Sunday, October 9, 2016

Could Russia Actually Shoot Down An F-22, F-35, Or B-2 Stealth Bomber Over The Skies Of Syria?

A Lockheed Martin F-22A Raptor fighter streaks by the ramp at the 2008 Joint Services Open House (JSOH) airshow at Andrews AFB. Wikipedia

Dave Majumdar, National Interest: Could Russia Really Shoot Down an F-22, F-35 or B-2 Stealth Bomber in Syria?

As tensions between Washington and Moscow flare, the Russian military is warning the United States that it has the ability to target stealth aircraft such as the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor, F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit that might be operating over Syria with the Almaz-Antey S-400 (NATO: SA-21 Growler) and the recently arrived S-300V4 (NATO: SA-23 Gladiator) air and missile defense systems. However, Western defense officials and analysts are skeptical and note that both the F-22 and the F-35 were specifically designed to counter those Russian-developed weapons.

"Russian S-300, S-400 air defense systems deployed in Syria's Hmeymim and Tartus have combat ranges that may surprise any unidentified airborne targets,” Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Major General Igor Konashenkov told the Russian state media outlet Sputnik. “Operators of Russian air defense systems won't have time to identify the origin of airstrikes, and the response will be immediate. Any illusions about ‘invisible’ jets will inevitably be crushed by disappointing reality.”

Read more ....

WNU Editor: If I was the Americans, I would not test this proposition .... they may be surprised.

27 comments:

fazman said...

WNU l agree, they had no real understandi g of the systems inital capabilities let alone after upgrades.
They were flabbergasted when serbia downed the F117 with pld school s.a.m and trigerometry.

fazman said...

WNU l agree, they had no real understandi g of the systems inital capabilities let alone after upgrades.
They were flabbergasted when serbia downed the F117 with pld school s.a.m and trigerometry.

B.Poster said...

Of course they could. Russia is the most powerful country in the world. The Untied States and all countries need to recognize this and act accordingly. Ehen reality is recognized and the appropriate actions are taken, good outcomes can be achieved.

Such things really aren't hard. Humans have been doing it for centuries.

Anonymous said...

Wouldn't the US first need to get a F-35 to Syria?
Maybe we can fly them there in 2020, after the Airbus Beluga XL comes out - when the F-35 is still not truly combat ready, and when the Syrian (civil) War is in its 9th year.

fazman said...

F22 there

Stephen Davenport said...

I think it is the other way round, the Russians may not want to test the Americans. I have yet to see any war in which Russian or Chinese equipment proved to be better than more modern western equipment. Except maybe the AK.

Hamilcar Barca said...

Wonder how many ....UFO s flying at this hour over Russia.

C-Low said...

I would wager that those F-22 flying cap in Syria are using the deflectors that they do have and are akin to running lights so they can be tracked when in non threat environment or areas were the enemy maybe able to gain insight into capabilities. In a first response they probably could but on day two the Russians maybe surprised when the full spectrum comes to bear jamming, stealth, kinetic counter sam.

Good card players don't show their cards until all bets have been made and its win or lose time.

That F117 that was lost is the only instance of such so I would not bet my house on it, could have been a myriad of flukes errors from lazy planning to a human error (stealth is not invisible just less visible from the right angles), or even something as odd off as a seam tape improperly applied overlooked or pealed off.

fazman said...

I see your point but time moves on, west has never faced anything like a T90 or SU37, ir had to surpress a area denial weapon like a S400.

fazman said...

Its no secret how it was tracked and shot down, the serb air defence crews have made full verified admissions years after hostilities ended.
No fluke,no error, it was tracked, its trajectory accuratley oredicted and engaged.

Aizino Smith said...

Linebacker blitz

Use them or lose them

Send the cheap stuff 1st

Andrew Jackson said...

MALD

Jac said...

Why Russia is developing a stealth fighter (very similar with F22) if they know that's not working? Mmmmmm

Unknown said...

Russia is a second rate regional power. The statements of the Russian military is like listening to Donald Trump, bluster, ignorance, and wishful thinking. They are really only for the Russian domestic audience, to keep them subdued in a worsening economic situation. Those statements don't scare the US military. A shooting war in Syria would see Russian jets cleared from the skies, navy from the surrounding waters, and an air defense systems blown to pieces. No one is even near in the league with the US military. It is the thing of Russian nightmares.

Unknown said...

Russia is a second rate regional power. The statements of the Russian military is like listening to Donald Trump, bluster, ignorance, and wishful thinking. They are really only for the Russian domestic audience, to keep them subdued in a worsening economic situation. Those statements don't scare the US military. A shooting war in Syria would see Russian jets cleared from the skies, navy from the surrounding waters, and an air defense systems blown to pieces. No one is even near in the league with the US military. It is the thing of Russian nightmares.

Aizino Smith said...

"Russia is a second rate regional power."

What was Prussia in the early 19th century?

Jay Farquharson said...

First off they arn't "stealth" aircraft, they are Low Observability aircraft.

To "normal" radars, their radar "crossection" is the size of a bird, which makes them much harder to detect against background clutter, and makes it much harder for a radar guided missile to be guided to target.

To low Frequency ESA radars however, like the Amalty complex deployed with the S300/400/500 family, at the frequency shift point, LOA aircraft have the exact same radar cross section as normal aircraft.

The difficulty is, the broad wavelength of the Low Frequency ESA radars, make it very difficult to use that radar to guide a missile to target.

The S300/400/500 family uses networked and datalinked mixes of ESA radars across a broad array of frequencies to solve the problem. The low frequency detects, the higher frequencies do the missile guidance.

The S300/400/500 family also has another "trick" up it's sleeve. LEO aircraft burn "hot". The F-22 for example, has a thermal signature 22x larger than an F-15.

The S300/400/500 family has a mix of long range IRST and Optical sensors networked into the system, both on the ground, and on the missiles. In addition, the S300/400/500 family can data link to all other sensor systems in a 400 mile range, from Pantsir's on the ground to the TU-214R in the air. Via the Command Center on the ground, the S300/400/500 family can also network to Russian IRST satellites.

Second, the TU/PAK 50, is a very different aircraft than the F-22. It's a Frontal Only LOA, combined with a high maneuver planoform. It's designed to defeat BVR missiles fired from long range, through it's Frontal LOA, close to the WVR range, and use it's high maneuver planoform and agility advantages to kill the F-22 and all other Western Aircraft.

Jay Farquharson said...

A shooting war with Russia in Syria, would not remain confined to Syria, and would quickly escalate.

American Exceptionalists/ Cold War Triumphialists/NeoCon's think that all it will take is one good smack and Russia will surrender,

But so far, from Georgia to Syria, it's been the US that's backed down.

fazman said...

Correct again jay, without political will those western technological marvels are almost irrelevant.
What experience does the u.s have against a coherrent and intergrated military behemoth?
Zilch, this is not desert storm.

fazman said...

Correct again jay, without political will those western technological marvels are almost irrelevant.
What experience does the u.s have against a coherrent and intergrated military behemoth?
Zilch, this is not desert storm.

B.Poster said...

It'd require more than "political will" to beat Russia. Those called technological marvels of the "west" would likely be quickly defeated by superior Russian technolgy, training, leadership, and motivation.

Russia is the most powerful military force on earth. Had we recognized this and acted accordingly we would be in a much better position today.

Jay Farquharson said...

The US lost 87 B-52's and B-57's in Vietnam, to 1950's and '60's fighter aircraft and AA systems, 2,221 aircraft in total.

The USAF has only 92 B-52's remaining, and only 1,721 Combat aircraft.

Jay Farquharson said...

Despite the massive destruction of the Iraqi Military in the Gulf War, a 13 year embargo against Iraq, and 13 years of a so called "No Fly Zone" that almost daily bombed Iraqi Command and Control, radars, aircraft, AA systems, armouries, goat herds, camel herds, schools, hospitals, water treatment plants, weddings, power grids, funerals,

It took 10 days of missile strikes, LOA strikes and night missions before the US and British completed the SEAD mission ( Supression of Enemy Air Defences), to the point that daylight air combat missions could be started.

fazman said...

Superior training and leadership.?
Yep Russia does have some great equipment , easily able to defeat western pilots or armour?doubtful.
Russias own papers reported that russian top guns are not confident in their ability to engage u.s aircraft and at best would "hope to shoot down a few aircraft" unquote.

Jay Farquharson said...

Russia's training ramp and doctrine for pilots was massively changed in 2009, ( after the Georgian War), current Russian pilots are getting as many air hours in 2016 in a month, as they were getting in 2008 in a year.

In case studies on the Georgian War, it was determined that the RUSAF failed in it's missions due to:
- a lack of air hours
- a lack of Pilot indepence
- no DACT training.

Kevin Greenhalgh said...

Russia is probably the closest the world has to the US Military. But, it is light years away from standing and fighting with it. I agree, any shooting war with soon escalate to a nuclear conflict. But should we be lucky enough that the conflict ended quickly without a nuclear Exchange, it would show United States dominant in the air and seas. The statement that Russia is the most powerful nation in the world militarily, or in any other way, it's so ridiculous that it doesn't even arise to requiring a response. Not even the Russian military would make that boast on there best day. A fight wouldn't be a fair fight, and the u.s. wants it that way. Not to say there wouldn't be surprises, but the outcome is not in doubt.

Kevin Greenhalgh said...

Russia is probably the closest the world has to the US Military. But, it is light years away from standing and fighting with it. I agree, any shooting war with soon escalate to a nuclear conflict. But should we be lucky enough that the conflict ended quickly without a nuclear Exchange, it would show United States dominant in the air and seas. The statement that Russia is the most powerful nation in the world militarily, or in any other way, it's so ridiculous that it doesn't even arise to requiring a response. Not even the Russian military would make that boast on there best day. A fight wouldn't be a fair fight, and the u.s. wants it that way. Not to say there wouldn't be surprises, but the outcome is not in doubt.