F 22 and 4 Tomahawks Are Destroyed by Syria : NRT TV

reply to post by Amagnon


You've never seen what Aegis can do have you. Five Arleigh Burke class ships, linked together aren't going to get "overwhelmed" easily. It would take just about every missile Syria has to get to them, all launched at the same time. The AN/SPY-1D radar is capable of search, track, and missile guidance with up to 100 targets. The only thing limiting the Burke is how many missiles the VLS holds.

Yes, yes, I know, the P800 is the big game changer right? Wrong.

The US Navy SeaRAM (RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile) has gone 10 for 10 against real anti-ship missiles, and Vandal targets at speeds up to Mach 2.5, while sea skimming, diving onto the ship, climbing for the terminal pop-up maneuver, and flying in trail with each other.

Originally posted by Catacomb

Originally posted by Amagnon


Heh - hubris out of ignorance - very amusing.

The military capabilities of Syria and Iran are extremely formidable - they have the capacity to sink the entire US fleet, the real question is whether they will decide to take that course of action.

Are you out of your mind? The entire US fleet?

Agreed. Not unless Iran or Syria has those huge robots from the movie "Pacific Rim"

Wouldn't they send in drones to smoke out any ground to air based systems, then take them out with medium ranged missiles?

That being said, this is an Muslim problem, and it should be left to the Muslims.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Amagnon

 

You've never seen what Aegis can do have you. Five Arleigh Burke class ships, linked together aren't going to get "overwhelmed" easily. It would take just about every missile Syria has to get to them, all launched at the same time. The AN/SPY-1D radar is capable of search, track, and missile guidance with up to 100 targets. The only thing limiting the Burke is how many missiles the VLS holds.

Yes, yes, I know, the P800 is the big game changer right? Wrong.

The US Navy SeaRAM (RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile) has gone 10 for 10 against real anti-ship missiles, and Vandal targets at speeds up to Mach 2.5, while sea skimming, diving onto the ship, climbing for the terminal pop-up maneuver, and flying in trail with each other.

This man speaks the truth. Just our amphibious assault craft like the San Antonio class have:

2× Bushmaster II 30 mm close-in-guns
two Rolling Airframe Missile launchers
two Mk 41 eight-cell VLS for quad-packed ESSMs (if required)
Several twin M2 Browning machine gun turrets

Those aren't even a destroyer like the Arleigh Burke classes. Those puppies are even MORE decked out.

reply to post by poet1b


I'm not sure I'd expose my anti aircraft positions over a drone. Of course w/stealth bombers and jets -- everything might look like a drone on their radar. Maybe Zaph can clear that up?

If they had the ability to tell the difference say, between a B-2/F-22 and a Reaper...

Additionally, couldn't stingers or similar should-fired missiles be used to take down slower moving drones?

reply to post by poet1b


No, they'll use F-16CJs in the SEAD role most likely. They're probably flying RC-135s along the border now gathering data on where the sites are, some will be targeted with missiles, but most will probably be hit by manned aircraft in the SEAD role, firing HARM missiles.

reply to post by Zaphod58

As always Zaphod, you are correct, these new systems are designed just for this type of theater, and they are unmatched. The only limitations are the number of units in the silo, and there is many. At the end of the cold war some governments were doing all the could to maintain some form of power, while the free world kept digging on the forefront of technology. Old director type missle technology is where the other ships are currently at and this can be dealt with by EMF pulse generators, I know we have them and they are deadly to radar directed projectiles. There is just too much bs info and people buy it way too easily.

MystikMushroom
Additionally, couldn't stingers or similar should-fired missiles be used to take down slower moving drones?

Easily. That's one of the problems with the current UAV fleet (aside from control lag). They're just not survivable in more than lightly contested airspace. We'd lose half the Reaper fleet just trying to open the door into Syria.

Originally posted by Zaphod58

MystikMushroom
Additionally, couldn't stingers or similar should-fired missiles be used to take down slower moving drones?

Easily. That's one of the problems with the current UAV fleet (aside from control lag). They're just not survivable in more than lightly contested airspace. We'd lose half the Reaper fleet just trying to open the door into Syria.

Do we have anything currently that is fast enough to out run the missiles? If it were me, and we did have a plane that could out run them (and still show up on their radar), I'd make passes back and forth lighting their anti aircraft defenses up like Christmas.

ETA: This is probably why I sucked at Command & Conquer and other strategy games.

reply to post by MystikMushroom


Not in the UAV fleet. Not that we're willing to bring out anyway. We either have stealthy and slow, or non-stealthy and slow. The fastest we have that could be used here (which only a couple are flying) is the Avenger. The Avenger top speed is only around 460 mph though. It's supposed to be semi-stealthy, but it's in such limited numbers that if we lost one, or more, we wouldn't have any left.

The trick to taking out a SAM site, and something that the Wild Weasels used to be awesome at, is to give them just enough of a look to bring their radar up, but not long enough to shoot at you. Then while they're watching you, your hunting buddy pops up and shoots them in the face with a HARM. Once the radar is down, you go in and blow the rest of it to hell.

reply to post by darkbake

obviously syria has modern weapons capabilities, why do you think they are inviting the US go visiting them.

...That's a clever strategy.

I suppose if we just EMP'ed them that might piss Russia and Iran off. I wonder if an EMP would be considered a "weapon of mass destruction"?

reply to post by MystikMushroom


The trick is to only take out the defenses not the entire half of the country with them.

Didn't Israel attack targets inside Syria three times since the civil war began?

reply to post by PlatinumShatinum


I believe two were confirmed, the third was allegedly Israel but was never confirmed. They've pretty much walked through the defenses without challenge.

reply to post by GonzoSinister

if they do have the surface to air equipment provided by Russia, they probably can down the F-22 if they were really trying...

I doubt the Russian stuff could down anything built in the last 20 years in the US. This sounds like a load of BS to me. Top of the line Russian stuff doesn't seem to work to well against top of the line NATO stuff in any conflict in the last 30 years.

Originally posted by GonzoSinister
if they do have the surface to air equipment provided by Russia, they probably can down the F-22 if they were really trying...

Just like all the "air equipment" and other bits and bobs the Russians supplied to Iraq which lasted three minutes and was about as useful as a chocolate teapot.

The OP is a hoax.

Regards

So, the Navy is much improved since the USS Stark days.

Surprised to see this thread still running?
Should have 404'd by now .
It's clearly a hoax.

Originally posted by PlatinumShatinum
Didn't Israel attack targets inside Syria three times since the civil war began?

Yes. These are the type of air defenses Isreal and the US are pros at getting through. You could always take losses do to accidents, error or dumb luck but, small scale raids using missles or stealth weapons platforms and the Syrians will not know you were there until things blow up. A full scale air campaign would be different because it would require a wider range of forces that do not have stealth capabilities. In this case command and conrol, radar, and air defenses would be hit with a suprise strike rendering the over all defense network ineffective. At that point you have asset just waiting for a air defense system to turn on so they can send a missle in its direction. If you want to stop the US or other western forces you need to contest command of the skies with your own aircraft backed by ground to air defenses or else your defenses just become targets.