WHERE IS/WAS this mythical CAPABILITIES of The U.S. Navy, AND I WANT A TANGIBLE ANSWER NOTHING WHICH is emotional?????????

I do not know what is more impressive, the way you switch between caps and no caps or that you needed four edits for one sentence.

The only source for this information is Russia which is state controlled media and is notorious for age old propaganda tactics. There is no proof of any of this other than an unarmed SU--24 did flybys which Russia likes to do on occasion. The follow-up story that 27 people resigned from the military is also not true and doesn't even make sense, you don't just quite.

If you want to base Russia superior abilities to win on this, then best of luck. I on the other hand will rely on 15 years of real fighting and improving every step of the way. Also, your assumption is that Russia tech is much better than the US and that is just not true either.

"The unarmed flybys" IS THE PROOF that they used E.W. Weaponry on that Ship, that was a demo on how our criminal Gov/Mil will be delt with,

Show me what has been improoved, same 'ol C-5/ 130 Transports HEAVILY reliying on "Hoast-Nations" to " ALOW" them to use thier land for bases, Same ol usless M-16A2's/ M-4's same 'ol lunky unagiled muscular Soldiers who will NOT fair well against Russian Military in a real fight, I'm sure I haven't mention AH-64 Long Bows, M1A2's with thier DU Skin which has been video taped just 1-2 months ago being Destroyed by a old "Konkors" Soviet Missile, can you imagine what the newer stuffRus has will do, I'm typing fast so please forgive me if I forgot some other stuff to talk about, but now the ball is in your court, please list in 1-2-3 ORDER what are these new Capabilities PPLLEEAASSSEEEE!!!!!!!
If I'm wrong I have no problem admitting it, and I will here on ATS to who ever I have offended, But I' m not wrong, U.S.A AIN'T WINNIN WORLD WAR-3 MAN.