Peter Cairns Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Personally I think it's a waste of money but they seem to be doing it anyway. "Syria signs for eight MiG-31 interceptors By Vladimir Karnozov Details emerged at the show of a Syrian order for an undisclosed number of RSK MiG-series fighters to be delivered within the next two years. The first of eight MiG-31 interceptors will be handed over soon, with the sale representing the first export order for the type, which is already in use with the Russian air force and has been inherited by Kazakhstan. The aircraft will be drawn from stocks of semi-completed airframes held at the NAZ Sokol factory. Vladimir Barkovsky, head of RSK MiG's Mikoyan Engineering Centre, says an earlier offer for MiG-25 operators to trade in their aircraft for MiG-31s remains open, with negotiations continuing with users including Algeria, Libya and Syria. Syria is also to take delivery of a squadron's worth of MiG-29SMT, MiG-29M1 and M2 fighters under the new deal, with this potentially to act as an interim step until the possible availability of Sukhoi Su-30s and Yakvolev Yak-130 trainers." In the fullnness of time Syria going for Yaks as a LIFT and Light attack platform ( Russia sees it as an SU-25 replacement) would make more sensne tthan tryinng to compete with Israel. Peter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karelian Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 The second best air force is like the second best hand in poker table, and thus the Syrians should focus on improving their AA-systems instead of investing to their air forces. But then again these kind of major arms deals are always political moves as well, and with the increasingly unstable Iraq and Lebanon next door the Syrians actually have pretty good reasons to gear up (and warm up their relations with Russia), no matter of their actual motives. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 This is odd. Recently they have been moving towards a better ground based air defense (which is possible) vs. an air defense (which is practically impossible). It's either because of ego or the Russians gave them some sort of package deal that required them to purchase the planes. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Could be saber rattling. Boosts the perceived chance of shooting down an incoming B2 bomber from 0 to 2(?) percent. But that thin 2% might be enough for their 'prospective adversary' (cough cough) to perform a cost-benefit analysis before deciding to push the big red button. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Well, I may be giving the current Syrian regime credit for too much foresight, but the US/NATO Powers and Israel are not Syria's only potential enemies, especially when you look beyond the 5-10 year horizon. The regional power balance in the ME is constantly shifting, as are alliances. If the winds of diplomacy change, it's not inconceivable that Syria could end up exchanging a few shots with some other nearby Second World nation in a future conflict. In a conflict like this, having an air superiority edge could be an important advantage. So it may be more a matter of "keeping their hand in the game," and keeping a somewhat viable Air Force around for possible future expansion and development, rather than realistically expecting to actually be able to build up an Air Force that could challenge the Israelis. Or maybe they're just blowing all their money on big fast toys. Cheers, YD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsobill Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 great "news" for Syria, one month old news, but still - hell they might even have some lucky eight aces to fly best planes on the planet - Seems like most of middle eastern countries that harassed, frightened and oppressed by superior powers and their tiny pundits in the region, will start writing those multizeros checks to Kremlin and might even rebuild USSR some day ) which is actually bad thing for oppressor that constantly playing "fear" tactics on them - old saying "dont corner rat - it WILL bite you" unless you wanted to get bitten. Reminds me of lebanon's rat hezbolah that bitted israel's multizillion dollar tanks build on US citizen tax moneys with 10 dollars soviet build outdated almost 30 years old RPG29 - and theres NOTHING wrong with that - after all Russian Federation don't sell cluster bombs or other weaponry designed for mass murder innocent population - it only sells DEFENSIVE weaponry to defend YOUR land not to invade other country and shell them with banned bombs... so God bless Russian Federation in their effort to DEFEND all defenseless country with their arms in return for their gold 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisND Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Why do you live in LA? Shouldn't you go back to the Kremlin or something? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsobill Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Originally posted by Normal Dude: Why do you live in LA? Shouldn't you go back to the Kremlin or something? so i see its gets personal now ehh ??? i dont live in LA - i'm surviving - theres difference and i will go to Kremlin when you go back to your racist and prejudice place that you came from? deal ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Cairns Posted June 27, 2007 Author Share Posted June 27, 2007 Unnsobill, and where did you ggetthe idea that Russia doesnnn't sell people cluster bombs. I am no great fan of the US policy on the middle east and this adminnistrationn in particular but there use of cluster bombes has been overwhelming on military targets and farmore discrinnminnating than Isreals in the Lebanon. Other than Israel who I think have pursued a fairly disasterous military and foreign policy for decades just who is itthathas used USclusterbombs against civilians. Oh and if you look at Chetnia Russia doesn't need to export clusterbombs and other thinnggs to kill innocent people it can do itwithout them evennn leaving the country. Steve, It could be a way to send a signal to Beirut as they seem to have been recieving a lot of hardware quickly from the US. Either to say we're still big brother or to finness them in to putinng scares resources in to an airforce or air defence and not facing down Hezbullah. Peter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Originally posted by unsobill: - and theres NOTHING wrong with that - after all Russian Federation don't sell cluster bombs or other weaponry designed for mass murder innocent population - it only sells DEFENSIVE weaponry to defend YOUR land not to invade other country and shell them with banned bombs... so God bless Russian Federation in their effort to DEFEND all defenseless country with their arms in return for their gold So you're saying... the US should sell Javelins to Chechen rebels? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsobill Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Originally posted by Sergei: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by unsobill: - and theres NOTHING wrong with that - after all Russian Federation don't sell cluster bombs or other weaponry designed for mass murder innocent population - it only sells DEFENSIVE weaponry to defend YOUR land not to invade other country and shell them with banned bombs... so God bless Russian Federation in their effort to DEFEND all defenseless country with their arms in return for their gold So you're saying... the US should sell Javelins to Chechen rebels? </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsobill Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Originally posted by Peter Cairns: Unnsobill, and where did you ggetthe idea that Russia doesnnn't sell people cluster bombs. I am no great fan of the US policy on the middle east and this adminnistrationn in particular but there use of cluster bombes has been overwhelming on military targets and farmore discrinnminnating than Isreals in the Lebanon. Other than Israel who I think have pursued a fairly disasterous military and foreign policy for decades just who is itthathas used USclusterbombs against civilians. Oh and if you look at Chetnia Russia doesn't need to export clusterbombs and other thinnggs to kill innocent people it can do itwithout them evennn leaving the country. Steve, It could be a way to send a signal to Beirut as they seem to have been recieving a lot of hardware quickly from the US. Either to say we're still big brother or to finness them in to putinng scares resources in to an airforce or air defence and not facing down Hezbullah. Peter. i agree mostly... we all need to disarm at once before its too late, but theres too much hypocrisy and $ involved - also i dont recall RF selling banned weaponry to countries, like US does to Israel, i think RF has special regulations they abide still, unlike others... but again i might be terribly wrong ofcourse... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsobill Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 wrapping up my little spam project here i just want to say on MIG31 trade - "tank is nothing without its crew" - i'm sure they'll never fly as good as soviet pilots... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiny_tanker Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Originally posted by unsobill: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Peter Cairns: Unnsobill, and where did you ggetthe idea that Russia doesnnn't sell people cluster bombs. I am no great fan of the US policy on the middle east and this adminnistrationn in particular but there use of cluster bombes has been overwhelming on military targets and farmore discrinnminnating than Isreals in the Lebanon. Other than Israel who I think have pursued a fairly disasterous military and foreign policy for decades just who is itthathas used USclusterbombs against civilians. Oh and if you look at Chetnia Russia doesn't need to export clusterbombs and other thinnggs to kill innocent people it can do itwithout them evennn leaving the country. Steve, It could be a way to send a signal to Beirut as they seem to have been recieving a lot of hardware quickly from the US. Either to say we're still big brother or to finness them in to putinng scares resources in to an airforce or air defence and not facing down Hezbullah. Peter. i agree mostly... we all need to disarm at once before its too late, but theres too much hypocrisy and $ involved - also i dont recall RF selling banned weaponry to countries, like US does to Israel, i think RF has special regulations they abide still, unlike others... but again i might be terribly wrong ofcourse... </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offtaskagain Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 DID thinks its a front for an Iranian purchase. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InvaderCanuck Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Originally posted by tiny_tanker: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by unsobill: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Peter Cairns: Unnsobill, and where did you ggetthe idea that Russia doesnnn't sell people cluster bombs. I am no great fan of the US policy on the middle east and this adminnistrationn in particular but there use of cluster bombes has been overwhelming on military targets and farmore discrinnminnating than Isreals in the Lebanon. Other than Israel who I think have pursued a fairly disasterous military and foreign policy for decades just who is itthathas used USclusterbombs against civilians. Oh and if you look at Chetnia Russia doesn't need to export clusterbombs and other thinnggs to kill innocent people it can do itwithout them evennn leaving the country. Steve, It could be a way to send a signal to Beirut as they seem to have been recieving a lot of hardware quickly from the US. Either to say we're still big brother or to finness them in to putinng scares resources in to an airforce or air defence and not facing down Hezbullah. Peter. i agree mostly... we all need to disarm at once before its too late, but theres too much hypocrisy and $ involved - also i dont recall RF selling banned weaponry to countries, like US does to Israel, i think RF has special regulations they abide still, unlike others... but again i might be terribly wrong ofcourse... </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsobill Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 MIG always been teh best and stay the best till the day - even newest F35's too weak to take on on mighty MIG's. LMAO i lub you battlefront ) [ June 28, 2007, 02:52 PM: Message edited by: unsobill ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matchstick Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Close in there's very little that comes close to the best Migs & SUs, but the west still has the avionics edge and seeing the other guy first is frequently decisive. Always thought that buying up modern soviet airframes and wedging in western engines and avionics would make for one hell of a cost effective package. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
luderbamsen Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Originally posted by unsobill: Blah blah blah blah e.c.t. Oh great, another nutcase. I swear I could make a fortune selling tinfoil hats on this forum... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Even more important than the avionics on the U.S. fighters is the avionics on the AWACS behind them. Being tracked from the time you leave the hanger shortens your life expectancy, a LOT. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Cairns Posted June 28, 2007 Author Share Posted June 28, 2007 Dan, Spot on. What matters is a fully integrated air defence system whether it be offensive with AWACs and Wild Weasels or defensive with SAMs and Migs. The problem for most Russian customers is that they haven't had the money, where with all or been allowed to buy the full package, and so the US or Israel simply exploit the gaps. In GW1 the US took out the ground radars in the first hour and then as the saying goes, In the Land of the Blind the One Eyed Man is King..... Peter. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Joch Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 its an odd purchase. The MIG 31 is an obsolescent cold war era, high speed, high altitude fighter originally designed to intercept U.S. strategic bombers. Given the other problems of the Syrian Air force, including poor pilot training, it would have a very limited lifespan against IAF or NATO fighters in any conflict. It does not carry bombs, so could not be used in a internal security or CAS role. They could be fronting for Iran or Russia may have made a particularly sweet offer to Syria just to unload them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Originally posted by unsobill: - and theres NOTHING wrong with that - after all Russian Federation don't sell cluster bombs or other weaponry designed for mass murder innocent population - it only sells DEFENSIVE weaponry to defend YOUR land not to invade other country and shell them with banned bombs... so God bless Russian Federation in their effort to DEFEND all defenseless country with their arms in return for their gold Cluster bombs are not designed for mass murder of innocent civilians, they are designed for attacking troop and tank concentrations, primarily the latter. The usage may vary, however. They are not banned in any way, shape or form. Tanks, small arms, ATGW and othe AT weaponry can be used on the offensive and defensive, and the kalashnikov is probably responsible for the murder of more civilians than all types of cluster bombs ever dropped. I fail to see how getting blown up with lots of little bombs is so much worse than getting blown up wit several big, thermobaric ones. Whoops, I bit. Must remember not to respond to trolls in future. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.