Can a Su-22 carry chemical weapons (such as Sarin gas)?

Hi all,

I have a question for you guys. Can a Su-22 carry chemical weapons (such as Sarin gas)? Can the bombs this aircraft carries be filled with gas or liquid chemical weapons? I decided to post this question here because it's a technical question about aircraft. I think this simple question can make or break the mainstream media narrative about Syrian Su-22's dropping chemical weapons in Khan Shaykhun.

They can carry napalm and nukes so I don't see why chemical weapons would be different.

a reply to: TheBandit795

As you know yourself the answer is yes, if a plane can carry ordnance and all fighter air craft can, then it can carry an appropriately packed chemical weapon ordnance.
The only difference is in the content of the delivery system, in place of explosives a liquid under pressure that turn's to gas when the missile or bomb hit's the target, sometime's, usually with a small explosive to help deliver and disperse the agent.

a reply to: TheBandit795

The only difference between a chemical and regular bomb is that the payload is replaced. With a nuclear weapon you have special communication protocols between the aircraft and weapon. With chemical weapons, it's just like the aircraft was carrying a normal high explosive weapon.

a reply to: TheBandit795

Air craft carry liquid fuel, on board and in wing tanks.

Napalm was a chemical weapon too.

So are air fuel bombs.

Question: Why the hell would Assad bomb his own people with Sarin at a time when he's winning the war against terrorism in his country? Why would he carry such an attack to a place that has little military value like Idlib Province? He knows the west is waiting to pounce on any infraction, it would be stupid at this point to give the west pretext to escalate hostilities.

Which by the way seems to have happened, even before any investigation into the 'chemical attack' has begun.

The Syrian army dismantled its chemical apparatus two years ago, the process was monitored and confirmed.

The Syrian army dismantled its chemical apparatus two years ago, the process was monitored and confirmed.

Would you would be willing to testify under oath, in a court of law that was factual information ?

Buck

a reply to: intrptr

Why the hell would Assad bomb his own people with Sarin at a time when he's winning the war against terrorism in his country

I asked the same question in another thread...he stand's to gain nothing

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: intrptr

Why the hell would Assad bomb his own people with Sarin at a time when he's winning the war against terrorism in his country

I asked the same question in another thread...he stand's to gain nothing

Theres your sign.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Zaphod...
U are my aeronautical knowledge hero...
I don't say this lightly but I want to reiterate how much I appreciate your posts and your contribution to the fabric of ATS…

While I rarely rarely comment, I tend to read most, if not all of your posts…

-Chris
Loyal Zaphod Groupie

a reply to: Christosterone

Z has a fan club, you should get on the mailing list.

a reply to: TheBandit795

Russian air-dropped chemical weapons employ the same casings as general purpose bombs. They are distinguishable primarily by their markings, typically bright green bands painted on the nose or tail end.

Thank you all for the answers

a reply to: flatbush71

There is a U.N. report about this. I'll post it when I get back to a pc.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: TheBandit795

Air craft carry liquid fuel, on board and in wing tanks.

Napalm was a chemical weapon too.

So are air fuel bombs.

Question: Why the hell would Assad bomb his own people with Sarin at a time when he's winning the war against terrorism in his country? Why would he carry such an attack to a place that has little military value like Idlib Province? He knows the west is waiting to pounce on any infraction, it would be stupid at this point to give the west pretext to escalate hostilities.

Which by the way seems to have happened, even before any investigation into the 'chemical attack' has begun.

The Syrian army dismantled its chemical apparatus two years ago, the process was monitored and confirmed.

Assad has been bombing his own people for years. Chemical weapons allow him to do it much more efficiently.

a reply to: intrptr

Those are not Assads own people. Its a complicated situation but Assad is a Alawite Muslim which is the minority in Syria and he has little support among the other factions or sects of Islam which include Sunnis, Shia, Wahabbi's and Christians. The Assad family dynasty has always used overwhelming terror to maintain power in a country they are out numbered in. It is why the regime has always been "brutal", they have to control the opposition or be run over. The Alawites are a Secular sect of Islam, which is in direct contradiction of the others in the region which is why we see large support from other non-secular countries like the Saudi's to remove him from power.

In the past typical chemical weapons attacks have been carried by rocket assist, large chemical tanks fitted with bursting charges, fired indiscriminately against civilian targets. These are not guided weapons, but classed as area munitions having the most effect on massed 'combatants'. In the case of Syria this has been the centers of civilian populations.

Heres video of one such attack--And the expended weapon...

image

a reply to: DJMSN

Those are not Assads own people. Its a complicated situation but Assad is a Alewife Muslim which is the minority in Syria and he has little support among the other factions or sects of Islam which include Sunnis, Shia, Wahabbi's and Christians.

Those are "not Syrians" got it. Chemical weapons attacks via canister or unguided rocket are indiscriminate, point and shoot into the largest mass of population , regardless of how you cut up the humanity.

it is not a tactic employed by a government against an enemy hiding in the bombed out rubble. Its a terrorist weapon designed to arouse emotions in the west against Assad and the Syrian Army.

But you could show me the results of (any) investigation into Wednesdays attack and the weapon employed, the device components found after the attack... (?)

I didn't see any of that leading me to believe one way or another the attack was carried by Syrian military personnel. Just cries of outrage and the dead baby pictures in the UN and the mani stream media.

a reply to: flatbush71

Would you would be willing to testify under oath, in a court of law that was factual information ?

Buck

Thanks for not replying direct to my inbox so I have to stumble upon it here. (?!)

Despite others attempts to bury the truth (dummy up), the whole process was carefully monitored and confirmed.

Wiki

a reply to: moebius

Assad has been bombing his own people for years. Chemical weapons allow him to do it much more efficiently.

Crap. Besides chemical weapons are the antithesis of "efficient", its the terrorists holding people hostage to protect them from airstrikes that end up getting civilians killed by Syrian strikes because they can't kill the terrorists hiding in their midst without collateral damage to civilian populations.

We'll just ask the insurgents to come out from hiding in the cities behind human shields and engage in open battle...

Edit:

image search

Sorry OP, last off topic post