Photos of the Syria strike show missile interceptors firing blindly, failing to stop attack

[El Sidd]

Its all fake

 

[Shamsher1990]

I have been following this even quite keenly. Here are some of my observations:

US/UK/France fired about 50 Tomahawks on the Chemical Research Centre in Syria. If you do back of the envelop calculation it goes like this :

Each missile carries 450 KG of high explosive (C4/HMX RE equivalent) that is equivalent to 450 x 1.7 = roughly 750 KG of TNT. This according to Kingery-Bulmash equation and UN calculator based on that, it gives an incident pressure of 9.9 psi at a distance of 30 meters. Enough to completely destroy concrete structures. Even the hardened ones. If you look at the map of the target, each building is smaller than 30 meter in radius. Heck the entire complex can be enclosed in a 100x150 meter rectangle. So 5-6 missile are enough to demolish all the structures in the compound. Given the excellent accuracy of the Tomahawks, it is surprising that US and friends used 50 of these missiles.

I am suspecting Russia is tell the truth here. NATO was at-least worried about interception. Did the interception really happened is another question. I will go with Russian view here, most probably it did happen. May not be as much 71 out of 100 but quite a few of the missile did get intercepted.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

I have been following this even quite keenly. Here are some of my observations:

US/UK/France fired about 50 Tomahawks on the Chemical Research Centre in Syria. If you do back of the envelop calculation it goes like this :

Each missile carries 450 KG of high explosive (C4/HMX RE equivalent) that is equivalent to 450 x 1.7 = roughly 750 KG of TNT. This according to Kingery-Bulmash equation and UN calculator based on that, it gives an incident pressure of 9.9 psi at a distance of 30 meters. Enough to completely destroy concrete structures. Even the hardened ones. If you look at the map of the target, each building is smaller than 30 meter in radius. Heck the entire complex can be enclosed in a 100x150 meter rectangle. So 5-6 missile are enough to demolish all the structures in the compound. Given the excellent accuracy of the Tomahawks, it is surprising that US and friends used 50 of these missiles.

I am suspecting Russia is tell the truth here. NATO was at-least worried about interception. Did the interception really happened is another question. I will go with Russian view here, most probably it did happen. May not be as much 71 out of 100 but quite a few of the missile did get intercepted.

Yes, if there is no knowledge, then You had better adopt the Russian view.
That they lied about interceptions of the previous CM strike can safely be ignored.

The known facts are:

• The coalition fired CM at Syria.
• Several targets were destroyed.
• No evidence of the number of missiles fired.
• No evidence of any CM beeing intercepted.

Some previous Russian claims.

• Russians show pictures of intercepted CMs, which then are shown to be something completely different.
• Russians claimed that 5 russians died in the recent clash with the US, but they had to back off and admit ”several dozens” once Russian journalists started to count. (One of them now dead after falling from the fifth floor). Never mind that hundreds were killed.
• Russian had no responsibility for the little green men in Crimea.
• MH17 was shot down by an Ukrainan fighter jet, the remains of a BUK warhead found in bodies can be disregarded.

Feel free to trust habitual liars...

 

[Shamsher1990]

Yes, if there is no knowledge, then You had better adopt the Russian view.
That they lied about interceptions of the previous CM strike can safely be ignored.

Its not just that only Russia lies. There have been quite a few lies from US/UK/France about their weapon systems and even their missions.

I did an independent fact-check because 50 missiles for a 15000 SQ Meter complex looked weird to me and it points the over-kill of missiles. Makes me wonder why so many missiles are claimed to be dedicated to a target which is not big enough. Something is fishy. Either they are scamming their nation for missile and expense or they targetted something else as well which they are not forthcoming about or may be their missiles were vulnerable for interception and they fired a literally boat-load of the weapons to compensate..

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Its not just that only Russia lies. There have been quite a few lies from US/UK/France about their weapon systems and even their missions.

I did an independent fact-check because 50 missiles for a 15000 SQ Meter complex looked weird to me and it points the over-kill of missiles. Makes me wonder why so many missiles are claimed to be dedicated to a target which is not big enough. Something is fishy. Either they are scamming their nation for missile and expense or they targetted something else as well which they are not forthcoming about or may be their missiles were vulnerable for interception and they fired a literally boat-load of the weapons to compensate..

Having theories is fine, believing in miracles is another.

 

[Aramagedon]

View this content on Instagram

View this content on Instagram

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Its not just that only Russia lies. There have been quite a few lies from US/UK/France about their weapon systems and even their missions.

I did an independent fact-check because 50 missiles for a 15000 SQ Meter complex looked weird to me and it points the over-kill of missiles. Makes me wonder why so many missiles are claimed to be dedicated to a target which is not big enough. Something is fishy. Either they are scamming their nation for missile and expense or they targetted something else as well which they are not forthcoming about or may be their missiles were vulnerable for interception and they fired a literally boat-load of the weapons to compensate..

Or they are doing weapon testing.
The point is that you do not know, and then decide that the version provided by known liars is the most plausible.

 

[Vassnti]

I have been following this even quite keenly. Here are some of my observations:

US/UK/France fired about 50 Tomahawks on the Chemical Research Centre in Syria. If you do back of the envelop calculation it goes like this :

Each missile carries 450 KG of high explosive (C4/HMX RE equivalent) that is equivalent to 450 x 1.7 = roughly 750 KG of TNT. This according to Kingery-Bulmash equation and UN calculator based on that, it gives an incident pressure of 9.9 psi at a distance of 30 meters. Enough to completely destroy concrete structures. Even the hardened ones. If you look at the map of the target, each building is smaller than 30 meter in radius. Heck the entire complex can be enclosed in a 100x150 meter rectangle. So 5-6 missile are enough to demolish all the structures in the compound. Given the excellent accuracy of the Tomahawks, it is surprising that US and friends used 50 of these missiles.

I am suspecting Russia is tell the truth here. NATO was at-least worried about interception. Did the interception really happened is another question. I will go with Russian view here, most probably it did happen. May not be as much 71 out of 100 but quite a few of the missile did get intercepted.

You are neglecting one point, the number of missiles fired was a political decision not a military one.

I agree 5-6 missiles impacting the target would probably have done the job, however it wouldn't have allowed trump to claim this was bigger than last time.

As for intercepts seeing it appears the Russian crews were all at home safely tucked in their beds with their top shelf equipment turned off its very hard to believe that the Syrians with 3rd rate hand me down that were apparently afraid to actually turn on their radars hit 75% if the missiles.

Did the US hit the targets yes.
Did Russia let them probably.
Did trump cancel the proposed new Russian sanctions after Putin let trump have his little aren't I great victory lap , yes.

 

[$@rJen]

Its a Rubbish Video... there's no intercept !!! tell me what was it hitting? Air ??? does tomahawk has no engine ??!!
Its a childish video man

 

[LeGenD]

I have been following this even quite keenly. Here are some of my observations:

US/UK/France fired about 50 Tomahawks on the Chemical Research Centre in Syria. If you do back of the envelop calculation it goes like this :

Each missile carries 450 KG of high explosive (C4/HMX RE equivalent) that is equivalent to 450 x 1.7 = roughly 750 KG of TNT. This according to Kingery-Bulmash equation and UN calculator based on that, it gives an incident pressure of 9.9 psi at a distance of 30 meters. Enough to completely destroy concrete structures. Even the hardened ones. If you look at the map of the target, each building is smaller than 30 meter in radius. Heck the entire complex can be enclosed in a 100x150 meter rectangle. So 5-6 missile are enough to demolish all the structures in the compound. Given the excellent accuracy of the Tomahawks, it is surprising that US and friends used 50 of these missiles.

Warhead type matters! They can equip a Tomahawk cruise missile with a nuclear warhead and take out a city with a single strike.

NATO might not have armed its precision munition with high-explosive warheads for these strikes. They wanted to minimize the prospects of collateral damage so it makes sense to use warheads that would be least destructive.

The compound in question (i.e. Barzeh facility) was not only massive in size but its buildings were rectangular in shape and even featured small gardens. Quality of concrete would also be really good.

Tomahawk cruise missiles have a diameter of just 26 inches so every missile would have struck that facility from different angles without any issue. It is also possible that 2 Tomahawk cruise missiles struck the same spot each.

I am suspecting Russia is tell the truth here. NATO was at-least worried about interception. Did the interception really happened is another question. I will go with Russian view here, most probably it did happen. May not be as much 71 out of 100 but quite a few of the missile did get intercepted.

Nobody is stopping Russians from parading so many intercepted trophies around but they haven't shown any so far which makes you wonder. A few images that circulated around were easily busted.

Think about it.

 

[The SC]

Its a Rubbish Video... there's no intercept !!! tell me what was it hitting? Air ??? does tomahawk has no engine ??!!
Its a childish video man

How can a blind see anything..anyway..

 

[Falcon29]

How can a blind see anything..anyway..

أي إعتراض يا زلمه وحد الله

 

[The SC]

أي إعتراض يا زلمه وحد الله

Don't know what to do with this.. it looks like an intercept, but some say it is just a Syrian SAM exploding on its own!!?

 

[Oldman1]

Wow they claim to have shot down phantom missiles in false alarm.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/apr/17/syria-missiles-fired-at-air-base-near-homs-state-tv

Syrian claims of missile attack on Homs airbase were 'false alarm'
State media reports that Syria’s air defences were mistakenly activated overnight at Shayrat


http://www.businessinsider.com/syri...attack-later-says-fired-on-false-alarm-2018-4

Syria claims to thwart missile attack, later says it fired off defenses in a false alarm

AMMAN (Reuters) - A false alarm led to Syrian air defense missiles being fired overnight and no new attack on Syria took place, Syrian state media and a military commander said on Tuesday.

Syrian state TV reported overnight that anti-aircraft defenses had shot down missiles fired at an air base in the Homs area, and a media unit run by the Lebanese group Hezbollah said missiles had also targeted an air base near Damascus.

The incident underscored fears of a further escalation in the Syrian conflict after a U.S., British and French attack on Syrian targets on Saturday and an air strike on an air base the previous week that Damascus blamed on Israel.

Syrian state news agency SANA cited a military source as saying a number of air defense missiles had been fired but no foreign attack had taken place.

Separately, a commander in the regional military alliance backing the government attributed the malfunction to "a joint electronic attack" by Israel and the United States targeting the Syrian radar system.

The issue had been dealt with by Russian experts, said the commander, who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity.

State television had showed pictures of a missile it said was shot in the air above the air base.

 

[Shamsher1990]

NATO might not have armed its precision munition with high-explosive warheads for these strikes. They wanted to minimize the prospects of collateral damage so it makes sense to use warheads that would be least destructive.

If you want to minimize the collateral damage, you will not fire 8-10 times the missiles than needed. Simply because of chance of a missile hitting outside the intended target.

Warhead type matters! They can equip a Tomahawk cruise missile with a nuclear warhead and take out a city with a single strike.

The warhead types are following known ones.
1. 1000 pound high explosive.
2. Submunition cluster bomb type.
3. Nuclear bomb.

It is most likely 1000 pound high explosive.

Tomahawk cruise missiles have a diameter of just 26 inches so every missile would have struck that facility from different angles without any issue. It is also possible that 2 Tomahawk cruise missiles struck the same spot each.

Its not as much the question of diameter of the missile but that of guidance. Tomahawks have indeed really good guidance system, question is why will you want to deploy 8-10 times of needed. I think US wanted to saturate the air defence systems. They were expecting some interception, might have happened. Just not as much Russia is claiming.