Turkey Shoots Down Jet Near Syria Border

[QuantumTokoloshi]

loveice said:

marshall100 said:

Apols, that should have been F35.

However it begs the question, what's a fair fight on the side of the Russians vs an F16?

As for this mission, there isn't a fair comparison from Russian side, due to the fact that they were in a 'simple' bombing mission which only requires bombers or bomber fighters (even with a 'fighter' in their names, they never stand a chance when facing real fighters). As the enemy doesn't even have an Air Force, just like all other countries who are also bombing the region, Russian wouldn't use any fighter escort with their bombers.

But, if you are asking on paper which fighter is the equivalent to F16 Turkey used in this case, then it should be the late model Mig-29 and Mig-35 (an upgraded model of Mig-29)..

Of cause, Russia could have used their Su-34 fighter bomber which is their latest fighter bomber. They should stand a better chance when facing real fighters. But still due to their physical size, they are never the best option to deal with fighters...

Indian Su-30MK did quite well against the US Airforce / RAF in joint training (pinch of salt required), thrust vectoring and Archer missiles are a substantial combination, mixed with a big PESA radar and the R-77 missiles, the Su-30SMs will make it a formidable gen 4 fighter opponent. Throw in a S400 SAM, and Turkish pilots will not be quite so keen to hit the big red button now, with these in the air.

A load of chest beating going on between them, much better idea to calm the hell down and sort it out diplomatically.

Edited by QuantumTokoloshi on Thursday 26th November 14:22

[superkartracer]

Martin4x4 said:

superkartracer said:

Martin4x4 said:

superkartracer said:

No chance , these guys are top the pile professionals and i'm sure some evidence will back these claims .

A professional would understand the distinction between altitude and latitude by longitude

Captain Konstantin Murakhtin said:

"No, this is out of the question even for a one-second possibility, as we were at the altitude of 6,000 metres and the weather was clear.

To be fair , the poor chap has just ejected from a jet that was hit by a missile , then shot at while parachuting , then prob kicked about a bit ... i'd give him some slack .

Yet he still had the presence of mind to present a completely misleading statement to the assembled press, which is what I was really getting at.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3333630/First-pictures-emerge-Russian-pilot-killed-Turkish-F-16-shot-jet-Syria-plus-pilot-survived-infantryman-killed-daring-rescue-mission.html

^^ well he is about to jump straight back into a fighter and dish out some stick , give him a ring and point the error out .

[irocfan]

genuswine Q here - when the Turks were apparently warning the Ruskies about airspace violations what language is it in? If the Ruskie doesn't understand English or Turkish they're pretty much fked surely?

[Bluebarge]

irocfan said:

genuswine Q here - when the Turks were apparently warning the Ruskies about airspace violations what language is it in? If the Ruskie doesn't understand English or Turkish they're pretty much fked surely?

http://www.aviation-esl.com/ICAO_English.htm

[WinstonWolf]

yellowjack said:

glazbagun said:

I may need a whoosh parrot. Russia/USSR has been flying planes into our airspace for Decades to test our air defences. We then send up a plane, tell them they're approaching our airspace, escort them out and take some snazzy photo's alongside Russian bombers



The SU 24 seemed to be just taking a short cut. Did the Turks threaten to shoot down the Russian jet prior to doing it? All I've heard was a request to change course, nothing about shooting anyone, not withstanding Turkey moving "their" airspace 5mi into Syria. Is there an overlay of airspace vs borders available for this yet?

As has been pointed out, Russia/USSR don't 'enter' UK airspace at all. They do, though, know pretty much the moment they enter our "area of interest", and when they do they start the stopwatches. It's all done to test and assess the UK's state of readiness, and the RAF's QRA intercept times.

I know it's not relevant to the Turkey/Syria/Russia situation, but here's a Sky News video of how we do it here in UK...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hijzP1zzLI

At 18m40sec in that video...

RAF QRA Typhoon pilot said:

1605 from Lima Tango 4-7. I am instructed by Her Majesty's government of the United Kingdom to warn you that if you do not respond immediately to my orders, you will be shot down

...this was during the interception of a Latvian cargo aircraft which was not communicating with ATC when approaching London.

It's a political decision ultimately to splash a civilian a/c, and "Call Me Dave" would have to find a spine and some pretty substantial balls to order a shoot-down on a commercial airliner, but those QRA crews need to be prepared to carry out such an order should it ever come down to it.

That bugger came right over my house flying supersonic, it popped my bloody loft hatch up and gave me a right fright

[dudleybloke]

John "hotshot" McCain must be jizzing in his pants over this situation.

[rovermorris999]

dudleybloke said:

John "hotshot" McCain must be jizzing in his pants over this situation.

Would that be John McCain, genuine war hero who knows what it's like?

[optimal909]

irocfan said:

genuswine Q here - when the Turks were apparently warning the Ruskies about airspace violations what language is it in? If the Ruskie doesn't understand English or Turkish they're pretty much fked surely?

What proves that this was recorded at this instance anyway? The only certainty in this story is that the aircraft was shot down in Syrian airspace.

[dudleybloke]

rovermorris999 said:

dudleybloke said:

John "hotshot" McCain must be jizzing in his pants over this situation.

Would that be John McCain, genuine war hero who knows what it's like?

That's the one.

[SlipStream77]

Some interesting reading on Russian kit here.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a...

[plasticpig]

Bluebarge said:

http://www.aviation-esl.com/ICAO_English.htm

It's a military jet; not a civilian aircraft so those rules do not apply.

[irocfan]

plasticpig said:

Bluebarge said:

http://www.aviation-esl.com/ICAO_English.htm

It's a military jet; not a civilian aircraft so those rules do not apply.

the thought had occurred to me....

[eharding]

plasticpig said:

Bluebarge said:

http://www.aviation-esl.com/ICAO_English.htm

It's a military jet; not a civilian aircraft so those rules do not apply.

Given that a military pilot's training can reasonably be expected to cover the case where he or she is the interceptor, rather than the intercepted, then a familiarity - possibly rusty - with the procedures isn't an unreasonable expectation.

Unless, of course, you think that non-english-speaking nations maintain a small specialist cadre of flawless English speaking pilots specifically for the purpose, rocking up and opening proceedings with a full-on Leslie Phillips "Helllooooooo, look here, old boy...."

[loveice]

PRTVR said:

loveice said:

marshall100 said:

Apols, that should have been F35.

However it begs the question, what's a fair fight on the side of the Russians vs an F16?

As for this mission, there isn't a fair comparison from Russian side, due to the fact that they were in a 'simple' bombing mission which only requires bombers or bomber fighters (even with a 'fighter' in their names, they never stand a chance when facing real fighters). As the enemy doesn't even have an Air Force, just like all other countries who are also bombing the region, Russian wouldn't use any fighter escort with their bombers.

But, if you are asking on paper which fighter is the equivalent to F16 Turkey used in this case, then it should be the late model Mig-29 and Mig-35 (an upgraded model of Mig-29)..

Of cause, Russia could have used their Su-34 fighter bomber which is their latest fighter bomber. They should stand a better chance when facing real fighters. But still due to their physical size, they are never the best option to deal with fighters...

Will it matter if the missiles are launched at BVR?, then does it not just come down to missile verses counter measures battle?

When both are at war, it matters less. However, in this situation when they were testing out each other (which means both aircrafts flew closely), being a fighter matters more, especially since most bombers don't even carry any AAM missiles.

[Halb]

dudleybloke said:

rovermorris999 said:

dudleybloke said:

John "hotshot" McCain must be jizzing in his pants over this situation.

Would that be John McCain, genuine war hero who knows what it's like?

That's the one.

The one that sleeps like a 'baby'?

[plasticpig]

eharding said:

Given that a military pilot's training can reasonably be expected to cover the case where he or she is the interceptor, rather than the intercepted, then a familiarity - possibly rusty - with the procedures isn't an unreasonable expectation.

Unless, of course, you think that non-english-speaking nations maintain a small specialist cadre of flawless English speaking pilots specifically for the purpose, rocking up and opening proceedings with a full-on Leslie Phillips "Helllooooooo, look here, old boy...."

No but I wouldn't expect an SU24 bomber to be intercepting another aircraft.

In this article it says in one of the previous incursions into Turkish airspace the Russians apologised and said the pilot didn't speak the language. It's not clear whether this is Turkish or English being referred to.

[eharding]

plasticpig said:

No but I wouldn't expect an SU24 bomber to be intercepting another aircraft.

Why not? In the general case, the act of 'interception' is simply to close with and visually identify another aircraft - provided the interceptor has sufficient performance to match the other aircraft, it can be tasked to do so.

During the London Olympics, lethargic Army helicopters were tasked with intercepting even more lethargic civilian traffic.

Interception protocols are exactly that - the ICAO documentation is one manifestation, but the whole point is that you don't *know* that the target of an interception is civilian, military, or Elvis and John Denver on a comeback tour. So everyone plays by the same rules, or at least attempts to do so - or either wilfully or through incompetence ignores them, and gets shot down as a result.

Hence your assertion that 'because military' the protocols don't apply, or that the pilots involved wouldn't be aware of them, is pure bunkum.

Edited by eharding on Friday 27th November 00:30

[glazbagun]

Turkey jails two journalists pending trial for espionage after they revealed the smuggling of weapons to rebels in 2014.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/76ce1e38a81b4fd6a8a...

They're like a smaller Russia.

[Pesty]

our allies

[danllama]

The plot thickens.