In this article, we will provide technical insight on the Tomahawk missile attack against the Sayarat AFB in Syria. This missile attack happened on April of 2017. It was executed by 2 cruising Arleigh Burke destroyers after accusations that the Assad Regime used chemical weapons against civilians. The decision of the attack was made during a period when President Donald Trump was accused by American media of being Putin’s Friend.
Regardless of the political aspect of this incident, various reports and satellite photographs have shown that the Sayarat AFB was heavily hit by the salvo of Tomahawks.
This is a follow on article about the Operational Lessons from the Tomahawk missile attack in Syria (article is written in Greek, though Chrome Browser could help translate parts of it) which was published during last April.
Interestingly, some other reports have indicated that around 23-36 missiles have been shot down by the combined Integrated Russian-Syrian Air Defense System that consists of an S-400 battalion Hi-SAM, a S-300 VM anti-missile system, several SA-6 Gainful medium range AA autonomous missile batteries, a few Buk M2 and newly arrived Pantsir S1 hybrid (gun and missile system) SHORADS.
Most of those systems were covering strategic value target like the Capital of Syria, Damascus or the ports and airfield of Lattakia. Sayarat AFB is located nearly 150 km away of Lattakia and is a medium size airforce base. It is used mainly by Syrian frontline strike fighters like Su-22 or newer frontline bomber Su-24 Fencer.
During the missile attack various ammo bunkers along with Hardened Aircraft Shelters were hit. Some of them were destroyed but some other withstood the 450 kg HE warhead of the BGM-109 Block IV Tomahawk missile.
But the real questions are:
- What is the possibility of those low-flying Tomahawk missiles being shot down by the combined Syrian-Russia Anti-Air/Anti-Missile Batteries?
- Greek Airforce is one of the few combat airforces, having access to sub-strategic cruise missiles like Tomahawk. In the HAF (Hellenic Airforce) inventory around 100 air-launched Scalp-EG missiles are operational. They are loaded on the Mirage 2000-5 mk2 aircraft. What lessons could be gained from this cruise missile strike that might be useful to the Aegean Theater?
- Could some missiles really have missed their targets?
To find out we will use the Air/Naval Operations Simulator CMANO and a slightly modified version of the scenario Confrontation near Tartus,2017 by Mark Gellis .
The cruise missile Tomahawk has some remarkable characteristics:
- Tomahawks fly in a low altitude around 10-70 meters (30-200 feet)
- They carry a 450 kg HE warhead capable of penetrating most of the structures
- Alternatively 166 dual purpose sub-munitions are carried against soft targets
- Effective range exceed 1700 km, making it an ideal weapon carried by ship, cruising from safe distance. In our simulation case two Arleigh Burke destroyers are located south of Cyprus.
We will simulate two possible flight paths of the Cruise missile salvo. One trying to avoid the S-400/S-300 VM SAM batteries, surpassing them through the Lebanon Airspace and the second one passing through a dangerous zone covered by them.
Scenario 1: Inside the Danger Zone
Note: You can click on the images to enlarge
After a while, the Grill Pan Volume Search radar of the S-300V4 identified 5 incoming low flying missiles. Even if it was able to track them, the 9M83M and 9M82M missiles couldn’t hit them because the targets were flying under the 3000 feet which is the lower limit for successful engagemnt of the S-300V4 battery
2:10:15 am – 2:10:15 am – New contact! Designated VAMPIRE #98 – Detected by SAM Bn (SA-23 Gladiator/Giant [S-300V4]) [Sensors: Grill Pan [9S32M]] at 283deg – 53,5nm
The S-400 missile battery includes the 92N6E Grave Stone engagement radar which can target 72 missiles against 36 (!) targets. A quite impressive performance !
The first missile missed the target, but the second one did a direct hit
2:11:58 πμ – 2:11:58 πμ – Contact VAMPIRE #97 has been lost.
2:11:58 πμ – 2:11:58 πμ – Weapon: SA-21b Growler [40N6] #2316 is attacking RGM-109E Tomahawk Blk IV TACTOM #2262 with a base PH of 80%. Target signature modifier: -15%. Final PH: 65%. Result: 43 – HIT
2:11:56 πμ – 2:11:56 πμ – Side ‘Russia’ is now considered HOSTILE
2:11:46 πμ – 2:11:46 πμ – Weapon: SA-21b Growler [40N6] #2315 is attacking RGM-109E Tomahawk Blk IV TACTOM #2260 with a base PH of 80%. Target signature modifier: -15%. Final PH: 65%. Result: 78 – MISS
In our simulation the actual Pk is really 60%. From the 15 engaments 9 found their targets and another 6 missed them. That leads us to the conclusion that a higher number of AA missiles (even the latest 40N6) is required against a low flying/low signature target.
There are two main SAM installations one below the HOMS and the other near the Sayarat AFB. In each installation Medium Range and SHORADS are located:
2X Pantsir S1 ME SHORADS armed with 12X57E6 missiles each
4X SA-6 Gainful TELARS armed with 3X3M9 missiles each, medium range
2X SA-17 TELAR along with LLV launch-reload vehicle, armed with 4X3M917 missiles each
4XSa-3b SAM armed with 4X5V27 missiles each, medium range
6XSa2b SAM armed with 1XS-75 Volga missile each, medium range
In total 31 missiles found their targets. Of the total 28 missiles being shot down, S-400 is responsible for the 23.
If the flight path was different what would be the reuslt?
Scenario 2: Through the Lebanon valley
In this case, Tomahawk missiles fly through the Lebanon airspace to attack the Sayarat AFB. Considering the absence a concrete airforce branch in the Lebanese Armed forces, Tomahawk missile will fly in a neutral zone in Lebanon while entering the Syrian Airspace south of Sayarat AFB.
Conclusions
The Tomahawk missiles are pretty hard to be effectively hit . Low altitude over a populated land area with mountains around can give the essential cover to block any illumination attempt. The saturated attack of 59 missiles can surpass legacy Air Defenses. But in the end it can be shot down…
Generally:
- The most capable system of countering cruise missiles is the S-400 Triumf. The gap between predecessor systems like the S-300V4 is obvious (Check Scenario 1: Inside the Dangerous Zone)
- Medium Range SAM like the BUK M2 or SHORADS like Pantsir are capable of detecting and engaging effectively cruise missiles like Tomahawk in very close range, 5-10 nm. The limitations of simultaneously engaging targets, illumination problems that lead to low Pk and the very little time to respond makes them defenseless against a massive amount of incoming missiles
- Pk of the S-400 missile was 60% against the Tomahawk. Pk of the S-300V4, BUK or Pantsir S1 was far less making those systems less effective and easily saturated.
- The very big range of the Tomahawk missile makes a more complex flight path possible to avoid dangerous areas
- As with every system the Tomahawk missiles may miss their target. But this percentage is quite low, less than 4%.
Specific facts of Greek Interest (SCALP EG in HAF Inventory):
- Having in mind that the status of the Turksih Air Defenses is even worse than the combined Syrian-Russian Air Defenses, a possible massive launch of Scalp-EG cruise missiles could have catastrophically effects against a concetrated target area like Dalaman AFB or Fokaia Naval Base.
- The Turksih mainland is rather mountainous (same like Greece). This could be used in the advantage of any of the two rival forces.
- The presence of SCALP EG is critical for the Detterence in the Aegean Sea. The small number of aircrafts capable of carrying this sub-strategic weapon should be reconsidered.
PS: Special Thanks to fox2 for providing more info about the status of Syrian Air Defenses and Mark Gellis for using its scenario Confrontation near Tartus as a base which we have made some modifications.
Is it possible to calculate the exact number of SAMs that were launched from each system, both in total and for each air defense system? Meaning how many missiles launched per detected target, how many missed/hit, in total how many expended against the cruise missiles in both scenariow?
Μου αρέσει!Αρέσει σε 1 άτομο
Yes, you can get detailed reports of this and other information by using the analysis features in Command Professional Edition: http://www.warfaresims.com/?page_id=3822
Μου αρέσει!Αρέσει σε 1 άτομο
Hello to all
@Nik Dim
I am using the Vanilla edition of CMANO
I don’t have any data about the exact amount of missiles being launched against a specific target, but I have the total sum of each specific SAM launched in both scenarios
I will give you an update through this comment a few hours later
Keep in mind that especially in the terminal phase of attacking the Sayarat AFB most of the SAMs launched the highest possible amount of missiles even if in reality the Pk was moderate to low. In the real world a Sa-2 or Sa-3 SAM may not even try to engage a Tomahawk missile. On the other hand, in war you use every available means to defend.
Here is the sum of total fired missiles from the combined Syria/Russian forces
Scenario 1
Hi-SAM
32x SA-21b Growler [40N6] from the S-400 Triumf near Lattakia
24x SA-23a Gladiator [9M83M] from the S-300VM in Tartus
Medium Range
24x SA-17 Grizzly [9M317] from the 6 Sa-17 launcher south and north of Sayarat AFB
15x SA-3b Goa [5V27, V-601P] from a Sa-3b Goa south of Sayarat AFB, didn’t score any hit
SHORADS
24x SA-22 Greyhound [57E6] from the two Sa-22 Pantsir S1 next to Sayarat AFB
Scenario 2
Hi-SAM
7x SA-21b Growler [40N6] from the S-400 Triumf near Lattakia
Medium Range
24x SA-17 Grizzly [9M317] from the 6 Sa-17 launcher south and north of Sayarat AFB
23x SA-3b Goa [5V27, V-601P] from a Sa-3b Goa south of Sayarat AFB, didn’t score any hit
SHORADS
24x SA-22 Greyhound [57E6] from the two Sa-22 Pantsir S1 next to Sayarat AFB
@Dimitris
As usual thanks for the valuable info!
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
Ελληνικη μεταφραση δεν υπαρχει?1
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
Αλλαγη πολιτικής,
Change of policy
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
wich is the estimated time when the syrian confirmed the target of missile and the time of missile hit …;
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
the situation about Syrians-Rousians would be more complicated and dramatically difficult,if the enemy used anti-radar missile against AA system.(need run + sead mission).
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
Hi Τ.Δ
That is true, but on the other hand you wouldn’t expect the Russians to just sit and watch. They would use Electronic Warfarre equipment, jam GPS signals( Tomahawks heavily rely on that) and probably send more Su-30SM for air CAP patrols. The target of the American Tomahawks was a forward military base in Syria. They have also warned the Russians/Syrians 6 hours ahead…so it was more a punishment
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
Παράθεμα: Greek Media obsessed with Turkey’s S-400 SAM deal – Προέλαση
This analysis and CMANO simulation misses THE key factors behind only 23 Tomahawks hitting the AFB.
The Krasukha-4 is officially in Lattakia and surely is the main key for the «frying»:
* https://sputniknews.com/world/201510051028033057-syria-russia-electronic-warfare-systems/
Other factors could have been the IL-20 «Coot» surveillance aircraft (roughly an equivalent to US Navy’s P-3 Orion) and a Vishnya-class intelligence collection ship. The latter reportedly headed to Syria in October 2015 and maybe was still around during the attack.
* http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/10/06/spy-planes-signal-jammers-and-putins-high-tech-war-in-syria/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vishnya-class_intelligence_ship
I would guess the Kremlin didn’t fry all the Tomahawks to not make Washington lose face totally and thus antagonize them too much. The Kremlin, Tehran and Damascus have proven they do not allow themselves to be tricked in to a scenario that NATO and the mass media spin so they (read all Talmudists and Kabbalists in the world) can use to justify starting WWIII. NATO has several times said they might use low yield nukes (B-61 bombs, nuked artillery shells, etc.). Humanity is waking up and the ancient elites – the scribes and pharisees – need WWIII to secure their survival by fulfilling the Book of Revelation (which of course they have written).
In playing Ankara against NATO it might be true that the Kremlin alerted Erdogan regarding the coup against him, as this article claims:
* http://www.defenseworld.net/news/16654/Russia___s_Krasukha_4_Electronic_Countermeasure_System_Alerted_Erdogan_Of_Coup#.WnzPq-co-M8
Personally I think the coup was staged, but it does not mean Erdogan was not alerted. Erdogan is Muslim Brotherhood = Qatar based Salafi type of Takfir (actually Kefir…) = Muhammad Mursi = MB in Egypt which was created by the MI6 = Queen of England = Feudal Trinity
(DELETED by ADMIN, we are no conspiracy page even if some of the info might be true)
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
@ ADMIN
This is a geopolitical page, isn’t it? If, say, Erodgan is MB and hence just like Gulen/ists a Kabbalists that must mean their regementality, their End Game, and all their deeds towards that manifest themselves materially «here», not the least in the geopolitical realm.
Know Thyself does not only start and end with Take Care of Thyself, but one must also Know Thy Enemy equally well. Geopolitics is a relation between the total sum of (major) systemic actors, a play on a global stage according to their regementality.
There wouldn’t be a hegemonic power if their war of deception was not of hegemonic proportions. Hence you should not limit the input that we all can contribute to and thus start challenging this hegemonic enslavement of our minds.
Thank you for listening!
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
Θα γραψω κατι που θα πικρανω: 1) δεν επρεπε να δοθει στην κρητη , η ..σουδα στους αμερικανους διοτι οι αμερικανοι ..ποιουν την νησσαν , στα προβληματα μας με την τουρκια.2)Αφου οι υποτιθεμενοι συμμαχοι μας( αρχιδια συμμαχοι βεβαια ) , μας εγκαταλειπουν στο ελεος …..του Αλαχ , θα επρεπε να προλαβουμε την τουρκια. Να συμμαχισουμε πρωτοι με την ρωσια , η οποια μας εξασφαλιζε την αμυνα μας. 3) Εβγαζε με δικη της ευθυνη τα οποια…κυττασματα στο αιγαιο …και αλλου , και μας παρειχε το 50% , …τελειως ανεξοδα.Αλλα που…! ! ! ! ! !…. ! ! ! ! !!!!!!.Δεν θελει μονο αρετην και τολμη η ελευθερια , θελει και αντρες με ΑΑ@@ , που δυστυχως …λειπουν απο …….τους δηθεν …πατριωτες …ΜΑΣ ! ! ! ! ! !….
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
We have never ever witnessed such a direct confrontation b/n USA & Russia even at this limited battleground.
The real picture was this.
I can shoot from wherever I choose, from Aqaba, fm Persian Gulf, using this or that, but I will engage your existing A/A ground-based resources in your most advantageous set-up and I’ll prove to you, that even so, 60% of my gear will be enough to achieve my target.
So, if you want to escalate further, you have to either deploy more of your conventional assets or face the consequences.
It seems though, that message wasn’t received and it needed a second use of force in recent Deir-Ez Zor op, with devestating losses on their mercenaries.
Let’s see how many times to realise reality
Μου αρέσει!Αρέσει σε 1 άτομο
@ IvyChris
This article will tear your eyes:
* https://russiandefpolicy.blog/tag/krasukha-4/
And for more tears, please also read:
* http://www.defenseworld.net/news/16654/Russia___s_Krasukha_4_Electronic_Countermeasure_System_Alerted_Erdogan_Of_Coup#.WnzPq-co-M8
Consequentially, the United States of Hollywood has now officially been downgraded to no 2:
*https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/02/putin-announces-russia-as-world-leader.html
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
I just wonder how easily people can be manipulated.
Actually they have all the right to disagree with facts.
Well, not actually, but in any case it sounds familiar with Russian government controlled propaganda. Russian journalists know very well…
The point is Russians were informed in advanced and had all the time to deploy whatever means they had.
Ok, I know, they decided not to… BS
I can imagine what would have happened, should the Americans hadn’t informed well in advance…
And all those russian government press conferences to inform the public??
What abt Deir-Ez-Zor then?
You remind me of an expression called :»Whataboutism» meaning that when someone has an allegation or a solid argument, the other replies by deflecting or undermining the importance, the substance of the argument.
It’s called Disinformation tactics.
Peculiar coincidence is that same tactics being applied by Trump as well, ofc besides Putin…
So many obvious lies that alter reality and at some point, public begins to question whether objective truth exists at all.
russiandefpolicy.blog, fort-russ.com & defenseworld from Bangalore
I rest my case
Hilarious effort
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
Propaganda comes from the verb «to propagate», meaning «to speak for your cause», something given to anyone with a cause.
But in the West this word is not only associated with Soviet/Russia, as if Britain never had a Ministry of Propaganda, but they denaturalize something that is given…by every state.
Mind you that 99,x% of ALL media in the world – TV, radio, newspapers, magazines, printing presses, etc. – is owned by only nine (9) conglomerates. None of these conglomerates is owned by Russia or Russian oligarchs but rather by Anglo-Zionists/Jews.
Now, could that hegemonic power of 99,x% be the cause of our Western idea of «propaganda» as a property of its otherness?
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
Saudi PAC-3 destroyed by Houti drone swarm:
* https://southfront.org/houthis-destroyed-uae-patriot-system-in-central-yemen-with-swarm-of-drones-reports/
No wonder they want to buy the S-400 after often failing to intercept Yemeni missiles.
Sweden is ready to spend $3.2 billion. Try get rid of yours…
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
Να αναμένουμε ανάλυση και για την νέα επίθεση των Αμερικανών;
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
Ναι τις επόμενες μέρες!
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!
Can someone block that pro-Rusian troll Φεβρουαρίου? He is taking over the entire thread with his monologues.
Μου αρέσει!Μου αρέσει!