Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Hongjian

Could anyone ID these parts? I know they say "WING" and "REAR COVER", but still it would be nice for anyone to point out whether these parts are likely to be in such conditions after either impacting onto their targets or having been intercepted. Also, what type of missile might this be? MBDA France would indicate Storm Shadow. Which would be big if true.

As for now, I would lean towards the "intercepted" option, as missile-parts scattered after hitting their targets would have been many times more damaged and unidentifiable than these.

With this rounded shape, it could be one of the 3 french naval cruise missiles MdCN fired from FREEM Aquitaine

Wait,

I saw a bottle rocket once (see picture) so I must be imminently qualified to discourse on this also!

Based on the Russian Military Statement, they tracked 103/105 and successfully engaged 71/103. They are reporting 112 total SAM launches instead of US DoD 40. Interestingly, most of the targets that were "successfully" defended had all inbound weapons intercepted. The exception is the "abandoned" Mezza airfield, where only 5/9 were intercepted...meaning there should be 4 impacts somewhere on-field. I've yet to see handheld of impacts, and I know both ISI and DG collected the airfield post-strike and I haven't seen any BDA products showing the damage.

I think the Russian attempt to make their numbers seem realistic revealed that they're just making this up and hoping people don't look to closely.

So who is going to build a scenario on this now?

ORIGINAL: leemiller24

So who is going to build a scenario on this now?

T-Trout is making a test scenario of this event. It's a good idea to play it rather than arm-chairing nonsenses:

tm.asp?m=4467719

Can you tell where these pictures were taken? According to this article https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/0 ... s-britain/ all the Storm Shadows were fired at the storae facility's.

BTW, kinda gullible/silly to think Russians only lie and US/NATO only speak the truth. In reality it will be somewhere in the middle. Both are creative with the facts/truth.
Moreover, any information from either Russia or the US is not meant to convince their counterparts. It is only menat for their own public: I know a few Russian people who immigrated from former Soviet Republics to the Netherlands and they are very reluctant to believe anything they hear from the US against Russia. They have a very different view on the US then people from the west.

I think the famous quote "The first victim of war is truth." is still seasoning well. Dead men cannot talk, but survivors can lie.

Keep in mind though that the US press is not controlled by government. In the US, the background usually comes out. There is a balance of messages eventually. The press is generally antagonistic and will not be simple mouthpieces.

I'm sceptical. We only know about the things that indeed have come out. I doubt there were any journalists present in the staffrooms.

Of course not. All I am saying is that government announcements and spokespeople are eventually smoked out about the truth. The US press, for all its faults, loves sniffing out government propaganda.

They do indeed. And when they feel they are having smoke blown at them, they turn into sharks in chum filled waters. The real story may not be available immediately but it usually comes out.

One of the many interesting aspects of the West vs the East, is the willingness of the West’s people to discuss its mistakes or errors, wrongs or misjudgments. This I believe allows for the education of one’s beliefs in relation to what’s good or bad, right or wrong, about its people’s or Governments actions.

This doesn’t always equate to the West’s people or Governments doing the right thing or acting responsibly in relation to the rest of the worlds beliefs or needs, but hopefully it balances its misdeeds with good ones.

I will say, America has been wrong about stuff. Admit it, own up, learn lesson, move on.

I will also say America has been right about stuff. Congrats, slap back, take bow, move on.

That also goes for all the rest of the Nations on this spinning rock.

History has/will show the truth.

Currently in Russia and China, complaining openly against the party in charge isn’t recommended if ones interested in a fruitful and happy life, one can end up getting the “flu” or “slipping\falling” off a balcony or such, or maybe being whisked away in the middle of the night by the leader for life’s minions.

Here, one can bitch about Trump or Obama, and move on.

Watching the Russian Ministry of Defense rattle off the official line on the Syrian strikes is laughable…………. until we watch FOX News, basically doing a similar job about the current Administration’s admirable efforts vs the most recent past administration’s perceived “tyranny”.

And I’m still waiting to hear China claim Minamitori Island as being “within” the South China Sea.

Obviously, I follow the line that liberals control all other major news sources, brainwashing 55% of America into not being fair and balanced but I come here and a few other places to continue being educated to what the outside world’s Military Gamers think.

I would counter that the non-FOX major media outlets typically spend their time “reacting” to the actions or deeds of the Right, then after being told they’re snowflakes and too PC in complaining about narcissist, misogynist, hateful, corrupt, intolerant actions and words, respond incredulously with video, tape and text examples of said actions, only to be told its “Fake News”.

Interesting stuff, and a very Interest place America is nowadays.

Will the strikes against Syria solve any major issues? I doubt it. do I support it? I guess. Gassing folks is bad. The trolls here would say it won’t do any good, then other trolls here say it’s the perfect answer to the problem. Based on how it’s been working out since long before I’ve been born, I have no clue.

But for now, I won’t be persecuted for jabbering about it.

Back to gaming.

ORIGINAL: BrianinMinnie
Will the strikes against Syria solve any major issues? I doubt it. do I support it? I guess. Gassing folks is bad. The trolls here would say it won’t do any good, then other trolls here say it’s the perfect answer to the problem. Based on how it’s been working out since long before I’ve been born, I have no clue.

It seems clear they're only meant to be punitive wrt Chemical Weapons usage, not to change any dynamic of the civil war. The reasoning is that it's very risky to allow CWs to become commonplace in Syria and elsewhere, so better to try to nip it in the bud early when limited strikes can be effective.

Will this recent strike suffice? Who knows. But if it's accompanied with the believable threat of further strikes, then it has a good chance. Replacing expensive infrastructure is something most governments dislike, let alone one with a huge war budget.

The last scenario of punitive strikes before Syria was Serbia/Kosovo, and that did work well.

In 2012, Syria did purchase and equipped some Pantsir-S1 point defense SPAAG, which is somehow becomes a missing memory or misquoted to be used by Russians along with S-400.

Right now, Syria's state media reported how Pantsir will protect some assets from allies' air strikes, and immediately quoted by Sputnik:

https://sputniknews.com/military/201804 ... top-facts/

It is a very robust AA defense and itself has good FCR to track stealthy missiles at vicinity. Under the most opmistic scenario, 9 units of Pantsirs will have 108 57E6 missiles against 103-107 cruise missiles, excluding the autocannons. So stopping 71 missiles will give this system around 70% of PoH.

It's unlikely, since Syria does not have that much Pantsirs in Damascus, yet it's quite telling if 70% hit did work as intended.

ORIGINAL: guanotwozero

It seems clear they're only meant to be punitive wrt Chemical Weapons usage, not to change any dynamic of the civil war. The reasoning is that it's very risky to allow CWs to become commonplace in Syria and elsewhere, so better to try to nip it in the bud early when limited strikes can be effective.

This is the real reason - it normalizes the fact that the US will use kinetics in response to WMD use on civilians. Imagine how much worse Darfur or Rwanda would have been had chemical weapons been in play.

ORIGINAL: Dysta
It's unlikely, since Syria does not have that much Pantsirs in Damascus, yet it's quite telling if 70% hit did work as intended.

Did you read the Russian military statement I posted? They literally listed missiles fired and successful engagements for every system in Syria. SA-22 reportedly had 24 out of 25 successful engagements (96% Pk). Overall Pk of all SAM systems was 63%. I think those numbers are BS, but that's what the Russians are reporting.

ORIGINAL: ExNusquam

Did you read the Russian military statement I posted? They literally listed missiles fired and successful engagements for every system in Syria. SA-22 reportedly had 24 out of 25 successful engagements (96% Pk). Overall Pk of all SAM systems was 63%. I think those numbers are BS, but that's what the Russians are reporting.

Little adjustment. There are 23 of 25 engagements in Russian-language version.

If there had been a high rate of engagement successes, then the Syrian media should be showing off the debris ad nauseam. Triumphant soldiers standing on remains of missiles, giving v-signs. But they're not - only fakes so far.

So why no real footage yet?

ORIGINAL: guanotwozero

If there had been a high rate of engagement successes, then the Syrian media should be showing off the debris ad nauseam. Triumphant soldiers standing on remains of missiles, giving v-signs. But they're not - only fakes so far.

So why no real footage yet?

It's an assumption that they would show such footage? Its not like they have a policy where they must show triumphant soldiers standing over debris of enemy vehicles after every battle. Nor must they show debris.

Someone posted something earlier about how pieces would scatter all over the place, and would be difficult to find en masse. Maybe that is the reason?

They may still be in the process of trying to find wreckage for all we know.