Russians deploy aircraft carrier to Syrian waters to increase air strikes against mujahideen

[Akasa]

Photo of static plane with this ancient junk was made in the beginning of the campaign. But for over 9 months there was not a single pic video of Su-24 using or even taking off with guided weapons.

Russian crews, working on guided weapons, on a Su-24, in a Syrian airfield sounds pretty evidential that these weapons are being used in that theater of operations and by that platform.

 

[500]

Russian crews, working on guided weapons, on a Su-24, in a Syrian airfield sounds pretty evidential that these weapons are being used in that theater of operations and by that platform.

I repeat. During over 9 month campaign swarms of journos visited Russian airbase. There were also live cams for hours. However not a single time Su-24 taking off with guided weapons was noted. Russian MoD also never released footage of Su-24 using guided weapons.

 

[Akasa]

I repeat. During over 9 month campaign swarms of journos visited Russian airbase. There were also live cams for hours. However not a single time Su-24 taking off with guided weapons was noted. Russian MoD also never released footage of Su-24 using guided weapons.

So, was there an explicit statement from these journalists that not on Su-24 used guided weaponry, or is it a case of you assuming that an absence of evidence is evidence of absence?

 

[500]

So, was there an explicit statement from these journalists that not on Su-24 used guided weaponry, or is it a case of you assuming that an absence of evidence is evidence of absence?

They were making pics there. Su-34 was noted many times taking off with guided weapons (although recently guided weapons disappeared and Su-34 switched to incendiary clusters). Su-24 - not a single time in 9 months.

 

[ptldM3]

U see u know nothing, but attack me. Su-34 have built in pods. These pods are primitive compare to Western but still exist:

And you think this is new to me? And those arnt "pods".

I said that in whole campaign which lasts over months there is no evidence that Su-24 dropped guided weapons even once.

There is more then enough photos of SU-24s in Syria with precision weapons. You must think you're special if the Russian military just put those on to impress you. The SU-24 has a 'TV' screen where the weapons system operator sits, what do you think it's for?

Just because you are a liar does not mean everyone else is.

Show us taking off with heavy payload.

4 800kg fuel tanks, over 7000lbs. Crowed taking pictures, waiting for takeoff.

Two 800kg fuel tanks and two missiles. I know you will claim it's not taking off, but spare everyone (It's in afterburner).

Mig-29k bort # 941 getting ready for takeoff:

Same Mig-29K bort # 941 landing:

Mig-27K are very different from regular Mig-29.

You think? You are once again making baseless claims with no proof. Where is your proof that Russia does not have trained crews for the Mig-29k, the Mig-29K has been in service for years. Before pilots ever get to land the Mig-29k on a carrier they go through extensive training. I remember SU-33 pilots were required to perform 400 landings on a simulated carrier before they got to perform a carrier landing. I would also not be surprised if some SU-33 pilots are flying Mig-29ks.

 

[500]

And you think this is new to me? And those arnt "pods".

Thats internal targeting pod. You did not know otherwise u would not made stupid claims.

There is more then enough photos of SU-24s in Syria with precision weapons. You must think you're special if the Russian military just put those on to impress you. The SU-24 has a 'TV' screen where the weapons system operator sits, what do you think it's for?

Just because you are a liar does not mean everyone else is.

I repeat. There are swarms of photo and video footage made in 9 month period. Not a single time Su-24 was noted taking off with guided weapons.

4 800kg fuel tanks, over 7000lbs. Crowed taking pictures, waiting for takeoff.

There is no taking off in ur pics. I know where from these pics are grabbed.

You think? You are once again making baseless claims with no proof.

Of course. Very different plane. Very different operational platform.

 

[ptldM3]

Thats internal targeting pod. You did not know otherwise u would not made stupid claims.

It not a targeting "pod". I knew what that was for years. The problem is you making stupid claims that the Mig-29K is not seen with a targeting pod, as if that has something to do with its ability to takeoff with guided munitions.

I repeat. There are swarms of photo and video footage made in 9 month period. Not a single time Su-24 was noted taking off with guided weapons.

Besides being a fool what are you trying to prove? I never personally seen a radar track a B-2 or F-22, does it mean they are not 'stealthy'?

SU-24s are seen in Syria with precision munitions, just because we have no pictures or video of SU-24s in Syria using those weapons does not mean it was not used by SU-24s. The evidence is stacked against you.

@SinoSoldier posted a video of an SU-24 using precision munitions.

I have seen videos with SU-24 pilots talking about using precision munition.

In the past I posted sources proving the SU-24 can use precision munitions.


You have been debunked move along.

There is no taking off in ur pics. I know where from these pics are grabbed.

Do you even watch the video? Your own source just backfired. I did not even watch the entire video but at around 2:30 that is the same Mig-29k that I posted a screen shot of and its taking off with those heavy fuel tanks.


And I don't need to post the same picture of Mig-29 bort number 941 getting ready for takeoff and then landing with a centerline fuel tank, two anti ship missiles and two air-to-air missiles.

Sorry not only do I have pictures that bust your claim but you also posted a video that busts your claim.

Of course. Very different plane. Very different operational platform.

I asked you to prove your claim that Russia has no trained crews for the Mig-29k.....I'm still waiting.


I never started a debate about how different or similar a Mig-29K is compared to a SU-33 or any other Mig-29.

 

[500]

It not a targeting "pod". I knew what that was for years.

You made a claim that targeting pods are not necessary because Su-34 does not have it.

However the fact is that Su-34 has built in targeting pod (or targeting electro-optic targeting system if u insist to be a grammar nazi). Mig-29K however does not have neither built in nor external targeting pod, so it cant effectively perform ground attack mission.

The problem is you making stupid claims that the Mig-29K is not seen with a targeting pod, as if that has something to do with its ability to takeoff with guided munitions.

See above.

Besides being a fool what are you trying to prove? I never personally seen a radar track a B-2 or F-22, does it mean they are not 'stealthy'?

Yep in 9 months of flights tons of pics and videos there is not a single instance of Su-24 taking off or flying with guided weapons. Or using it. When I see western coalition jets performing over Iraq and Syria I see guided weapons all the time. What it has to do with radar tracks?

SU-24s are seen in Syria with precision munitions

There is only one static jet pic with ancient missile in the beginning of the campaign. Never was seen using it and never seen afterwards with any guided weapons at all. Either they tried to fire that ancient junk and it did not work well, either just made a pic for show.

just because we have no pictures or video of SU-24s in Syria using those weapons does not mean it was not used by SU-24s. The evidence is stacked against you.

There is zero evidence of Su-24 using guided weapons in over 9 month campaign.

Do you even watch the video? Your own source just backfired. I did not even watch the entire video but at around 2:30 that is the same Mig-29k that I posted a screen shot of and its taking off with those heavy fuel tanks.

I watched it carefully. Only taking off Mig there is empty one at 2:35-2:43

I asked you to prove your claim that Russia has no trained crews for the Mig-29k.....I'm still waiting.

Show me Mig-29K on Kuznetsov.

 

[ptldM3]

You made a claim that targeting pods are not necessary because Su-34 does not have it.

I said SU-34s in Syria do not use them. A built in eloctro optical system is not a 'targeting pod'.

However the fact is that Su-34 has built in targeting pod (or targeting electro-optic targeting system if u insist to be a grammar nazi). Mig-29K however does not have neither built in nor external targeting pod,

Really?

so it cant effectively perform ground attack mission.

TV guided weapons are not effective now?

Yep in 9 months of flights tons of pics and videos there is not a single instance of Su-24 taking off or flying with guided weapons. Or using it. When I see western coalition jets performing over Iraq and Syria I see guided weapons all the time. What it has to do with radar tracks?

So let me get this strait. The SU-24 fitted with Guided munitions are just for fun propaganda purposes? SU-24s firing guided munitions on camera is a Hollywood effect. Sukhoi and countless pilots as well as countless sources are all lying about the SU-24 right?

You don't catch on very quickly, again I will use an F-22 analogy, if I have not personally seen F-22s dropping precision munitions over Syria or Iraq does it mean it did not happen? Do you see how apsolutely redicolous your logic is?

Your argument is.....I didn't see it so it did not happen

I watched it carefully. Only taking off Mig there is empty one at 2:35-2:43

You are simply a troll, no argument here. The Mig-29k with 4 fuel tanks was at full power and headed for the ski jump.


Still I think it's funny how you are ignoring pictures of Mig-29k
Landing with external fuel tanks and weapons.

Show me Mig-29K on Kuznetsov.

What? Trying to play more cat and mouse games? You make random claims such as there is no Mig-29k trained crews, then you repeatedly avoid providing proof for that claim, then you ask me to prove something completely random that has nothing to do with our argument:


I expect you to somehow deny this picture and then ask me to prove some more things when you yourself have avoided providing proof for every claim you made.


Show me your Masia, show me Santa....redicolous.

@Oscar @Manticore @Horus

I understand this 500 was stripped of his think tank status for good reasons but if you take a momement to read his arguments here you will see he is on a trolling mission. Every source, video and picture he disregards, then he makes claims which he can never back with sources, then he asks asks other people to show proof of unrelated topics, the proof is shown but he refuses to acknowledge he is wrong.


Just a few days ago he was justifying suicide bombings and why it's okay to sometimes work alongside ISIS.

 

[500]

I said SU-34s in Syria do not use them. A built in eloctro optical system is not a 'targeting pod'.

You used S-34 as proof that targeting pods are not necessary. However it has one just interlal. Just like F-35 has internal targeting pod. Either u did not know that fact or tried to cheat.

Really?

View attachment 316612

Thats not targeting pod.

TV guided weapons are not effective now?

Without targeting pods cant be used effectively.

So let me get this strait. The SU-24 fitted with Guided munitions are just for fun propaganda purposes? SU-24s firing guided munitions on camera is a Hollywood effect. Sukhoi and countless pilots as well as countless sources are all lying about the SU-24 right?

You don't catch on very quickly, again I will use an F-22 analogy, if I have not personally seen F-22s dropping precision munitions over Syria or Iraq does it mean it did not happen? Do you see how apsolutely redicolous your logic is?

Your argument is.....I didn't see it so it did not happen

My argument is very simple: there are swarms of footage of Su-24 taking off to missions. And NEVER with guided weapons. I ma an Occam razor guy.

You are simply a troll, no argument here. The Mig-29k with 4 fuel tanks was at full power and headed for the ski jump.

Still I think it's funny how you are ignoring pictures of Mig-29k
Landing with external fuel tanks and weapons.

I am asking it taking off with serious load. Still nothing.

Show me your Masia, show me Santa....redicolous.


View attachment 316613

Again who are you trying to fool? Thats SN 312 prototype built in 1991. It was tested against Su-33 and Su-33 won.

The MiG-29K program was renewed in 1999. And now is very different plane. Russia ordered serial MiG-29K in 2012. Carrier now in repairs. No one saw Russian MiG-29K operational.

@Oscar @Manticore @Horus

I understand this 500 was stripped of his think tank status for good reasons but if you take a momement to read his arguments here you will see he is on a trolling mission. Every source, video and picture he disregards, then he makes claims which he can never back with sources, then he asks asks other people to show proof of unrelated topics, the proof is shown but he refuses to acknowledge he is wrong.

Just a few days ago he was justifying suicide bombings and why it's okay to sometimes work alongside ISIS.

You are constantly make personal attacks against me while I calmly answer u with facts. Probably u are frustrated that my predictions come true and Russian involvement in Syria led to nothing but bloodshed and suffer.

 

[ptldM3]

You used S-34 as proof that targeting pods are not necessary. However it has one just interlal. Just like F-35 has internal targeting pod. Either u did not know that fact or tried to cheat.

I was very specific about the SU-34 not using targeting pods in Syria. What's more, some SU-34s have been fitted with targeting pods. The point is that the SU-34s in Syria do not use them.

Thats not targeting pod.

Of course it's not.

Every shred of proof that is presented to you is shamelessly denied by you. Someone can show you the ocean and you would still deny it with a strait face.

That is the T-220 targeting pod carried by a Mig-29M2

Here it is with the lense:

And here is proof it is a targeting pod:

Without targeting pods cant be used effectively.

Mig-29s just like to carry Precision munitions for fun or for "propaganda" because I'm sure the entire world keeps up with the Mig-29 developments and the illuminati reptilians at the head of the Mig are basking in the glory of deceiving the entire world.

My argument is very simple: there are swarms of footage of Su-24 taking off to missions. And NEVER with guided weapons. I ma an Occam razor guy.

Your argument is simply and utterly stupid. No one cares that you did not see an SU-24 dropping precision munitions over Syria, the fact is they SU-24s werephotographed in Syria with precision munition; Moreover, doing a simple search would yield countless sources supporting the fact that SU-24s do use precision munitions. Same with video.

Take your conspiracy theories and propaganda elsewhere.

I am asking it taking off with serious load. Still nothing.

I posted plenty of pictures supporting the fact that it did takeoff with serious payload.

Even the video you posted showed a Mig-29k with 4 drop tanks heading towards the ski jump at full power. Do you actually believe that the Mig-29 just stopped or tured around?

Or do you believe those Mig-29s landing on a carrier with external fuel tanks and weapons just came from land or telaported from the carrier instead of taking off?

Again who are you trying to fool? Thats SN 312 prototype built in 1991. It was tested against Su-33 and Su-33 won.

And what is your point? You asked me to post a picture of a Mig-29k on the Kuznetsov and I did.

This is your little cat and mouse games. I asked you about 4 times to provide proof that Russia does not have trained crews for the Mig-29k and so far you have ignored me every time. Instead you changed the subject.


Notice the troll pattern, you demand sources and proof from me and I always provide them but you refuse to provide sources for your claims.

The MiG-29K program was renewed in 1999. And now is very different plane. Russia ordered serial MiG-29K in 2012. Carrier now in repairs. No one saw Russian MiG-29K operational.

You're mumbling a bunch of random unrelated subjects in order the divert attention away from your previous failed claims. When did I ever say the Mig-29k was operational on the Kuznetsov? I never did, but nice try.

If you're trying to say Mig-29k pilots have no experience on the Mig-29k because it is not operational on the Kuznetsov then you are ignorant and mistaken. Both the Indians and Russian have been training on the Mig-29K from land, which includes all forms of basic training as well as simulated carrier landings both on makeshift carrier decks and flight simulators.

A multitude of different Russian pilots have also landed Mig-29ks on sea trials of the Indian carrier and because many Mig-29 pilots also have experience on Sukhois I am willing to bet that some of the Mig-29k pilots came from the SU-33.

You are constantly make personal attacks against me while I calmly answer u with facts. Probably u are frustrated that my predictions come true and Russian involvement in Syria led to nothing but bloodshed and suffer.

What personal attacks? I said you were an ISIS supporter because you justified suicide bombings and collaborating with ISIS you also seem happy every time ISIS wins a battle but upset when they lose. Other then that I called you troll, in fact there is probably 5 dozen people that call you a troll regularly. You might want to ask yourself why everyone refers to you as a troll, maybe because you troll?

 

[500]

I was very specific about the SU-34 not using targeting pods in Syria.

This statement is senseless or cheating because it has internal targeting pod, just like F-35.

That is the T-220 targeting pod carried by a Mig-29M2

T-220 is just a mock up.

Your argument is simply and utterly stupid. No one cares that you did not see an SU-24 dropping precision munitions over Syria, the fact is they SU-24s werephotographed in Syria with precision munition; Moreover, doing a simple search would yield countless sources supporting the fact that SU-24s do use precision munitions. Same with video.

I repeat: in 9 months of operation not a single instance of Su-24 flying or taking off with guided weapons was seen. Thats enough to me to conclude it was not used.

Ive seen Su-34 with precise munition of several kinds. Although overall rate was also low.

I posted plenty of pictures supporting the fact that it did takeoff with serious payload.

I asked takeoff pic.

And what is your point? You asked me to post a picture of a Mig-29k on the Kuznetsov and I did.

Obviously I asked for operational MiG-29K, not some ancient test prototype from early 90-es which has little to do with modern MiG-29K.

What personal attacks?

You constantly call me fool troll and stuff like that.

I said you were an ISIS supporter because you justified suicide bombings and collaborating with ISIS you also seem happy every time ISIS wins a battle but upset when they lose. Other then that I called you troll, in fact there is probably 5 dozen people that call you a troll regularly. You might want to ask yourself why everyone refers to you as a troll, maybe because you troll?

Its your country who armed and trained Iraqi Baath aka ISIS just like its arming and training Syrian Baath terrorists.

I repeated zillion times that both Iraqi Baath aka ISIS and Syrian Baath are scum. As for suicide attack, I said that suicide attack against military target is not a war crime, in contrast to indiscriminate shelling of towns. Also I find it funny that people who support suicide attacks against civilian targets (Iranian and Assad regime) are bitching about suicide attacks against military targets.

 

[ptldM3]

T-220 is just a mock up.

I will ask you to prove that with a source but you won't. You're a waste of everyone's time. There are a thousand claims you made which you refuse to back with sources.

The fact is you did not even know what the T-220 was. There is also no reason to stick a mock up on both the Mig-35 and Mig-29M2 which is essentially the same exact airframe.

I repeat: in 9 months of operation not a single instance of Su-24 flying or taking off with guided weapons was seen. Thats enough to me to conclude it was not used.

Ive seen Su-34 with precise munition of several kinds. Although overall rate was also low.

And I repeat that no one cares what you have or have not seen. SU-24s in Syria have been photographed with precision munition. Any idiot can google about the SU-24 and find countless sources and even video proving that they are capable of firing precision munitions. You made a stupid claim that SU-24s can't use precision munitions and now you are tap dancing your way around your blunder by claiming you have not seen an SU-24 use precision weapons in Syria.

I asked takeoff pic.

There are plenty of pictures of Mig-29ks with heavy payloads on deck and pictures of them landing on carriers with heavy payloads as well as a video which shows a Mig-29k with heavy payload headed towards the ski jump, at which point the video cuts short.


You know very well those Mig-29s took off like that but you are being a troll. You can't win arguments so you try to play cat and mouse games or find some rediculus loop hole such as the one above.


By your logic an F-22 is not 'stealthy' because you personally have not seen the proof.

I don't believe the Merkava's weight, show me the Merkava on a giant scale.

Show me a picture of the iron dome intercepting an actual enemy missile.

See how dumb your arguments are if I apply your logic?

Obviously I asked for operational MiG-29K, not some ancient test prototype from early 90-es which has little to do with modern MiG-29K.

No you didn't, you said: "show me Mig-29k on Kuztetsov". I did show you, and then I ask what it had to do with the topic. You then started attacking me by claiming it is an old prototype So to some it up, you randomly ask me to post a picture of a Mig-29 on the Kuznetsov and after I do you attack me.



Of course I know why you mention the Kuznetsov. You claimed that Mig-29k crews are not well trained so your pathetic logic is, since there is no pictures of modern Mig-29ks on the Kuznetsov then they most not be well trained.....

Never mind the fact that Mig-29k pilots train from land, on simulators and they some likely had experience operating SU-33s.

Your logic must also apply to Top Gun pilots since they are navy pilots that mostly train out of San Diego California.




For the 5th time were is your evidence that Mig-29K crews are not trained. Stop ignoring me.

You constantly call me fool troll and stuff like that.

To be fair even moderators call you a troll, almost everyone calls you that. You think it's a coincidence?

 

[500]

I will ask you to prove that with a source but you won't. You're a waste of everyone's time. There are a thousand claims you made which you refuse to back with sources.

The fact is you did not even know what the T-220 was. There is also no reason to stick a mock up on both the Mig-35 and Mig-29M2 which is essentially the same exact airframe.


And I repeat that no one cares what you have or have not seen. SU-24s in Syria have been photographed with precision munition. Any idiot can google about the SU-24 and find countless sources and even video proving that they are capable of firing precision munitions. You made a stupid claim that SU-24s can't use precision munitions and now you are tap dancing your way around your blunder by claiming you have not seen an SU-24 use precision weapons in Syria.



There are plenty of pictures of Mig-29ks with heavy payloads on deck and pictures of them landing on carriers with heavy payloads as well as a video which shows a Mig-29k with heavy payload headed towards the ski jump, at which point the video cuts short.


You know very well those Mig-29s took off like that but you are being a troll. You can't win arguments so you try to play cat and mouse games or find some rediculus loop hole such as the one above.


By your logic an F-22 is not 'stealthy' because you personally have not seen the proof.

I don't believe the Merkava's weight, show me the Merkava on a giant scale.

Show me a picture of the iron dome intercepting an actual enemy missile.

See how dumb your arguments are if I apply your logic?











No you didn't, you said: "show me Mig-29k on Kuztetsov". I did show you, and then I ask what it had to do with the topic. You then started attacking me by claiming it is an old prototype So to some it up, you randomly ask me to post a picture of a Mig-29 on the Kuznetsov and after I do you attack me.



Of course I know why you mention the Kuznetsov. You claimed that Mig-29k crews are not well trained so your pathetic logic is, since there is no pictures of modern Mig-29ks on the Kuznetsov then they most not be well trained.....

Never mind the fact that Mig-29k pilots train from land, on simulators and they some likely had experience operating SU-33s.

Your logic must also apply to Top Gun pilots since they are navy pilots that mostly train out of San Diego California.


For the 5th time were is your evidence that Mig-29K crews are not trained. Stop ignoring me.

I dont know what to talk with person who thinks that pic of ancient prototype from 1990-es proves they are fully operational and well trained.

To be fair even moderators call you a troll, almost everyone calls you that. You think it's a coincidence?

Who?

 

[ultron]

MiG-35 has OLS beneath fuselage used for attack. Not sure about MiG-29K.