Posted on 08/26/2009 8:36:03 PM PDT by VRWCTexan
(Israeli) Military sources said the intelligence community has concluded that despite its denials Russia or its former Soviet allies would supply Iran with the S-300 air defense system.
The sources said Iran has already signed agreements for surplus S-300 systems with at least one former Soviet republic.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldtribune.com ...
The sources said Israel’s F-16 multi-role fighter has already been equipped with systems that could detect and alert pilots of any S-300 launch.
Battle tested in Syria?
PING
What former Soviet Republic would that be? And what horn is this of ten? 5?
Belarus is the most common Russian surrogate in such shady deals.
There was no S-300 in Syria.
One darn persistent myth, that no matter how disproved, keeps springing back.
The issue of SAM defense of the Syrian reactor has been subject to a lot of misinformation. Some facts:
i) The Syrians did not have the S-300 ...any version of it. They had older Soviet SAM types, such as the SA-6 and SA-3 (co-ordinates of which include the following: a location for a Syrian SAM - one of 30 SA-6 sites - is as follows: 33 54' 31.31" N 36 53' 51.70" E. While we are at it, let me give you the location of another SAM site in Syria, this time a SA-3 SAM system - one of over 30 - 34 31' 17.63" N 37 41' 01.54" E). Often, on FR, claims are made of the far more capable S-300 system, when the SAM network was old Soviet.
ii) There was no 'state of the art' radar system as some have claimed on other threads. There was no advanced IADS in place.
iii) The Israelis were quite clever, coming in through Turkish airspace and to the North of Syria, which is a weak point in the country SAM/AD network.
iv) The reactor site was not well defended. This was the result of a gambit by the Syrians that went way wrong ...due to the secrecy of the site, they had decided not to have any significant military presence in the area, in order to avoid any undue surveillance. This included a heavy SAM presence. All in all the Syrians had some semblance of a stratagem, the only problem is that the Israelis already knew of the site due to their formidable HumInt. A newspaper from Qatar called Al Watan that had an interview with President Bashar Assad of Syria, where he tried to claim it wasn't a nuclear site because it was not defended. Fox news reported the same on the 25th of April 2008 (quoting the UN ambassador for Syria, Bashar Ja'afari).
Put all those factors together, plus the very capable Israeli airforce, and the Syrians had no chance whatsoever.
Thing is, development of air-space denial weapons is progressing much faster than the ability to keep 4th generation weapons platforms viable in such areas. Double digit SAMS coupled to advanced IADS are making significant gains, and sooner or later it will begin to percolate to more and more nations we may not want to have them.
Talking about the Israelis, they were all in a flurry, making threats and all, when Russia was supposed to sell S-300 systems to Iran.
Is the S-300 invincible ...no, far from it. But it is a powerful system, that as part of an advanced IAD system it can cause a lot of pain ...unnecessary pain. Furthermore, look at the Gulf War (first). Even against the most formidable array of air assets assembled, with suppression and wild weasels, F-117s and cruise missiles, the Iraqi SAM system still managed to bring down allied jets ...and those SAMs were no where as advanced as the S-300 is. The Israelis, in one of the engagements against the Egyptians decades back, suffered a lot due to Soviet SAMs in the hands of their foes. Why then would the Israelis want to risk an advanced SAM system? Even though they can, since they are one of the most dedicated groups of people, come up with a viable/semi-viable solution against the S-300, why would they want to face it? The S-300 is not invincible, but it is the most lethal anti-aircraft (as opposed to ballistic) SAM system present outside the AEGIS/Standard team-up in USN Aegis ships, and the Patriot PAC-3. Not unbeatable by any measure (and it can definitely be defeated), but it can cost an airforce. And if in GW1 Soviet era SAMS still managed to shoot down jets, I wonder what S-300s could do against 30-60 jets?
Thank you for the info.
Up till now I was always under the impression that the Israelis made a joke of the S-300 that day.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.