US Defense System ‘Falls Flat’ Against Iranian Suicide Drone In Syria; US Investigates Avengers’ Failure

[Hack-Hook]

The question must be what are Americans doing in Syria? Their positions in Syria were within an earshot of ISIS bases there. ISIS has been decimated. It's time to decimate American occupation as well.

They're there illegally and have no purpose. In fact they have been found facilitating smuggling of Syrian oil to Kurdish areas literary fueling the conflict to divide Syrian land. This conflict will ultimately benefit Israel.

isis not decimated in all Syria , they are still present in areas that they are under the protection of USA air force and air defense . aka 100km radios around USA bases in syria

And Iran support Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations in Syria against US and Israel so what so special about it if US and Israel supported ISIS in Syria???

its several years that i can't find any Hezbollah in Syria.
and the terrorist part , well we consider CENTCOM as terrorist organization

 

[LegionnairE]

They need to stop rely on 1980s era anti-air missile for protection is what they should do, Avenger Defence System are 30+ years old, and we have better stuff but not piped down to the frontline troop for tactical defence (like Vanguard, Centurion or MSHORAD) Instead they keep rely on the old Avenger.......

They have some really weird deficiencies and their priorities are certainly much different than ours. They spent enormous sums of money on replacing the Nimitz class carriers which could probably keep going another decade But they are still rolling with ancient M109 howitzers and stubby L44 gun on the Abrams.

How difficult must it be to add a little booster to the AIM-9x or just convert AIM-120 AMRAAM and use them from the ground? Or convert some ESSMs, some SM2s for ground based SAM? Makes you scratch your head.

Something like the Draco with 76mm shells with terminal guidance has much longer effective range.

just get the naval 127mm gun on an armored vehicle or just convert an M109 to fire AA shells. Add a little targeting radar on it and done.

There are a billion things americans could do but they won't

 

[Communism]

They have some really weird deficiencies and their priorities are certainly much different than ours. They spent enormous sums of money on replacing the Nimitz class carriers which could probably keep going another decade But they are still rolling with ancient M109 howitzers and stubby L44 gun on the Abrams.

How difficult must it be to add a little booster to the AIM-9x or just convert AIM-120 AMRAAM and use them from the ground? Or convert some ESSMs, some SM2s for ground based SAM? Makes you scratch your head.

Budget priorities go to Air Force first, Navy second, and Army last.


This is why the Army is the only branch of the U.S. military that tries to save money at all.


Using air to air missiles or naval missiles from the ground is ruinously expensive.


AIM-9x is ~500,000 USD each.


AIM-120D is ~1,000,000 USD each.


ESSM is ~1,800,000 USD each.


SM2 is ~1,200,000-~2,400,000 USD each.


You have to remember that every air defense system means less planes for the Air Force.


Air Force gets first dibs on the budget, and air defense systems would theoretically kill the reason to have fighter jets, so air defense needs to never be funded to make sure that fighter jets never get their funding cut.

 

[LegionnairE]

Budget priorities go to Air Force first, Navy second, and Army last.


This is why the Army is the only branch of the U.S. military that tries to save money at all.


Using air to air missiles or naval missiles from the ground is ruinously expensive.


AIM-9x is ~500,000 USD each.


AIM-120D is ~1,000,000 USD each.


ESSM is ~1,800,000 USD each.


SM2 is ~1,200,000-~2,400,000 USD each.

Who cares man?

Development cost will be zero. And development time is also basically zero. You could buy them in limtied numbers and deploy them in critical areas. It would be far less embarrassing. Send them back to the air force/ Navy when you have something more cost effective available.

If that's not good enough you could buy some Korkut systems from Turkey

 

[Communism]

Who cares man?

Development cost will be zero. And development time is also basically zero. You could buy them in limtied numbers and deploy them in critical areas. It would be far less embarrassing. Send them back to the air force/ Navy when you have something more cost effective available.

If that's not good enough you could buy some Korkut systems from Turkey

You clearly didn't read what I wrote.


Army simply doesn't matter.


Their only real role is spotting for airstrikes anyways.


A few army men die, who cares.


If it gets politically costly, simply change the entire U.S. Army to contractors so that the deaths don't count as deaths.

 

[LegionnairE]

You clearly didn't read what I wrote.


Army simply doesn't matter.


Their only real role is spotting for airstrikes anyways.


A few army men die, who cares.


If it gets politically costly, simply change the entire U.S. Army to contractors so that the deaths don't count as deaths.

Are you familiar with the term one-trick pony?


Also you wanna know why Alexander the Great's army was so great?

If everything relies on one system to werk, and one day the enemy figures out how to counter that system, you're fvcked. IF your military is strong in all branches, not much can stop you.

USAF isn't the unchallenged force it used to be. F-22 is retiring. Times are changing. You have to change with it.

 

[Communism]

Are you familiar with the term one-trick pony?


Also you wanna know why Alexander the Great's army was so great?

If everything relies on one system to werk, and one day the enemy figures out how to counter that system, you're fvcked. IF your military is strong in all branches, not much can stop you.

Don't tell that to me, tell that to the U.S. military.


I'm simply telling you how it works.

 

[LegionnairE]

Don't tell that to me, tell that to the U.S. military.

I'm simply telling you how it works.

We were discussing how things could be, and should be.

I'm perfectly aware of how they already are. But thank you.

 

[aryobarzan]

In the late 1970s US did try to put a gun on top of an armored chassis with radar targeting for AA purposes..it was called " Sargent York"..a system that never worked and was finally terminated..that made AA a target for bean counters in the US..lol..just a bit of history.

 

[LegionnairE]

In the late 1970s US did try to put a gun on top of an armored chassis with radar targeting for AA purposes..it was called " Sargent York"..a system that never worked and was finally terminated..that made AA a target for bean counters in the US..lol..just a bit of history.

Before Sargeant York there was the M42 Duster ...even Turkey had some of them I think a few might still be in the inventory when Korkuts first came out.

Electronically, C-RAM is a much better system but it's limited by the 20mm caliber.

German Millennium gun(or sky guard or sky shield or whatever) and Turkish Korkut are far better systems on the NATO side.

Pantsir seems very good on paper but we saw that destroyed by TB2s a couple of times. Once in Armenia I remember very vividly. Maybe since Ukraine they've gotten better software or something.

 

[jhungary]

They have some really weird deficiencies and their priorities are certainly much different than ours. They spent enormous sums of money on replacing the Nimitz class carriers which could probably keep going another decade But they are still rolling with ancient M109 howitzers and stubby L44 gun on the Abrams.

How difficult must it be to add a little booster to the AIM-9x or just convert AIM-120 AMRAAM and use them from the ground? Or convert some ESSMs, some SM2s for ground based SAM? Makes you scratch your head.


just get the naval 127mm gun on an armored vehicle or just convert an M109 to fire AA shells. Add a little targeting radar on it and done.

There are a billion things americans could do but they won't

They work on a global force, so Navy always get the biggest budget, the US defence posture is that the Navy will protect us from threat at sea, extending the strategic depth by defending the ocean, Air Force also were used to extend the strategic depth out so they have the second most budget, Army were mostly stuck in territorial defence mode and they are still using the civil war era model (at least when i was in the Army) they expect you to use already established infrastructure and equipment, like you are expected to travel by car instead of military transport, or by subway or train, you are supposed to quarter with the civilian if we were under attack. That civil war era mentality means we don't need as much budget than the rest of the branch because we are geographically limited.

Accord to CBO, last year we saw 22% of defence budget spend on the Army, 26% on the Air Force and 31% in the Navy. The rest are split between organisation and infrastructure.

So we have the least budget but is the biggest branch of all 5, so Army always not budget friendly. I remember the time when i was deployed to Iraq, we were equipped to barebone, compare to the gear today soldier have, what we had back then is minimal, you would probably laugh at us if you see what kind of gear we are rolling back in 2003. I mean I was allotted a M4 without ACOG, Foregrip, PEQ-15, most soldier buy their own gear to war, only when the war got hotter, they started to put more budget in and we started to get next gen IOTV, Tact-Com and so on as individual equipment.

 

[Oldman1]

I think it is safe to say that although US has absolute superiority in Aircraft Technology their Air Defence products just suck..always disappoints in the actual field....They should buy AD systems from Iran..(at least after Global Hawk they know ours work.).

LOL! Funny. Considering many drones of Iran being shot down in Iraq and Syria.

I wouldn't say their air defence products are sub-par, they're among the most advanced in the world. It's rather that Iran has perfected the asymmetric approach to warfare, cold-bloodedly exploiting whatever vulnerabilities enemy defences may present to the most cost effective offensive weapons and tactics conceivable.

Also let's keep in mind military doctrines by essence are on the static side. It takes considerable domestic and/or international political disruption to initiate a rethink, and then these sorts of processes move on at a very slow pace. In a country such as the USA the issue is further magnified by the impact of the military-industrial complex's special interests upon the regime's procurement policies. So the Americans are not going to shift their fundamental focus away from airpower nor transform their general way of waging war anytime soon.

As for them trying to address potential loopholes in their AD systems by investing into the field accordingly, this isn't a one-way street: Iran as well is constantly adjusting her weapons development to steps taken by the enemy. So the mere possibility that the USA regime may come up with new and innovative air defence systems at a given point in future doesn't imply that Iranian weapons will be rendered useless - especially those Iran will be having access to by that time.

Only because there was no serious threat since War on Terror last 2 decades. Now the U.S. military taking drones seriously and you have seen Iran back groups in Iraq and Syria using kamikaze drones and recon being shot down. And they are adding more layers of systems as well as learning from the war in Ukraine where Russians losing tens of thousands casualties from drones being used for kamikaze or recon. Not to mention Ukraine encountering Shahed drones which is a great learning experience.

 

[DF41]

LOUD MOUTH MURICA GOOD AT MAKING EXCUSES AFTER EXCUSES IN ADDITION TO TELLING LIES AND AND STEALING AND CHEATING

Why am I reminded of KSA and the protection of Murican systems over the oil installation there?

A US 4 star general once said not long ago that China can kill as many as 20 to 30 millions Americans only in a nuclear war that means only about 10% penetration rate of Chinese nukes at US defence shield

10% penetration?

More likely it will be 99% penetration



And as demonstrated so clearly in KSA the Aegis and Patriot systems defending Saudi a joke as the Aegis and Patriot cannot even detect a few sub Mach cruise missiles not to talk of taking them down. Even to now, no one sure where those came from and who flown them. Despite overlapping coverage of those Patriot and Aegis systems.
New sales pitch? US makes the world’s ‘finest’ anti-air systems, but sometimes they just don’t work, Pompeo explains
Saudi air defenses like Patriot & Aegis don’t match their advertised properties, unfit for real combat – Russian Army (MAP)

USA vaunted defense cannot even defend Saudi Arabia against a handful of slow poke sub mach drones and missiles



How then your touted defense systems all failed in Saudi Arabia?


And that against only puny sub sonic slow poke drones and missiles


Murica touted ability with their super duper missiles of Thaad and Patriot and Aegis to defend KSA that Murica so clearly and explicitly demonstrated to te entire world

The world see many overlapping safe covered zones of defenses.

Yet the launching and hits were made by several missiles.

To date, records could not even find the tracks where the missiles came from , and if the installations not hit, might not even have existed.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middl...es-destroy-houthi-drones-state-tv-2022-03-25/





So you think you be doing much much better against supersonics and hypersonics missiles by the hundreds and thousands?


Tell us again of the LAYERED DEFENSE SYSTEM that Saudi Arabia bought from USA

On March 25 or so.

Saudi Aramco storage facility targeted by Houthi attack, causing fire - Our Today​

Saudi Aramco storage facility targeted by Houthi attack, causing fire - Our Today​

RIYADH (Reuters) Yemen’s Houthis said they launched attacks on Saudi energy facilities on Friday (March 25) and the Saudi-led coalition said oil giant Aramco’s petroleum products distribution station in Jeddah...

our.today

No wonder Saudi Arabia lost all respect for USA and not only refused to accept call from Sleepy Joe.

But created a parody of Sleepy Joe and his Kamala as a sign of the esteem Saudi got for USA now and the failure of USA defensive systems that cannot even stop slow poke attacks from slow poke drones and slow poke missiles.

How will the Patriot systems in USA defend against ICBMs coming in at speed of Mach 25 when they cannot even detect missiles at sub Mach or even know where the missiles came from despite overlapping coverage?

 

[Communism]

C-Ram is extremely short range, making it mostly worthless for anything other than point defense.


Something like the Draco with 76mm shells with terminal guidance has much longer effective range.


Don't confuse the naval Phalanx CIWS with Centurion C-Ram, the Phalanx is able to use solid shells which gives it longer effective range (compared to the Centurion C-Ram, but still very short), but you can't just be spraying a stream of solid shells on land.

Here is a video to illustrate what I am talking about.

1 shot, 1 kill.


You can see in the video that in the 3-round burst, the first round already killed the target both times.


A system similar to this but utilizing AESA radars should theoretically be able to counter 10-30+ drones at once with independent radar guidance for each shell.


You should also be able to use dirt cheap unguided radio command fused shells against very slow un-maneuvering targets like the Iranian Shahed 136 or commercial quadcopters.

 

[SalarHaqq]

Only because there was no serious threat since War on Terror last 2 decades. Now the U.S. military taking drones seriously and you have seen Iran back groups in Iraq and Syria using kamikaze drones and recon being shot down. And they are adding more layers of systems as well as learning from the war in Ukraine where Russians losing tens of thousands casualties from drones being used for kamikaze or recon. Not to mention Ukraine encountering Shahed drones which is a great learning experience.

Everything you stated was addressed in my post. In short, tag me when Iranian UAV's (and their future developments) are rendered inefficient. We're waiting.