The Israelis should be more careful when gloating about F-35

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by darksithpro, May 22, 2018.

  1. darksithpro, May 22, 2018
    Last edited: May 22, 2018

    darksithpro macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2016
    #1
    It's in Hebrew, but basically what happened is a pair of IAF F-35s took pictures flying over Beirut Lebanon in broad daylight and they weren't detected. Then, they went on to gloat that none of the Russian radar and missile systems where able detect the plane. It's a dangerous game to be playing IMO. Perhaps the Americans should remind them not to gloat about such things.


    https://news.walla.co.il/item/31600...eral&utm_campaign=socialbutton#!/wallahistory

    "Today (Tuesday), Major General Nurkin decided to open an opening in the wall of ambiguity and expose an international conference of the IAF at the Air Force House in Herzliya to more than 20 commanders of foreign troops from around the world. Norkin revealed a photograph taken in the light of a huge plane on the backdrop of Beirut in Lebanon over the head of Hezbollah's secretary-general, who is preoccupied with threats to the home front of Israel from time to time, one huge airplane photographed another huge airplane, and the picture of a plane shining from the sun against the backdrop of dense buildings and the Lebanese coastline The message is clear: the air force operates freely throughout the Middle East despite the various threats, and despite the presence of superpowers like Russia in the region"
     
  2. Solomani macrumors 68040

    Solomani

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Location:
    Alberto, Canado
    #2
    I'd give them more respect if they changed the name of their army to a more accurate name (given its purpose): change it from IDF (Israeli Defense Force) to GAOC. God's Army of Conquest.
     
  3. A.Goldberg macrumors 68020

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #3
    Kind of reminds of Operation Opera when Israel bombed Iran’s nuclear reactor project. They received new F-16’s (I believe) from the US and the first thing they did with them was bomb Iran- within weeks of taking delivery I believe. The US wasn’t informed and they weren’t to happy about it either. The US and others would in time come to change their mind however. Funny to think decades later the Iran-nuclear debate continues.

    I actually find it odd Israel would go out an publicly brag about this. It’s not generally their style to show their cards. Most of the military action they do they don’t publicslly confirm. I took them 30-40 years to even admit they did Operation Opera (granted it was an open secret). It was a pretty bad ass and bragworthy operation though.

    One the one hand, it seems like unnecessary gamble of muscle flexing. On the other, I think it sends a strong signal to the bad actors in the area not to screw around with Israel. Id rather see benign muscle flexing than outright military action.
     
  4. Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #4
    I wouldn't count on that. Any advanced nation that gives the game away loses the element of surprise. The Russian S400 system and upcoming S500 system is dangerous to a breadth of European and American aircraft.

    It is assumed that major governments know where that Malaysian airliner went down. No one is speaking to let the cat out of the bag. What are 300 souls compared to national security? Nothing.
     
  5. A.Goldberg macrumors 68020

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #5
    It’s my understanding the strengths of the S400/500 are a bit overstated. It’s also my understanding that the way stealth works is not necessarily to make the plane invisible, it’s more to make the plane invisible until it’s “too late”. Also keep in mind the F-35 and it’s friends have some of the most sophisticated electronic countermeasures in the world- radar jamming and such. Stealth technology may not always prevent the plane from being seen, but it can make it far more difficult to track and target.

    The Russians have also kept the S400 very close to their vest... I’m not sure it’s really even in active use in the Middle East aside from protecting Russia’s own assets. So who knows it’s true abilities. The S500 is really just supposed to be an improvement against ballistic missiles. It seems all the ME countries are stuck using the older S200 and S300 systems. All these systems create a ton of radar noise and can easily be targeted and tracked and perhaps destroyed with radar detection, satellites, and anti-radar or cruise missiles.
     
  6. Zenithal, May 22, 2018
    Last edited: May 22, 2018

    Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #6
    Considering the S500 has yet to deploy, I'm curious where you heard that. The S400 system is deadly enough that it causes American commanders to worry about deploying aircraft too close to it. The problem with either system is their reach is vast. Our American system has only been tested and utilized in highly controlled environments. The Russians have a long history is rocketry and jamming. The issue with the F35 is while it's a multirole fighter, the only weaponry it does carry that can operate near the reach of the S500, for example, requires a larger surface area thereby weakening its ability to remain in stealth. The S400 system in a state from years ago was able to operate at multiple frequencies and shoot multiple missiles at once, overwhelming any potential aircraft. Russia deployed an S400 unit near the Syria-Turkey border after Turkey downed a Russian jet. Despite their warmer friendship now, that unit hasn't been removed from its position. These units like any modern military equipment can run specialized software. It isn't too far-fetched for Russia to give neutered units to its allies while having a better revision. They feel confident enough that they're willing to sell to the US, too.
    Russia, Belarus, China, India, Algeria, Saudi, and more operators are getting in line to purchase. Just 3 operators for THAAD outside of the US, and it's presumed the Saudi system has been tampered with.


    There's been a few white papers over the years and simulations. Usually the 'enemy' needs to be tampered with for our systems to overwhelm theirs. The US HAS studies the older systems, because we're allies with those countries, but as I said, there is no reason for Russia to sell operators a high end system if it can sell for the same price and sell a system that's 75% as good. Make sense? This is different than selling the same system with parts missing. Who's going to go through obfuscated OS code?

    Could there be holes in older systems deployed in Lebanon? Probably or not. Let's not forget our own naval ships didn't see Russian aircraft near us until they buzzed us. That's kind of the point of military equipment, though. In controlled tests, it works fine. In real world use, you update/patch until you fix issues. You won't ever know how capable it really is until you find yourself in real combat. And I'm not talking about blowing a bunch of Jihadists in a mountainside from a F22 80 miles away when that host country has no modern equipment or using outdated 30+ year old tech with dated artillery.


    Edit: Though, the only real way to destroy these would be by mass launches. In other words, 4-8 missile launches from one mobile unit may be too much for 2-3 modern jets, but if you could get a band of 50-200 jets to fire multiple AGMs each, then you might be able to destroy them. The issue with mobile units versus ours are they can be moved relatively quickly.

    The best way to interpret these weapons is like the Iron Dome system Israel uses. It's very good because it fires 2-3 shells at incoming missiles. Missiles that are highly rudimentary. The take down ratio is good, but it can increase with more shells fired by Israel. The question is whether Iron Dome would work with a real missile. Make sense?

    What's amusing to me is that regardless of external support, if the Palestinians could manage to make rudimentary missiles and not have it explode in their face, you'd think they'd for once make an actual effort at peace and probably harmonizing the region with an interfaith council that seeks to establish a powerful position in the area.

    Though I suppose it's easier to be a dolt and behave like a miscreant.
     
  7. darksithpro thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2016
    #7
    It's going to get really interesting when the US delivers 100 F-35s to Turkey. The hostility between Erdogan and Netanyahu is legendary, both calling each other terrorists/muderers, or terrorist states. If one of those planes on either side was fitted with a tactical nuclear warhead it would be game over for either side. No simple way to detect the stealth aircraft.
     
  8. Solomani macrumors 68040

    Solomani

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2012
    Location:
    Alberto, Canado
    #8
    Selling Erdogan F-35s is probably an idea that's about as good as selling F-35s to the Islamic Republic of Iran.

    But Trump is President, so idiotic decisions on foreign policy is highly possible.
     
  9. A.Goldberg macrumors 68020

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #9
    Articles I’ve read make the assumed advancements between the S400 and 500. I know the S400 has multiple operators- most of whom are very new. As mentioned the S400 hasn’t had a lot of real world activity as far as I know, at least in the recent conflicts.

    The S200/300 systems clearly aren’t great considering all the bombing the US, Israel, and others have performed in Syria with virtually no issues. Israel did have a Jet shot down (F-22?) fairly recently but it was alllegedly due to pilot error, if you want to take the IDF’s word. It’s my understanding that most of these batteries were destroyed by Israel.

    It’s my understanding the F35 has roughly 50-75km distance before perhaps being detected by the S400 system. You don’t necessarily need stealth or hypersonic weapons to take out such systems. Although slow, conventional cruise missiles are so small and fly slow low along the ground they are quite difficult to detect. And of course overwhelming the system would lead to its defeat. Keep in mind their are other potential options- such as ground invasions to take these out.

    Part of the reason the US is “behind” in such systems is that up until relatively recently we haven’t really found the need for them. Having bar none the most powerful air force in the world, our main defense starts with controlling the air to start off with.

    I’m not saying the Russian SAMs are not a formidable opponent, but I imagine our military could likely out maneuver them if needed. Besides, Russia’s military is quite far behind in technology in a lot of areas and way far behind in infrastructure. Literally, their sole remaining aircraft carrier has to be escorted by a tug just in case it breaks down. I also wouldn’t underestimate the level of Israeli counter intelligence either- in operation opera they somehow managed to bomb while Iran’s local radar was inexplicably turned off. Somehow they managed to smuggled thousands of nuclear documents out of a vault in a hidden facility. How they manage these things is quite fascinating.

    I imagine the Iron Dome is at least halfway decent at most conventional short range, non stealth or hypersonic missiles if it can handle the rudimentary Hamas rockets. It can also handle artillery. I saw it in action in 2013 the last time I was in Israel and rockets were flying, absolutely incredible technology.

    Hamas by definition does not want peace, that’s the point. Their primary platform is the destruction of Israel.
     
  10. Zenithal, May 23, 2018
    Last edited: May 23, 2018

    Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #10
    Not quite. The S300 is a series like ones before it. Most of the foreign operators are running the first few generations of the S300, a lot of which came out in 1978-1995. Russia is the only operator of the latest iteration that came out within the last few years. Another way to explain it is if someone asks what you drive, you'll say BMW 5 series, and they'll ask you what body code or year. You might say it's an E60, but the E60 had a long run and you had the LCI version versus the launch version. Make sense? FWIW, the last S200 system variant came out over 40 years ago and wasn't updated anytime after.

    F35 is capable of shooting cruise missiles in flight. No need for a separate launcher. Again, the distance for both aggressor and defense are estimated via simulation studies. For all we know, in a real war the F35 may very well be a flop. We haven't had a conventional, real war with a rogue nation in decades. The 91 Gulf incursion was anything but a real war. And, as I pointed out, these are highly mobile systems. In a few years with the S350, you could overwhelm a small fleet of aircraft. If these systems were nothing to worry about, the US wouldn't be worried about some of our not-so-friendly "allies" and foes buying them up.

    Ground invasions are nice and all, but you expose manpower to death. You can either win on the ground with sheer manpower or heavy weaponry.

    The US is effectively isolated from the rest of the world in terms of war damage. We do however still develop the tech to keep our foreign interests in good hands. We have hundreds of bases around the globe. Some in remote areas of countries. It's projection of force.

    I don't doubt Israeli tech having invested in some of the companies there. Israel has put a lot of effort into securing home and their neighbors, but also their tech industry. Russia doesn't need to project as much as other countries. Operation Opera was a surprise attack on Iraq such as the beginning of the 1967 war. There's something to be said about the then and even current military might of ME countries. The only worthy country is probably Jordan, and they're on good terms. Now, Bibi's presser was a bunch of hot air. Documents were likely smuggled in the form of a digital bug or an inside person who was coerced. I'm leaning towards the former. Bibi's presser discovery was nothing more than a farce on the account that 1) We knew 90% of what was "stolen." 2) It was play for play what the Trump Administration did Q1 2017 with their table stacked sky high of documents and the regulation presser later on with the stacks of paper. Bibi's a smooth talker and a good-********ter. His big tell of whether he's lying his ass off or not is when he's in the Israeli press and the police are looking into him or his family for their dealings. If we were to believe Bibi, Iran would have developed and built out 100+ nuclear weapons by now. A little under 40 years ago he was incredibly articulate and had the right idea. Somewhere along the line he picked up American politics and started behaving like your typical congressman. The actual man power and money needed to launch a full scale attack on Iran would be in the trillions in a matter of a few years. It'd be akin to Vietnam but worse. Now if the idea is to stroke fury into the people to topple their own government and force a regime change into a modern government or restore their monarchy and resume friendly relations, then I can see that working. Yeah, it's been a long time but they still have support. It's one of those concepts that can happen. The US is a relatively stable nation, but we're also a young nation. For all we know, our entire form of government could be purged in another century.


    Even Stuxnet was an expensive and massive failure in the end. Jumping the gun caused the malware to spiral out of control and come across the eyes of the Iranians, which made them clean house and start over, including securing their network and minimizing the risk of air-gap hacking.
    --- Post Merged, May 23, 2018 ---
    Iron Dome is successful for that two to three attack approach. It ensures the safety of Israelis because home-brew rockets aren't... well... stable. Iron Dome is one of the best things that could happen for Palestinians. It ensures the IDF doesn't go nutty and kill innocents. It happens to a lesser degree these days.

    True, but no country that has a complex wants peace.
     
  11. darksithpro thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2016
    #11
    Here's the picture: Look, it's Beirut!:p
    [​IMG]
    --- Post Merged, May 24, 2018 ---

    It's probably even less than that, and even less than an F-22 at certain angles "the front". A good place to read is www.f-16.net They have some of most knowledgeable posters, and some that actually work on the F-35 project that have hinted that the RAM coating "stealth paint" on the F-35 is better/newer than that of the F-22. Notice on the F-22 it's canopy has a gold hue to it, while the F-35 is pinkish?
     

Share This Page