The United States complains about the lawlessness of the Su-35 in the sky of Syria
Well, again in the USA they are gods, again shouts about "unprofessional reckless behavior" in the sky and everything else. Again, you understand, the hostile actions of Russian aircraft and American drones. Only this time, not the Su-27, but the quintessence of the Su-35S.
In principle, there seems to be nothing new, well, two Su-35S (they say three, but ours don’t fly in threes, they do somewhat different things for three), well, three MQ-9 Reapers, well, the area of \uXNUMXb\uXNUMXbSyria is not very large, devices There are a lot of aircraft in the air, because, as at rush hour on Andropov Avenue, something can happen.
In general, it happened.
It is not entirely clear who overtook and how they cut, but the air accident did not happen. But there are complaints, because one of our planes dropped flares on parachutes, sort of like in the path of the Reaper. "On the trajectory," as many American media wrote.
If we consider what happened as air hooliganism, then even in this case, nothing of the sort happened. The Americans immediately recalled the incident over the Black Sea, when the Reaper doused with kerosene gurgled into the depths of the sea.
This was also followed by an accusation of "reckless behavior" of the Russian pilot in relation to American vehicles. It was in reference to previous incidents of this nature that the US Air Force was forced to begin deploying its F-22s in the region. Although, in fact, when did it stop the Americans from deploying their weapons on the territory of other countries? The last time it was in the middle of the last century, in the so-called Caribbean crisis. Stopped Soviet missiles with nuclear warheads in Cuba. And then some raids on UAVs ... Ridiculous.
However, the US Air Force does not think so.
In a July 5 statement, Lieutenant General Alex Grinkiewicz, head of the United States Air Force Central Command (AFCENT), provided the following details of the incident:
“Earlier today (July 5 – approx.), at approximately 10:40 am, Russian military aircraft behaved unsafely and unprofessionally when interacting with US aircraft in Syria. While three American MQ-9 drones were on a mission against ISIS targets, three Russian fighter jets started chasing the drones. Contrary to established norms and protocols, Russian aircraft dropped several parachute missiles in front of the drones, forcing our aircraft to take evasive maneuvers.”
It is very difficult to assess what happened without knowing the air traffic rules adopted by the military. If they exist at all, these rules. For civil aircraft, yes, they do exist, but there are corridors, air traffic controllers monitor the aircraft and everything is more or less organized. All this is done by an international organization aviation activities (ICAO).
Whether military aircraft follow ICAO guidelines is a question. No, where they're just flying and flying and everything, yes. But as for the war zones (and the “Reapers” didn’t fly to shoot videos, the Americans openly said this) - this is a question for a thousand.
Go ahead. It turned out to compile cries addressed to the pilots of the Russian Aerospace Forces from the American media and from officials, a rather peculiar picture turned out. But first, I will give an explanation from the pilot of the Russian Aerospace Forces, which will very well clarify the essence of what is happening.
What happens when Russian Aerospace Forces aircraft intercept another country's aircraft near their own airspace?
First of all, someone else's plane must be taken for escort. The duty fighter approaches the target and goes with it in a parallel course. Here it is important to identify the aircraft and the country to which it belongs and transfer it to ground services.
After that, attracting the attention of the pilot of the intruder aircraft begins. The Russian pilot, following a parallel course, “flaps his wings”, demonstrating his set of weapons. If the intruder does not react in any way, the fighter, maintaining its previous course, increases its speed and moves slightly forward in order to be guaranteed to be in the visibility zone of the crew of another aircraft. And here, very often, pilots of all countries use either IR traps or flares, which, with their flashes, additionally attract the attention of that side. This is especially effective at night or in the rain.
When our pilot realizes that he is being seen, then by turning the control knob he makes a delicate “nod” away from the state border, suggesting that the alien pilot begin a retreat maneuver towards his territory. If the intruder does not respond, then everything described is repeated from the other side of the intruder aircraft.
There are certain rules of air etiquette, and so these actions - they are considered extremely polite and correct.
Here it is also worth clarifying that all this air carousel takes place without radio exchange. In the vast majority of cases, the pilots of the aircraft of the two countries do not know each other's frequencies, which is why everything happens at the level of sign language.
There are pleasant exceptions. For example, in Syria, Russian and American pilots have a common communication channel and can somehow coordinate their actions. By the way, there were no special reasons for dissatisfaction among the parties. But such cooperation today is a rarity, many Russia-NATO cooperation programs are massively blocked, which does not benefit the parties at all.
Now about the incident from the other side. Here I recall the episode with the Su-30 and the Poseidon, when our plane was a little beaten up by the R-8A afterburner, about which the Americans immediately howled at all frequencies. But in general, what does such a reception say? The fact that all of the above has already been used. "Poseidon", apparently, lane, like a gopnik on his "BMW", not paying attention to anyone. Ignoring all polite ways of informing.
Impolite ways, yes, this is just a “cut” with obligatory turbulence or “pincers” when two aircraft carry out such a maneuver. Further, more radical methods are already coming, such as firing a cannon at a course or launching signal or even combat rockets.
Signal ones, of course, are preferable, because combat ones must be fired to kill.
What can be said about the event in the Syrian sky? It seems to me that the situation unfolded like this: the “Reapers” were flying somewhere on their own business, apparently their operators were on the other side of the world (well, who doesn’t know - all strategic drones The United States is controlled from the center on the territory of the country, in the state of Maryland) most likely, the Syrian authorities were not informed, we simply keep silent about the Russian contingent. The result was the rise into the air of the Su-35S link.
And now the "dryers" intercept the "Reapers". That is, we caught up, caught up ... and what's next? And then nothing. It's full and fat because the MQ-9 doesn't have cockpits for pilots to sit in. And the show that our pilots put on, it had one single purpose - to attract the attention of UAV operators.
Now it is very difficult to say where the MQ-9 flew, why. The Americans say they flew for ISIS. So, there were bombs or rockets on the pendants. In the event that the route passed over the sectors of responsibility of our troops, the concern is quite justified.
And here the actions of Russian pilots look very competently. What's the point of arranging an aerobatic show in front of the cameras, if operators from thousands of kilometers away may simply not see them? By the way, who said that our people did not dance in front of the "Reapers"? Recordings are pretty sparse...
Illuminating rockets. Not "along the way", but in the field of view of the cameras. So that the operators finally wake up and start responding. Apparently, the missiles did their job, and the operators saw our planes, but did not react quickly enough. Therefore, one of the aircraft decided to shake the UAV with a jet of turbulence. And after that, finally, the American drivers of the "Reapers" began to maneuver.
Of course, better late than never.
The cries of Americans that Russian pilots provoked a situation in which drones could fly into missiles that hung on parachutes look delusional.
Now, if ours dropped kerosene from tanks, as the Su-27 pilot did, who ruined the same MQ-9 over the Black Sea, and dropped these missiles into a cloud of kerosene, then yes, it would be a very interesting fire show. And so...
“These events represent yet another example of the unprofessional and unsafe actions of the Russian air force operating in Syria, which threaten the security of both American and Russian forces. We call on Russian forces in Syria to stop this reckless behavior and uphold the standards of behavior expected of a professional air force so that we can renew our focus on the ultimate defeat of ISIS."
This is Grinkevich again. And in their communiqués, representatives of AFCENT (this is the central command of the US Air Force) say that “armed Russian fighters” flew over the forces of the US-led coalition in Syria at least 26 times between March 1 and April 19, 2023. The command also said that since March, there have been 63 violations of conflict prevention protocols between US and Russian forces.
In general - a quiet horror ...
And here is the “adequate answer” for you: the deployment in the Middle East of the F-22 from the 94th Fighter Squadron, headquartered at the joint base Langley-Eustis in Virginia. It is planned that these aircraft can provide escort for unmanned aerial vehicles, if necessary.
Of course, it is possible and even necessary to admit that some aggravation of relations is taking place. However, if we look at where the incidents took place, the most famous for some reason were in the Black Sea.
Not in the North. Not near the coast of Florida or California, but in Black. There, yes, two Su-27s dropped an MQ-9 into the water in March of this year, and there another Su-27 caused discomfort for the crew of the British RC-135W “Rivet Joint” electronic reconnaissance aircraft, either accidentally launched or suddenly descended rocket. But in the case of the British intelligence officer, everything worked out, the rocket was remotely blown up by a self-liquidator, the interior of the aircraft, I hope, was washed.
In fact, nothing of the sort happened. Yes, the "Reaper", who first drank kerosene, and then sea water - this is unpleasant, but not fatal. Still a drone. Well, dropping several missiles to attract the attention of operators does not look like something malicious at all. Agree, this is how you need to contrive so that the UAV, which is controlled by a whole crew of three or four of them, crashes into this missile, albeit remotely. Quite small, by the way.
No, of course, if Jack Daniels is also used there, then yes, there are chances.
In principle, everything is quite peaceful and calm. Why raise such a fuss, to be honest, it is not entirely clear.
Yes, here the French also pulled themselves up. On July 6, sobs began on the topic that two Rafals, who were patrolling the Syrian-Iraqi border, met in the air with a pair of Su-35S. And the French also shed tears about how arrogant and unprofessional Russians behaved. The French "were forced to maneuver to control the risk of accident before continuing their patrol."
I would really like details. So you can blame anyone, but the wording itself is not entirely clear. One gets the impression that the valiant French simply dumped the patrol route to the side, because they saw the Su-35S on the radar. Yes, just in case.
But in general, these cries about an unprofessional approach, they require decoding. I would like to understand, but "professionally" - how is it? Is it like the Rafali did, run to hide until it arrives, or what?
But there were times when pilots flew wing to wing, showing who had titanium ringing in their suits ...
Today, we can endlessly watch this most pleasant picture: how water flows, how fire burns, and how the US Air Force whines that they are being prevented from flying normally.
Information