Huthi rebels take down a MQ-9 Reaper

Even the ZU-23-2 could be a chance with its range of 2.5km.

a reply to: Blackfinger

Against a Reaper? Easily.

a reply to: Blackfinger




lucky # would be needed and a competent user

a reply to: penroc3
HA! I don't really know how effective those are against modern aviation. Obviously they only need to land a few hits to do damage. but most of today's stuff is too fast I assume. I see that most of those in the region are being slapped onto trucks and shot on the ground at their enemies.


Seen them as long range ground fire in Syria, Libya, Iraq and Yemen by every side all these years now. I may have seen militants try to take down air targets with them in a handful of videos, none of them succeeded though.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

They can be

Thats an A-10 which is way way more maneuverable than a Reaper. That being said it was alot lower, and since the A-10 is built to absorb damage, it did not get shot down....

a reply to: worldstarcountry

The ZSU-23-4 is still one of the most feared AA guns out there. The early models had problems with the radar at lower ranges and altitudes, but in 1999 they introduced the ZSU-23-4M4 and 4M5. The upgrades added improvements to the vehicle itself, the addition of four Igla missiles, improved radar, and the ability to integrate into an air defense network.

Other countries have done other modernization programs to them. India added an AESA radar to them, Poland added Grom missiles, and a fully passive targeting system, and the Ukraine added Strela-10 missiles, upped the ammunition, and mounted the turret from a ZSU-23-4 onto a T-80 chassis.

a reply to: Blackfinger

...and this is what happens when they decide they are tired of their human overlords.

a reply to: Sammamishman

The 23-4, prior to the 4M, was notorious for misfires after the barrels heated up. The barrels would heat, which would cook off the round that was chambered, which would bring another round into position, which would cook off, and on and on.

a reply to: Zaphod58
I agree the system itself is still lethal, but not in the configuration found through the current hotspots. Mainly because the majority of them that are hostile to our forces are mounted on the back of pickups that start rocking like a boat in choppy water after a single burst.


The ones that are more effective hooked up to the digital systems and networks you describe are more likely to sit in the inventories of organized national forces with state backing. These militia forces all over the WW3 battlefield are not really integrated to challenge our air assets, which is why they are pretty much being used exclusively on the ground at their rivals or at the very most on helicopters, or as illustrated a few posts back, lucky shooting on an A-10 providing close air support.


You got to be flying real low and or slow to get hit by the militia truck mounted AA guns in 2017 against modern air. Even this reaper was shot down by a missile, not a gun.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Most guns, even the advanced ones, are only really useful against low flying targets, such as a strafing run, or helicopter. A fighter on a bomb run is moving pretty fast even for a modernized 23-4 to hit.