Nothing needed to crash in order to achieve anything. The US did not say specifically what was disabled or for how long. Your assertion is based on bias speculation. The fact is US officials admitted that Russia jammed/disabled US aircraft, you somehow spin it now and say it's resilient. The US is the one complaining about Russia disruption their operations, you however, spung it as Russian propaganda when Russia stayed quiet.
Useless rants and excuses. Americans complain about Russian military operations on a daily basis - what is new?
Russian EW capabilities utterly failed to hamper American military operations in Syria in significant ways, and this is apparent from the fact that NATO-SDF bloc succeeded in defeating ISIS in the region. Secondly, whenever US forces decided to strike at Syrian regime, Russian EW capabilities utterly failed to disrupt these military operations. For instance, explain to me what the mighty Russian EW capabilities achieved in the following fight?
LINK:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/24/...ican-commandos-russian-mercenaries-syria.html
- Nothing.
"In many ways I think what Russia is doing is just basically crying out at the night to try and be heard by someone, but I really don’t think anyone is listening because their capabilities are vastly inferior to the West on most occasions." -
Brandon Valeriano
&
"U.S. military maintains sufficient countermeasures and protections to ensure the safety of our manned and unmanned aircraft, our forces and the missions they support." -
Eric Pahon
However:
"For operational security reasons, we don’t discuss E.W., to include our detection or protection from these kinds of operations." -
Adrian Rankine-Galloway
Some news for you:
[1] https://i-hls.com/archives/84029
[2] http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...getting-new-sensors-and-anti-gps-jamming-gear
NOTE:-
"But while Russia’s GPS jamming and spoofing in Syria is definitely a cause for concern, especially given the steadily worsening ties between the Kremlin and the U.S. government, the full extent of Russian capabilities in this regard in the country and whether there has been any actual shift in policy remain unclear. The sources told NBC News that larger unmanned aircraft, such as MQ-9 Reapers and MQ-1 Predators, remained unaffected, which might be an indication that the electronic warfare attacks had been relatively localized and not complex enough to jam those drones' microwave satellite communications data links.
This would make sense given the increasingly close proximity of American and Russian-backed forces in Syria. U.S. forces throughout the country have been taking up more robust postures with added defenses in recent months in response to threats from various groups."
Therefore, General Raymond Thomas is
BLUFFING for 'public consumption' - his statement about Russian EW capabilities being able to disable AC-130 gunships over Syria was in a SYMPOSIUM. Self-explanatory.
Sensational reports of Russian military prowess are necessary to convince American public to continue to fund American military-oriented projects for indefinite period; FEAR being the driving force in this matter. Conversely, Russian propaganda machine is very capable in itself, and have done a splendid job in undermining Western narrative in contested spaces.
"The truth is, as we at The War Zone have been noting for months, that there is something of a low-level fight between Russia and the United States in Syria already, as well as elsewhere in the world. It’s a hybrid conflict that involves the heavy use of proxy forces and information warfare to create conflicting narratives about what’s actually happening on the ground." - Joseph Trevithick
Excellent read:
https://thedefensepost.com/2018/02/28/opinion-russia-us-less-than-war/
The bottom line is that modern warfare techniques are not limited to kinetics, but encompass "narrative-building."
You arnt neutral. You are literally marking up claims. You don't know to what axtent Russia has gone to disrupt US operations and you don't know what they disrupted.
See above. I simply do not buy your fairy tales.
Your assertions were noted and deemed copy and paste propaganda. You made assertions that the F-22 nozzles were somehow more stealthy then when I pointed close ups of large gaps, bolts, and protrudions you doubled down, started denying without evidence and started desperately copying and pasting unrelated articles how the F-22 is so great and how the nozzles were better despite having horrible tolerances and 90 degree corners which is the biggest no no of 'stealt'.
When I posted SU-35 imagery of F-22 heat signature you just about had a mental breakdown.
Your counterarguments are PERCEPTIVE NONSENSE and I am not interested in entertaining them.
[1]
[2]
[3]
NOTE:-
"Worthwhile to mention here that Su-57 has frontal RCS of 1sqm and rear RCS of 5sqm which falls under the category of fourth gen fighter jet. This is why Russian mounted a low-cost radar at the tail end of the aircraft is to detect whether the aircraft is being pursued by another aircraft because Su-57 cannot hide its signature from the rear end."
SHAME.
If you have concrete figures of RCS of both F-22A and Su-57 from their rear, kindly share. Otherwise, STFU.
It's the other way around, you sell fairytales.
This apply to you.
Right, Pakistan is not impressed but buys Russian weapons when many good options are available. For instance, the Mi-17 has a world class reputation, even NATO, including Canada and the US use the helicopters in Afghanistan. Germans and Japanese offer very little in terms of weapons and German systems are overrated, leopards turned out to be duds In Syria when they were taunted to have world class protection. All I seen was 'cook offs' similar to old Soviet tanks.
Pakistan does not have sufficient funds and geopolitical clout to buy whatever it want to in relation to procurement of arms. Please do not try to lecture me about the procurement realities of Pakistani armed forces because I know better than you.
Russian hardware is popular due to being easier to maintain in comparison to alternatives at times. American hardware can be very complex (superior design and capabilities) but also difficult to maintain accordingly. There are trade-offs to consider. Cost is very important aspect to consider as well.
Russian hardware is normally GOOD, but it doesn't have to be the best in the world to attract customers. Competitive price - performance - maintenance ratio is important.
And I have used German weapons and have owned German vehicles, I was not impressed, needless over complicated and unreliable. In many instances I was baffled at how moronic German ingineeing was. But that is here nor there.
Kindly tell me which Russian automaker produce cars which are better than the offerings of German Audi in Pakistan.
