Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumIsrael Official Says Gaza Militants Getting Anti-Aircraft Missiles From Libyan War Leftovers
By Associated Press, Updated: Wednesday, October 17, 12:06 PM
JERUSALEM — A top Israeli defense official says Gaza is being flooded with sophisticated weapons from Libya and that the anti-aircraft missile fired last week at an Israeli helicopter likely originated there.
Yossi Kuperwasser, who directs the Ministry of Strategic Affairs, says “significant” numbers of weapons have been smuggled into the territory from Libya since the fall last year of dictator Moammar Gadhafi. The country is awash in weapons after the eight-month civil war and has weak central authority.
Palestinian militants in Gaza launched a shoulder-fired Strela missile at an Israeli helicopter last week, but missed. It was the first such launch from Gaza.
MORE...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/israel-official-says-gaza-militants-getting-anti-aircraft-missiles-from-libyan-war-leftovers/2012/10/17/972fdfb6-1874-11e2-a346-f24efc680b8d_story.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
pennylane100
(3,425 posts)you can expect a little resistance.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Confused by your remark.
pennylane100
(3,425 posts)and I guess that either I misunderstood the headline, I believe the article mentioned that a rocket fired into Israel possibly originated in Gaza. As a country that is blockaded by Israel and according to a UN report is technically under occupation, it would not be hard to imagine a motive for firing rockets into Israel, or am I missing something.
I am not supporting such attacks on Israel, but when a country, or state, has nothing left to lose, they will turn to violence.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)I'm not sure those who would fire rockets at Israel have the best interests of their fellow Gazans at heart.
King_David
(14,851 posts)Expect extreme violence and retribution .
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Just wait until the Jihadi foreign fighters in Syria turn their attention and weapons back on target. It will make Israel and the neocons wish they had never heard of PNAC or "regime change". The 1996 "Clean Break" regional regime change document prepared for Netanyahu, here: http://www.israeleconomy.org/strat1.htm
More on this incident, the spreading MANPAD threat, and laser counter-measures for airliners marketed by an Israeli company (which don't work against more sophisticated SAM-16 and SAM-24 missiles), here: http://www.israeldefense.com/?CategoryID=483&ArticleID=1694
SESKATOW
(99 posts)What do you say HRW & Amnesty international?
don't know about HRW or Amnesty
SESKATOW
(99 posts)
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)Iran some Palestinian groups specifically Hamas and the Syrian government are allies of Iran
King_David
(14,851 posts)'Israel the Most Important Ally '
Ya think that could maybe perhaps be a good reason ? 
SESKATOW
(99 posts)King_David
(14,851 posts)According to ALL elected and nominated Democrats. Including the President .Best to remember this.
SESKATOW
(99 posts)
bemildred
(90,061 posts)I realize you think there is no difference, but are you in favor of disarming the insurgents or arming the Palestinians?
SESKATOW
(99 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)Thanks for clarifying.
SESKATOW
(99 posts)BTW - which party would I vote for if I wanted NO WAR??
bemildred
(90,061 posts)And neither party (I assume you are talking in USA) will give you no war.
SESKATOW
(99 posts)in other words -a vote for capitalism is a vote for war
King_David
(14,851 posts)Oki Doki
Lets vote for the communists then comerade..
Nastarovia
SESKATOW
(99 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)
SESKATOW
(99 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)SESKATOW
(99 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)SESKATOW
(99 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... if someone made it very far past 100 posts.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Happens on both "sides".
SESKATOW
(99 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)Seems more like your cup of tea, given my usual characterization round here.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... there are two things you never do with crazy ...
argue with it or have sex with it.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Libya added to it as well.
There are viable defenses against the 16 & 24. Employment tactics are also very important.
Palestinians shooting at airlines would be right up there with the Taliban shooting young girls.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)There are those who want, promptly after the US elections, the Obama Administration to let loose upon Syria the freshly imported foreign fighters and their newly acquired MANPADs, many of both sourced from Eastern Libya. By creating a sanctuary for Jihadis in the area of Libya where these fighters are trained, those who organized the Libyan and Syrian regime change operations also created a safe zone where the Israelis and CIA cannot operate in the normal way against the sources that are now resupplying al-Qaeda and Hamas operations.
Do you now understand the dilemma this has created, and the magnitude of the threat to civil aviation around the world posed by an extra ten to 15,000 MANPADs, even if most of these are relatively unsophisticated SA-7s?
LIBYAN RECRUIT REVEALS HOW TERRORISTS ARE TRAINED IN LIBYA, FUNDED BY ARAB GULF COUNTRIES, SENT TO SYRIA
Posted on August 26, 2012 by Veritas
Aug 26, 2012
DAMASCUS, (SANA) – In confessions broadcast by the Syrian Arab TV on Sunday after the 8:30 PM news, Libyan terrorist Ibrahim Rajab al-Farajani said that societies and organizations funded by Arab Gulf countries and affiliated with Al Qaeda train terrorists in Libya then send them to Syria via Turkey.
also see:
LARGEST SHIPMENT OF LIBYAN WEAPONS EN ROUTE TO TERRORISTS IN SYRIA
LIBYA’S LIFG ARE AL QAEDA AND THEY ARE WAGING WAR AGAINST THE SYRIAN PEOPLE
LIBYANS AND TUNISIANS WORKING WITH ARMED TERRORISTS IN SYRIA
LIBYAN MAN INDICTED, 20 CHARGED FOR SMUGGLING WEAPONS TO SYRIAN “REBELS”
SYRIA: THE EXPLOSIVE LUTFALLAH II ARMS SMUGGLING SCANDAL
NATO, AL QAEDA CAUGHT SHIPPING WEAPONS TO FSA BY SEA VIA BENGHAZI
SYRIAN CONSUL AND EMBASSY STAFF IN TRIPOLI ATTACKED
BALHAJ’S AL QAEDA STRIKES IN DAMASCUS
FREE SYRIAN ARMY COMMANDED BY MILITARY GOVERNOR OF TRIPOLI
LIBYA AND THE GLOBALIST PLANS TO DESTABILIZE SYRIA
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)My point is that it is not news for those knowledgeable in the matter.
US and Israeli forces know it better than most and most Israeli airlines now have upgraded equipment.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Now, the consequences of Libyan regime change are beginning to become apparent to a wider public, and even Romney's advisors see that this is a disaster in the making, even if the candidate is unable or unwilling to articulate exactly what the source of the danger is.
I can only hope that the neocons have not brought down yet another regime.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)And many of those supporting it in the US government and elsewhere were and remain clueless about the cascade issues that would follow.
On DU many praised the regime change and other parts of the so called Arab Spring not realizing what would also be unleashed.
Yet another case of mostly well intentioned people failing to realize what would happen.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)As always, most "unintended consequences" and "intelligence failures" are actually the predictable result of policy failure.
US Counterterrorism during the Bush years, in particular, has the seminal flaw that the same people who develop policy are also charged with carrying it out, and in many cases, with addressing failures. That's really 10 policy failures that became systemic failure.
We saw that with 9/11 where Cofer Black and others who led CIA CTC who were most culpable for (failure 1) allowing the AQ attack cells into the US, (failure 2) apparently lost control over them, (failure 3) actively obstructed the investigations of other agencies, (failure 4) were, after the attack occurred (failure 5) assigned to locate and capture or destroy UBL and his immediate circle in Afghanistan, (failure 6) were put in charge of capturing and interrogating "high value" AQ figures worldwide, (failure 7) were allowed honorable retirement and to join a privatized intelligence firm (Blackwater/Xe) and (failure 8) handed large contracts for managing assassinations and CIA drone programs against AQ remnants, and even after all these failures, (failure 9) have never been in any way sanctioned or made accountable for malfeasance. Black is now one of Romney's key national security advisors (failure 10, one hopes). That is policy failure and systemic failure.
Unfortunately, we are seeing the same pattern emerging where failed policies are followed by a failure of accountability. This country can not afford further system failures.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)with I suspect Egypt receiving at least some of the bill
bemildred
(90,061 posts)to neglect these little issues. Iraq-like.
And yes, there wil be hell to pay, in fact there is hell to pay. But don't expect anybody to take responsibility or change their ways. They are never wrong, it's just bad luck or something.
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)cause someones going to play with them and it can be quite profitable for the finders too
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)The "sophisticated weapon" was most likely an SA-7. They are cheap and cheerful 1960s Soviet weapons and the article admits that Gazan groups have had them kicking around for years.
The reason they don't get fired more often is lack of opportunity. SA-7s don't have much range, so you need to be able to put your hands on one essentially straight away when a helicopter flies overhead, which is an opportunity that probably doesnt come along very often.
You also need a fair bit of nous to know how to fire one. The radar on the things is rudimentary, you need to wait until AFTER the helicopter flies ahead, and then fire it directly at the arse of the heli so the missile has the clearest heat signature that it can possibly get. You can forget about firing them at fixed wing aircraft, too slow.
Hezb used to have these in the old days in Lebanon, they have better kit now. The other militias did not bother with MANPADs, from a guerilla point of view they are useless. They are heavy and conspicuous and you hardly ever get the chance to fire them, unless you are in an environment with wide open spaces (such as Afghanistan, where the Taliban put Stingers to good use against the Soviets).
The IRA for example made a big show of getting Stinger missiles but never even managed to even fire one at a British heli. They brought down two helicopters during the Troubles, but with machine guns instead.
At the end of the day, there is nothing to tie this to the Libyans.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)I'll repeat for your benefit what I said to "progressive professor" above. Neither of you seem to appreciate the dilemma that Libyan Jihadis and MANPADs (even SA-7s) pose for the US and Israel.
We can thank those who have engineered the regime change operations in Libya and Syria for creating this problem, which over the coming months and years will only spread and get worse.
There are those who, promptly after the US elections, want the Obama Administration to let loose upon Syria the foreign fighters and their newly acquired MANPADs now waiting in Turkey, many of both sourced from Eastern Libya. By creating a sanctuary for Jihadis in the area of Libya where these fighters are trained, they also created a safe zone where the Israelis and CIA cannot operate in the normal way against the sources that have resupplied al-Qaeda and Hamas operations worldwide.
Do you now understand the dilemma this has created, and the magnitude of the threat to civil aviation around the world posed by an extra ten to 15,000 MANPADs, even if most of these are relatively unsophisticated SA-7s?
By the way, you are wrong about this:
SA-7s brought down plenty of "fast mover" jets in the 1973 war, including Israeli F-4s. While military counter-measures and tactics are more effective today against the same weapon, the SA-7, a Mach 1.5 missile, remains a deadly threat to commercial airliners, and in the hands of well-trained users, are effective against most helicopters and slow and low flying aircraft.
LIBYAN RECRUIT REVEALS HOW TERRORISTS ARE TRAINED IN LIBYA, FUNDED BY ARAB GULF COUNTRIES, SENT TO SYRIA
Posted on August 26, 2012 by Veritas
Aug 26, 2012
DAMASCUS, (SANA) – In confessions broadcast by the Syrian Arab TV on Sunday after the 8:30 PM news, Libyan terrorist Ibrahim Rajab al-Farajani said that societies and organizations funded by Arab Gulf countries and affiliated with Al Qaeda train terrorists in Libya then send them to Syria via Turkey.
also see:
LARGEST SHIPMENT OF LIBYAN WEAPONS EN ROUTE TO TERRORISTS IN SYRIA
LIBYA’S LIFG ARE AL QAEDA AND THEY ARE WAGING WAR AGAINST THE SYRIAN PEOPLE
LIBYANS AND TUNISIANS WORKING WITH ARMED TERRORISTS IN SYRIA
LIBYAN MAN INDICTED, 20 CHARGED FOR SMUGGLING WEAPONS TO SYRIAN “REBELS”
SYRIA: THE EXPLOSIVE LUTFALLAH II ARMS SMUGGLING SCANDAL
NATO, AL QAEDA CAUGHT SHIPPING WEAPONS TO FSA BY SEA VIA BENGHAZI
SYRIAN CONSUL AND EMBASSY STAFF IN TRIPOLI ATTACKED
BALHAJ’S AL QAEDA STRIKES IN DAMASCUS
FREE SYRIAN ARMY COMMANDED BY MILITARY GOVERNOR OF TRIPOLI
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strela_2
As I indicated, these things have been widely circulated for a long time, and you can hit a slow moving jet airliner with just about anything if you want to.
Additionally, there is nothing to tie the particular SA-7 that was fired at the Israeli helicopters to any Libyan group. That is simply speculation by some fat, sweating post-adolescent cottage expert in his parent's basement.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)You're just cherry-picking one section dealing with the earliest version of the Strela. After 1970, the SA-7M and other improved types were far more effective than those used in that particular part of the Vietnam War.
You're in danger of being categorized as a deceptive SOB.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)it mentions one jet downed in the Vietnam war, and a subsonic jet downed during the 1973 war, and a downed subsonic jet during the 1973 war. It certainly doesnt mention dozens of combat jets being downed.
There are three mentions of the weapon being unsuited for use against combat jets:-
Number one:-
Number two:-
Number three:-
SA-7s were not that effective against fast jets, but they were the best weapon available to Arab infantry at the time.
No they weren't. The "m" suffix generally denotes fairly minor changes in Russian weapons systems, eg, the AKM rifle. The wiki confirms that the changes were in fact minor:-
As the modifications introduced with the Strela-2M were relatively minor, the process was fast and it was accepted in service already in 1970.[6] The Strela-2M replaced Strela-2 in production lines immediately. Improvements were made particularly to increase the engagement envelope of the new system:[5]
higher thrust propellant increased slant range from 3.4 to 4.2 km and ceiling from 1.5 to 2.3 km
improved guidance and control logic allowed the engagement of propeller-driven and helicopter aircraft (but not jets) approaching at a maximum speed of 150 m/s
maximum speed of receding targets was increased from 220 m/s to 260 m/s
more automated gripstock provided a simplified firing method against fast targets: a single trigger pull followed by lead and superelevation replacing the separate stages of releasing the seeker to track, and launching the missile (see Description below)
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Besides, my main point is that the SA-7 (and similar) MANPADs looted in large numbers from Libya present a deadly threat to commercial and military transports worldwide. I hope you don't disagree with that.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)struggling to barely evade a barrage of SAMs at higher altitude. Probably SA-2 GUIDELINE, SA-3 GOA, or SA-6 GAINFUL. Different missile types, but the footage is chilling (listen to the rising tone of voice, and the breathing of the pilot or weapons officer at the end).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=up82mrrqswI
BTW: in addition to SA7s, a significant number of SA-16 and SA-24s (more sophisticated MANPADs) went into the hands of various militia groups after the fall of Gadhaffi, and nobody knows where they went, as only a quarter of the estimated total of 20,000 were recovered or destroyed. Here's a video of a complete SA-24 being reassembled and mounted on a truck bed, somewhere in Libya last year:
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)I never said that SAMs were not a threat to combat jets, I said that SA-7s were not much of a threat to combat jets.
As for the video, its hard to tell, but the plane was probably hit with an SA-3 or SA-6 (not man portable) rather than a man-portable SA-7. An SA-7 has a fairly small warhead so would not normally cause that large an explosion.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Both the SA3 and SA6 are much larger than that object, which is so small you can't see anything except the exhaust plume.
SA3
SA6
The only other possibility is that it's an air-to-air missile, but definitely not a SAM3 or a 6
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)The caption says it was a Mirage brought down by an Egyptian SAM - presuming that is true, that means either an SA-2 during the war of attrition, or an SA-3, SA-6 or SA-7 during the Yom Kippur war.
However, I can't find any record on the internet of any SAM, man-portable or otherwise, having downed an Israeli mirage. There are plenty of responses to the message claiming that it is in fact not an Israeli jet at all, nor an Egyptian SAM.
So in any event, its not an SA-7, is it?
leveymg
(36,418 posts)You're not proving anything here that you can't put mustard on.
There's reference to a number of IAF F-4 Phantoms in just a single squadron falling to Egyptian and Syrian "mobile missiles" during and after the Yom Kippur War. Specifically, see, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/69_Squadron_%28Israel%29
The Yom Kippur War ended on October 24. 69 Squadron had flown 789 sorties, had lost 9 aircraft, and had shot down 10 enemy aircraft. Four airmen had been killed and eight had become prisoners of war.[42] The end of the war, however, did not spell an end to the fighting. On December 6 a mixed 69 and 119 squadrons combat air patrol over the Gulf of Suez engaged a flight of MiG-21s to score one kill, possibly two. The kill was credited to 69's Yiftach Shadmi and Meir Gur, with the MiG-21s revealed to be a part of a North Korean contingent had that deployed to Egypt during the war.[43][44] With the arrival of spring fighting also resumed in the north, where Israel and Syria had yet to sign a disengagement agreement.[45] On April 8, 1974, while on patrol against low flying Syrian helicopters, the squadron lost one of its aircraft, probably to a shoulder-launched SA-7.
But, back to the video. That's definitely not an SA-2, which is as big as a "flying telephone pole", larger than the 3 and 6. Also, the SA-2 is a mid-to-high-altitude weapon, so it's not an SA-2 in those frames. So, it's not 1967. More likely 1973 or possibly 1982, but the IAF wasn't flying many Mirages by then.
There's reference in the same article to the loss of an AIF Mirage III over Syria in 1973:
Granted, the film may have been that 69 Squadron Mirage over Syria, but who knows?
So, what can we conclude here, class? That's obviously not a SA-2, 3 or 6. That's also obviously a tailless delta-wing jet fighter, probably a Mirage. The only other possibility is a F-102 or F-106 target drone, but I don't think so. It was obviously destroyed at low altitude by what appears to be a small missile, probably a MANPAD, but possibly an AAM.
So, you think you've proved it's not an SA-7 and that Strelas can't shoot down jets? Please, help yourself to another pretzel. More mustard?
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)you did, and you claimed it was proof that an Egyptian SA-7 downed a Mirage jet.
I'm not claiming that the video is proof of anything. You're claiming that the video is proof of something. What exactly is it?
Again, stop misrepresenting me. I never said that Strelas as a whole were incapable of shooting down jets. I made a very specific claim about the SA-7. You're simply trying to adjust the goalposts.
And its not up to me to prove its not an SA-7. Its your evidence, its up to you to prove that it is.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)That was my original assertion (#14), and I believe that I have demonstrated that.
I provided documentary evidence to show the SA-7 MANPAD is capable of and did shoot down "fast movers" (fixed-wing military jets). You haven't established anything other than you put mustard on your pretzels.
You have insisted despite evidence that these weapons pose no serious threats to jet aircraft. You are simply wrong.
Bye, and have a safe flight home.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)I readily concede that the SA-7 knocked down a handful of combat jets, mostly about forty or so years ago. Any threat to combat jets was largely eliminated when newer designs minimised the heat signature given off by the exhaust. Since then it has been used chiefly as a weapon against helicopters, as I have argued.
The assertion in my post was that the SA-7 is virtually useless against today's fixed-wing combat aircraft, and your posts with unattributed youtube vids have not diminished that assertion.
Another dishonest statement. I specifically said that it was quite possible for these missiles to hit a civilian jet.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)That has always been my main point. Your repeated statements upthread that SA-7 is essentially an anti-helicopter weapon and isn't a substantial threat to fixed-wing aircraft simply isn't true. Even the lowly Strela-2 has downed high-performance jets (there are still plenty of F-4s in service by various countries, particularly Turkey) and remain deadly against all types of transport aircraft around the world.
But, I still would not want to be at low altitude with the afterburner lit on an F-18C (or similar) with MANPADs around. Heat signature and aperture are still plenty big on most combat aircraft, today, even if tactics and countermeasures are now greatly improved. But, that's exactly what I said originally.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)and these weapons have been available to militias for a long time.
Its also worth noting that there is generally a lot of background heat sources at airports, and other aircraft, and many other things that make the SA-7 a less than ideal weapon for this sort of thing. Im also not sure whether a jet's engines at takeoff are hot enough to give off a clear enough heat signature.
The one attempt to fire an SA-7 at a civilian jet took place 10 years ago. Two were fired, and both missed:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Mombasa_attacks
Frankly, it would have been more productive for the terrorists to shoot at the jet with rifles. A jet aircraft is only a thin aluminium skin after all.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)At least. A windfall, because of the Libyan regime change.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)when you do hyperbole on this website, you gotta do it right. Go for broke. The sky is falling down. You won't be able to fly a kite in a suburban park without someone firing a SAM at it. Its all the damn Arabs' fault. Obama's too. That kind of thing. You'll learn.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Its fairly clear that you know little to nothing about MANPADS
To begin with, they don't use RADAR and prior to the existence of effective countermeasures they brought down fixed wing aircraft regularly.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)Ive seen SA-7s and spoken to militia members who carried them. Their commonly held opinion of the SA-7 was that it could bring down a heli in the right conditions but that they shouldn't waste their breath firing it at jets.
Whether or not that is because of "effective countermeasures" makes not the slightest bit of difference.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)and that counter measures mean survival down low, even for fast movers. This includes warning sensors, flares, and other solutions. Helos mostly, but jets need them too.
Which militia are you speaking of? Few if any would have had adequate training.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)That doesn't even make sense, syntactically or logically. For someone who pretends to hold academic tenure, you don't write very well.
And anyone who has been near an SA-7 knows that they are virtually useless against fast moving jets. The NVA scored some kills on turboprop-driven aircraft during the Vietnam war, hardly any against jets. The wiki article on the SA-7 says that there was one hit on a US jet aircraft out of 589 firings.
This was in south Lebanon. Most full-time militiamen would have undergone more training with man-portable missiles than most soldiers in the US Army.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)MANPADS use IR for any number of practical reasons. Its a basic that also impacts their utilization. Anyone who has been around them know that. That you made such a basic mistake speaks volumes.
With all your tactical knowledge imparted from your Lebanese militia friends, you would have understood the statement "counter measures mean survival down low, even for fast movers". It is basic tactics for survival of ground support aircraft. Quite logical and factual. If the wording confuses you, again its speaks volumes.
The SA-7 is far from the best against fast movers, but as your magic militia members should have told you, they can be used in combinations to create effective kill zones. The SA-7 and its successors are credited with redefining US low level tactics to the point where all aircraft fly above MADPADs whenever practical. It has also impacted the design of new aircraft to minimize heat signature, be they manned or UAVs.
Current tactical doctrine is to insure air superiority by rolling back any opposing medium to high altitude SAM system as well as any surveillance radars. Aircraft then stay above MANPAD range unless absolutely necessary. The Israelis use the same approach, such ask your militia buddies about OCL.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)but I doubt its a MANPAD. Unless of course the Russians send you a sample in the post whenever they build a new model.
Bullshit. The service ceiling for a helicopter gunship is about 2.5 miles, give or take. The max altitude for most second-gen MANPADs is about the same. Most combat helicopters therefore can't fly above MANPADs. There are other reasons why this would be a stupid idea. Flying near its ceiling makes the helicopter much more visible and accessible, gives people on the ground plenty of time to get their missiles ready and also lengthens the duration of the trip.
Have you got any more crocks of steaming fresh bullshit to serve up or are you just about done?
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Again you show your lack of knowledge about the technology...
MADPADS are intended to defend against low level aircraft. They do not readily acquire targets at altitude. So yes, tactical aircraft stay high whenever they can.
Note also that the altitude limitations are MSL not AGL.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)they probably even let you fire off a couple on the range from time to time. Jesus.
MADPADS are intended to defend against low level aircraft. They do not readily acquire targets at altitude. So yes, tactical aircraft stay high whenever they can.
MANPADs happily acquire targets at altitude. An SA-16 for example is effective against targets at up to two and a half miles:-
http://www.fas.org/programs/ssp/asmp/MANPADS.html
In fact, SAMs are often more effective against targets at altitude than anything else. Gary Bowers U-2 was shot down by a Soviet SAM (yes, I know, not a MANPAD) flying at over 12 miles altitude, far beyond the reach of any fighter aircraft. Theres also much less background noise at altitude to confuse the guidance systems.
Which altitude limitations are you talking about? SAMs or helis? That consideration applies to both, but in the case of helis there are two separate altitude limits, where ground effect applies and where it does not.
Anything else?
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)And have some real experience. We also don't cite magic mlitia men either.
Some basics since you clearly are googling rather than operating from actual knowledge...
SAMs come in classes based on ranges and altitude. Big SAMs are for longer ranges and higher altitudes. Those are regional/theater/national level systems. They may or may not be fixed, and are used to guard large high value targets. However, their co-located GCS can not see low altitude targets which are below their RADAR horizon (ignoring bistatic situations). There are also medium range SAMs with similar limitations. Those tend to be mobile and used for protecting military formations in the field. Finally we get to point defense SAMs, including MANPADs. Often IR based they are the last defense for fielded units under air attack by low flying aircraft.
What a nation does is build what is known as an IADS based on layers of SAMS, even AAA. You may remember the first few strikes against Iraq were targeted at IADS centers, and it worked beautifully. You magic militia bubbas tried to set up something similar in Lebanon but were cut to pieces in the first hours of OCL.
Your claim about SAM effectivity being highest at altitude actually depends on which SAM. SA-7 would have a poor probability of lock on, let alone kill. A modern long range SAM would be much more effective.
So to be clear and sum up prior posts:
- MANPADs use IR not RADAR
- MANPADs are designed and optimized for use at low levels
- Though not optimal, they can shoot down fast moving/fixed wing aircraft
- There are countermeasures against MANPADs
- MANPADs changed tactics to force the roll back of medium and long range SAMs since friendly aircraft now have to fly higher to avoid/be able to defeat enemy MANPADs
I am sure your militia friends and Google will support all of the above.
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)Last edited Sun Oct 21, 2012, 10:42 PM - Edit history (1)
Operation Cast Lead was in Gaza, not Lebanon, genius. I guess thats your "DOD" expertise on display, eh?
You got me on the use of nomenclature, I said radar when I should have said IR. Good for you. Meanwhile, you've shown you dont have a clue about MANPADs and you seem prone to basic failures of understanding re geography.
This rather pointless argument was about whether SA-7s were near-useless against combat jets, and it seems as though you are prepared to accept that they are.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)Bollocks
shaayecanaan
(6,068 posts)and I'm quite happy to concede that I have never fired a weapon in anger, nor fought in a war, nor ever worked for the CIA, MI5 or Mossad, nor am I some kind of "DOD" cottage expert.
If you want to read those kinds of bullshit claims, then cast your eyes below.
On the other hand, I am a Lebanese Catholic and have lived in Lebanon previously, a fact about which I have been quite open since posting here. There are a lot of weapons in Lebanon. There are a lot of militias in Lebanon. There are a lot of militias that like to ride around flaunting their weapons in Lebanon. The list of people who have seen and spoken and know of weapons and militias in Lebanon is not an exclusive club.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)... you were in the same country as some guys who happen to have some Vietnam-Era Grail rockets and they didn't kick your arse for trying to sneak a peek at it -- then you Google'd the rest of what you know about them.
I saw an F-15 at an airshow once -- it doesn't make me a fighter pilot.
holdencaufield
(2,927 posts)"We were disappointed by them, and they were found to have been useless," a Hamas source said.
The source said Hamas smuggled four Stinger systems in 2008. The source said the Hamas military deployed the Stingers against Israel Air Force AH-64 Apache attack helicopters during strike missions in the northern Gaza Strip.
"Our gunners couldn't fire the weapon," the source recalled. "A notice came up on the display saying 'friendly aircraft.'" ...
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a10_1239371679
