tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post787450325614264332..comments2023-11-03T09:36:22.100-04:00Comments on In From the Cold: Iran Closes the Deal for the SA-20George Smileyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07049707648660651119noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post-80636031155552130022008-12-12T19:23:00.000-05:002008-12-12T19:23:00.000-05:00Wait, they actually ponied up the cash, even in th...Wait, they actually ponied up the cash, even in this economy? Wow, or is Russia so desperate for a sale that they'll finally book one even for a notoriously bad customer as Iran?BigFirehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08691686124373392635noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post-9406190977663996572008-12-12T16:25:00.000-05:002008-12-12T16:25:00.000-05:00Spook, I've often used some statistics when doing ...Spook, <BR/><BR/>I've often used some statistics when doing speaking engagements promoting my books on my SEA experiences. I note that the combat tour survival percentage of an F-105 pilot during Rolling Thunder was about 40%. An F-105 pilot was shot down once every 65 missions (on a 100 mission tour). Three out of five that started a tour wouldn't complete it. <BR/><BR/>During Desert Storm the fixed wing loss rate dropped to about one per 3500 sorties. A significant improvement. <BR/><BR/>With Iraqi Freedom we saw one fixed wing lose for 116,000 combat sorties. <BR/><BR/>That's about the same as peacetime, local flying accident rates. A rise based on upgraded defenses is almost inevitable when your combat loss rate for the last two decades has been so low. <BR/><BR/>I'll always favor buying technology to keep the loss rates low, but how's a guy ever going to become a hero if he/she doesn't face incredible odds and overcome them?Ed Rasimushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13667325554289268659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post-44337946691367092102008-12-12T11:02:00.000-05:002008-12-12T11:02:00.000-05:00Ed--You raise excellent points. As a community, t...Ed--You raise excellent points. As a community, those of us in intel were sometimes guilty of creating the proverbial "10-foot tall Russian," based on the technical capabilities of new systems. <BR/><BR/>Using the holistic approach you describe, we can still penetrate airspace defended by double-digit SAMs. But, as I observed in the post, it's going to take more cruise missiles, UAVs and better intel, to locate these systems and take them out--or at least, suppress them sufficiently, so that the strike packages can reach their targets. <BR/><BR/>It's a tall order. Throw in dedicated D&D measures, and tracking down the SAMs in a place like Iran becomes even tougher. But it can be done. The only tradeoff is that we must be prepared to accept higher losses among our pilots and crews, because no SEAD campaign is 100% effective. <BR/><BR/>Against the SA-20 and similar systems, the days of flying hundreds of sorties with negligible losses may be behind us. We won't see losses on the scale of Schweinfurt or Nuremburg in WWII, but the numbers will go up. And one reason is our own short-sightedness. By all accounts, there won't be any more F-22 buys, despite the fact that it can operate and survive in a double-digit SAM environment.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12712369389411084085noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10820485.post-86754675509936945652008-12-12T10:23:00.000-05:002008-12-12T10:23:00.000-05:00As an operator in a SAM environment and one who sp...As an operator in a SAM environment and one who specialized in SEAD during the great SEA unpleasantness (Society of Wild Weasels #2488), I'll confess that I've always been properly petrified of SAMs. Yet, history has shown that each generation of Soviet (now Russian) product has offered incredibly potential and disappointing employment results. <BR/><BR/>Evolving tactics, weaponry, spectrum management and targeting philosophies have continued to allow manned tactical systems to prevail. It would be foolish to conclude that this is the inevitable pattern for the future. Yet, we've got fifty years of consistent outcome speaking to that conclusion. <BR/><BR/>I would not like to be in the first wave against these systems, but so far we've seldom seen Russian technology meet the levels of hyperbole in Russian marketing or even in Allied intelligence estimates.Ed Rasimushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13667325554289268659noreply@blogger.com