HJ-8 ATGM in Syria

US and other western countries arming of secular opposition to counter not onlyassad army,but also acted as a counter weight to al queda terrorist group.but the danger laid on saude and qatar intention,this gave them excuse to arm more radical wing of extremist group. this is what happen in afganistan.even if assad finally collapse, the war is simple entering into second phase, secular vs. islamist.
just look at iraq and afghanistan daily act of terrorism.
Britain,Us and france decision to arm the rebel may turn out the biggest blunder since 1953 coup in iran or suez canal crisis of 1956.

well i think if the rebels get hands on say MANPAD like Anza/Red Arrow then it will change course of the war entirely

currently Assads air force is attacking ground targets from 3,000-7,000 feet, the threat of MANPADS will force them to operate above the missile envelope >10,000 feet, and since the air force has virtually no targeting capabilitys for ground attack above that height it will seriously compromise their ability to attack the rebels and in turn allow rebels to better organise and plan thier land formations

in my opinion a MANPAD is therefore a game-changer a ATGM is a suppliment for now

asif iqbal said:

well i think if the rebels get hands on say MANPAD like Anza/Red Arrow then it will change course of the war entirely

currently Assads air force is attacking ground targets from 3,000-7,000 feet, the threat of MANPADS will force them to operate above the missile envelope >10,000 feet, and since the air force has virtually no targeting capabilitys for ground attack above that height it will seriously compromise their ability to attack the rebels and in turn allow rebels to better organise and plan thier land formations

in my opinion a MANPAD is therefore a game-changer a ATGM is a suppliment for now

Click to expand...

The rebels already have very capable MANPADS in the form of the FN6, but even if you gave every single rebel a FN6, and supplemented that with Tors, Patriots and S300 batteries it won't change the course of the war much.

The role the Syrian Air Force has played in this conflict has been marginal at best, and their transport helicopters are probably having a bigger impact than the odd bomb or rocket attack the fast jets might launch.

The whole air threat has been vastly exaggerated out of all proportion to their actual contribution to the war or the damage and casaulties they have caused because the war mongers in the western media knows that playing up the government air threat is the easiest excuse for the west to get involved directly by making the harmless sounding proposal to establish a no-fly zone, which can be quickly and easily mission creeped into air strikes and CAS as has happened in Libya, to act as the Air Force of the rebels and sweep away all government resistance before their advance and massively increase the chances of the fall of the Assad government.

On the ground, without a full scale western intervention, ATGMs are far more useful for fighting and winning the war.

plawolf said:

The rebels already have very capable MANPADS in the form of the FN6, but even if you gave every single rebel a FN6, and supplemented that with Tors, Patriots and S300 batteries it won't change the course of the war much.

The role the Syrian Air Force has played in this conflict has been marginal at best, and their transport helicopters are probably having a bigger impact than the odd bomb or rocket attack the fast jets might launch.

On the ground, without a full scale western intervention, ATGMs are far more useful for fighting and winning the war.

Click to expand...

that is incorrect, FN6 is far and few between, infact any MANPADS is far and few between, the only advantage the Syrian military has is in its air force and heavy calibre weapons

Syrian air force uses transport helicopters as "bombers", they basically fill a barrel with explosives and roll it off the rear ramp, its one of the devastating bombs they use, and its from less than 2,000 ft in the air yet rebels have no defence against it, a MANPAD for the rebels would be like a god sent dream if they had access to one i think you dont know the course the war is taking

the meer noise of a fighter aircraft is enough for rebels to go diving into a nearby trench or hole they are terrified from the air threat, Syrian air force can fly and hit at will, they have no equal, and to suggest that MANPAD will make no difference is gross over estimtation, one of the main weapons rebels have been asking for in the last 2 years is MANPADS and ATGM

asif iqbal said:

that is incorrect, FN6 is far and few between, infact any MANPADS is far and few between, the only advantage the Syrian military has is in its air force and heavy calibre weapons

Syrian air force uses transport helicopters as "bombers", they basically fill a barrel with explosives and roll it off the rear ramp, its one of the devastating bombs they use, and its from less than 2,000 ft in the air yet rebels have no defence against it, a MANPAD for the rebels would be like a god sent dream if they had access to one i think you dont know the course the war is taking

the meer noise of a fighter aircraft is enough for rebels to go diving into a nearby trench or hole they are terrified from the air threat, Syrian air force can fly and hit at will, they have no equal, and to suggest that MANPAD will make no difference is gross over estimtation, one of the main weapons rebels have been asking for in the last 2 years is MANPADS and ATGM

Click to expand...

If the rebels are terrified of that, they need discipline and training more than MANPADS, but without the former, having the latter would make little difference.

They are far far more likely to stop a bullet than get blown up by such crude barrel bombs. Pretty much everything else on the battlefield pose a greater threat. Any half decent soldier would realize that and would just ignore these crude terror tactics for the most part. You spread out to not present obvious targets, but otherwise just carry on as you would otherwise on the battlefield. Yeah it sucks to take fire and not be able to reply, but if they wanted a sporting fight, they should have stayed at home and taken up boxing.

The rebels might want MANPADS, I'm sure they want APCs, MBTs, their own Air Force, and probably preferably someone else to do the fighting to boot. What the rebels want and what they need are more often than not the same thing, and that goes for any soldier or fighter in the field. That's just the realities of war.

The important thing in separating the wants from the needs is to look at the tactical and strategic significance each weapon might have. The Syrian Air Force might make a lot of noise, but their crude bombing should have little real impact because they lack modern weapons, and also because the rebels lack much worth bombing in the first place. Iron bombs have about as much chance of killing infantry as shells, and you can fire far far more shells than the Syrian Air Force can drop bombs.

A tank is far far more lethal than a fast jet. A tank can cause far more damage than a Syrian fast jet, and a tank with some infantry support is a hard counter to light infantry that have no means to take out the tank at range.

Given a choice between MANPADS or ATGMs, I would take ATGMs every time because those are weapons that will make a real difference in battle. Syrian air power can be largely ignored, while ATGMs can wins battles and wars. Tanks cannot be ignored and with MANPADS but no ATGMs, you can feel safe sunbathing, but good luck trying to take that crossroad or hard point or anything defended by a tank. And does Syria have more tanks or fighters?

If anything is worthy of the overused title of 'game changer', it is ATGMs, not MANPADS. You can win the war with enough ATGMs and no MANPADS. Good luck trying to win the war with plenty of MANPADS but not enough ATGMs.

I hope you are taking about the same weapon as me, shoulder fired air defence missile? and u are saying its not relavence

These bombs are being dropped on residential areas and have killed many civilians, shoulder fired missiles would put a end to that

Stinger did not change the course of the Mujahideen war against the Soviets? Pakistan Anza missile downed Indian Mig21, Mig27 and Mi-17 in Kargil war, it wasnt until France and Israel supplied integrated pods on IAF Mirage 2000 that IAF started to come back in the war and the Chechens downed over 60 Russian aircraft many using MANPADS

To the contrary it's MANPADS that change the outcome of wars not ATGM, I am not discrediting ATGM but the weapons are also conflict specific and in this case a air defence system would win the war for the rebels

Taliban have no ATGM yet through IED have taken out thousands of land vehicles in Afghanistan, you can take a vehicle out on land using many innovation but same cant be said about aircraft

asif iqbal said:

To the contrary it's MANPADS that change the outcome of wars not ATGM, I am not discrediting ATGM but the weapons are also conflict specific and in this case a air defence system would win the war for the rebels

Click to expand...

Actually, right now it's not the Syrian air force the rebels have to be worried about. It's the Hezbollah fighters.

How is rolling an explosive barrel down a helicopter supposed to be more effective than an artillery barrage? You have more chance of shooting down a chopper with small arms than you have of silencing artillery a few km away from your position.

asif iqbal said:

I hope you are taking about the same weapon as me, shoulder fired air defence missile? and u are saying its not relavence

These bombs are being dropped on residential areas and have killed many civilians, shoulder fired missiles would put a end to that

Stinger did not change the course of the Mujahideen war against the Soviets? Pakistan Anza missile downed Indian Mig21, Mig27 and Mi-17 in Kargil war, it wasnt until France and Israel supplied integrated pods on IAF Mirage 2000 that IAF started to come back in the war and the Chechens downed over 60 Russian aircraft many using MANPADS

To the contrary it's MANPADS that change the outcome of wars not ATGM, I am not discrediting ATGM but the weapons are also conflict specific and in this case a air defence system would win the war for the rebels

Taliban have no ATGM yet through IED have taken out thousands of land vehicles in Afghanistan, you can take a vehicle out on land using many innovation but same cant be said about aircraft

Click to expand...

Yet we are talking about Syria, not Kashmir or Afghanistan or Chechnia, and the Syrian Air Force is no IAF, Soviet Air Force or Russian Air Force.

Even your examples are not convincing that MANPADS have a telling impact because it did not in Kashmir or Chechnia, where they served mainly a nuisance role rather than pivotal. The only place where MANPADS made a big difference was Afghanistan, and that was only because of a combination or terrain, tactics and SOP of both sides.

The Soviet relied heavily on their air forces for both strike and transport, and where very effective at using them in both roles. That is why MANPADS had such a big impact because they blunted a primary tool of the Soviets. Give the Talian of today top of the range MANPADS and they will have a massive negative impact on the ability of the US to continue its mission in Afghanistan for the same reasons.

In Chechnia, it was the massive bloody nose the Chechens delt the Russians in the streets and the hundreds of armour and thousands of troops they killed that decided the war, not the few aircraft they shot down. Similar thing with Kashmir.

Syria tends far more towards Chechnian than Afghanistan, even more so because the Syrian Air Force does not have all that many ground attack aircraft or suitable munitions for air to ground work. Thus the tactical impact the Syrian Air Force is having on the battlefield is limited if not counter productive, and removing that ineffectual tool from Assad's forces will change little in terms of the chances of victory for both sides in SOP or the results of major battles.

Dropping barrel bombs out of helicopters just just terror bombing, and like the blitz all sides inflicted on each other during WWII, has little tactical and strategic relevance, especially when you consider the vastly different scale of the operations. If the blitz did little to decide WWII with all the aircraft and bombs involved and all the civilian casualties it caused, what chance does a few barrel bombs have?

If anything, such tactics help the rebels as it is a perfect recruiting poster to get people previous on the fence to come and fight on their side.

One should take care not to make sweeping assumptions or inappropriate cross comparisons as weapons that make a decisive impact in one war could become less than useless in another. And in the specific example of the Syrian conflict, MANPADS are not what the rebels need to win because of the very limited effective role the Syrian Air Force is playing in the conflict. When you balance that against the risks of the missiles falling into the wrong hands and the carnage that could cause, it should have been perfectly clear that it was unnecessary and a grave mistakes to supply the rebels with advanced MANPADS at all. ATGMs OTOH, is what the rebels really need in large quantities to win the war in Syria, amongst other things, and such weapons would not be able to cause anywhere like as much damage if they fall into the hands of terrorists, so on balance, that should have been the weapon supplied to the rebels in large quantities to help them win the war.

chenchen downed 60 aircraft with Manpad?! My suspect is that chenchen exaggerate the report, during the afgha war,CIA was told by the mujahadeen that with stingers ,they are shooting down one soviet aircraft per day,it was not until in the mid-90's using russian combat record found the actual number being shoot down is not as extreme as CIA believe.some were in fact damage.successfully return back to base.

big question if the russian willing supplied Direct IRCM.