• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Unprecedented development: Syria downs Israeli F16

  • Advertisement
  • sadek2010

    Well-Known Member
    Even if they launched 100 missiles they would still cost less than the F16 :)
    Lik that wasnt my point , it was simple qst. I just wanted to known if it s true that they lunched 25 missile
    Ley ma7adan bijewib 3al sou2al keloun azkiya
    So again if u know the number pls reply
    Do u know how many missiles did they lunch to hit the F16? Thank u
     

    sadek2010

    Well-Known Member
    According to one account they launched 25 missiles. But it was unclear if it was to only one plane or all the planes.
    Anyway they are old version missiles but it does not matter as long as they were able to knock it of the sky.
    This will give them more ideas, more experience in how to deal with such threat.
    Of course the only problem is the number of missiles they have in the stock.
    But the important in this issue is that they now know how to shoot planes, sophisticated ones, and will make Israelis much more nervous in the future because losing another one will mean the end of their dominance to the sky
    thank you.
    I think they lured the F16 with the drone it was an operation and a succefull one.
    I think the f16 didnt have defence mechanism enough for 25 missile.
    They didnt expect a massive attack on one plane .
     
    thank you.
    I think they lured the F16 with the drone it was an operation and a succefull one.
    I think the f16 didnt have defence mechanism enough for 25 missile.
    They didnt expect a massive attack on one plane .
    "According to one account they launched 25 missiles. But it was unclear if it was to only one plane or all the planes."

    I am sure Syrians were aiming at all planes at once, to do otherwise does not make sense.
     

    Iron Maiden

    Well-Known Member
    Lik that wasnt my point , it was simple qst. I just wanted to known if it s true that they lunched 25 missile
    Ley ma7adan bijewib 3al sou2al keloun azkiya
    So again if u know the number pls reply
    Do u know how many missiles did they lunch to hit the F16? Thank u
    Smartass questions require smartass responses! who here would know how many missiles were launched :jimlad:
     

    zero

    New Member
    "According to one account they launched 25 missiles. But it was unclear if it was to only one plane or all the planes."

    I am sure Syrians were aiming at all planes at once, to do otherwise does not make sense.
    It could be they fired on one plane. More missiles targetting one plane= more chance of hitting that plane
     
    It could be they fired on one plane. More missiles targetting one plane= more chance of hitting that plane
    By firing at single plane you'd leave yourself vulnerable to unimpeded attack by other planes.

    Somehow I do not think Syrians wanted to afford this option to IAF.

    Anyway, if it were me I'd fire at all of them.
     
    Then I have better argument for you.

    Results of Israeli response - all Iranian/Syrian targets are destroyed, Syrian air defense failed, drons are not flying, Iranians are quiet (looking pretty).
    Israeli raids over Syria stopped so far. Why do you assume SA will use all anti air (revealing their position) to defend an Israeli air assault?
    More reasonable to assume SA will use them in similar traps, laying ambushes guerilla style.
    The tactics used in 1982 air battle over Bekaa will not be used again obviously.
     

    zero

    New Member
    By firing at single plane you'd leave yourself vulnerable to unimpeded attack by other planes.

    Somehow I do not think Syrians wanted to afford this option to IAF.

    Anyway, if it were me I'd fire at all of them.
    Im no expert but i think the point was downing a plane, not necessarily preventing any attack. If that makes sense.
    Anyway,
    breaking news: police find sufficient evidence to charge netanyahu with corruption
     
    Im no expert but i think the point was downing a plane, not necessarily preventing any attack. If that makes sense.
    Anyway,
    breaking news: police find sufficient evidence to charge netanyahu with corruption
    Ideally, one plane one missile - you have opportunity to down them all if you have enough of missiles and looks like Assad has enough of missiles.
     
    Even if they launched 100 missiles they would still cost less than the F16 :)
    Interesting excerpt on the economics of asymmetric warfare.



    New equation here: Israeli air superiority will remain. But the operations (if they decide to resume or initiate aggression) will become more restricted, complicated, and expensive. This is to account for added risk and precautions.
     
    Israeli raids over Syria stopped so far. Why do you assume SA will use all anti air (revealing their position) to defend an Israeli air assault?
    More reasonable to assume SA will use them in similar traps, laying ambushes guerilla style.
    The tactics used in 1982 air battle over Bekaa will not be used again obviously.
    Do not rush - Israel did not cross into Syrian airspace daily, but as needed and I am sure they'll keep doing it in the same way if not more aggressively.

    "More reasonable to assume SA will use them in similar traps, laying ambushes guerilla style" - actually it is no longer possible, if it even were a trap it could only work once.

    Besides, losing big chunk of your firepower over one F-16 is too high of a price to pay and it Assad and Iranians did not get it yet they will.
     
    Do not rush - Israel did not cross into Syrian airspace daily, but as needed and I am sure they'll keep doing it in the same way if not more aggressively.
    We will see.

    "More reasonable to assume SA will use them in similar traps, laying ambushes guerilla style" - actually it is no longer possible, if it even were a trap it could only work once.
    You doubt it was a trap? What other theory that makes sense?
    If it was why wouldn't it work again? Knowing where/when IAF will strike does not necessarily require IAF swallowing bait.

    Besides, losing big chunk of your firepower over one F-16 is too high of a price to pay and it Assad and Iranians did not get it yet they will.
    Changing tactics to account for the threat and uncertainty has to be done, even if not a shot fired.
    You maybe right about this (depends how much is big chunk).
    What did Israel destroy as retaliation? Lets see the cost (although this tells part of the story only).