A Panstir-S1 system at Russia’s Khmeimim Air Base in Syria
Air defense and electronic warfare systems deployed at the Russian Hmeimim airbase on the Syrian coast have shot down or disabled over 100 hostile drones in the last two years, a spokesman for the Ministry of Defense of Russia announced on September 27.
Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov revealed that most of the drones were launched from Idlib’s demilitarized zone, mainly from the towns of al-Lataminah, Khan Shaykhun.
“Terrorists are trying to break through the Hmeimim base’s air defenses. If we speak about figures, 118 unmanned aerial vehicles of terrorist groupings have been destroyed over the past two years, including 58 drones since January 1 this year,” the Russian general said, according to the Russian news agency, TASS.
Maj. Gen. Konashenkov added: “our Pantsir-S1 and Tor-M2 air defense missile systems also thwart terrorists’ attempts to deliver a strike with rockets. Since January 1, 2019, 27 rocket-propelled shells of terrorist groupings launched mostly from the Idlib security area have been destroyed.”
Only 31 missiles were used to shot down the 27 rockets. The general noted that this is close to a 1:1 success ratio.
According to Maj. Gen. Konashenkov, a layered air defense system, consisting of S-400, Pantsir-S1 and Tor-M2 systems, was set up in Hmeimim airbase.
“These capabilities allow the Russian military to strike all types of air targets at a range of 20 km to 250 km,” the general said.
Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) and other al-Qaeda-affiliated groups in Greater Idlib are believed to be responsible for these repeated attacks on Hmeimim airbase.
And now please welcome white american patriot to tell us how well american patriots are working in Saudi Arabia.
Patriots should be used against missiles. I’m not sure if US has some equivalent to Pantsir, since US has offensive military philosophy. While Russia in Syria has showed mixed capabilities. Nevertheless, I am very happy to know Pantsir defence capabilities work like charm as per design.
Air defence should be used for air defence i.e. against air threats. Do you suggest that Saudi opted to save some patriot missiles because incoming projectiles/drones wasn’t worth it? Yes, US is not that stupid and they know a thing or two about layered air defence concept. Simple answer is that their air defence system present in SA wasn’t capable to defend against relatively low tech attack with grave consequences. Mixed capabilities? Would you please provide some examples of successful hits on Russian Hmeimim or Tartuus bases? If you are talking about 2 Syrian Pantsirs destroyed by IAF than I suggest that you look closely at those events. First was the case of switched off unit and another was the case of saturation attack. No matter how good is the system – if there are more targets than available ordnance than some targets would not get hit. There is no such thing as invincible air defence system but Russian systems effectiveness was proven to be very good and yes, thats a comparative subject.
Dear mate, regarding mixed capabilities I was referring to offensive/defensive capabilities. Offensive like in Georgia, the best part is, although operation was success, MOD learned some mistakes they did during it, and this is what Shoigu was doing past 7 years. When it comes to defence, russian base in Syria Homeini is example. I was merely referring that I can’t remember US counterpart to Pantsir. If there is such, how come Saudi didn’t purchase it? Anyway thx for kind reply.
“Air defence should be used for air defence i.e. against air threats.”
Dtalin´s speech, Stalin´s style. He paid with 30 000 000 dead people instead 1 million in the ww2. + totally ruined country.
I see, the world is changing continuously, only the russians are the same …
Displaying your stupidity in public… World is changing but little zios stay the same. When such rat like you start talking about figures of Stalin caliber it always ends in the same way – just another fart in the puddle.
Stalin sent people on style 1 rifle/3 soldiers.
You are the same retard.
He helped his Communist (((buddies))) murder more people (especially Slavs) before and after WWII than the number of fatalities on the Soviet side between 1941-45.
Well, its the other way too. If You send many airplanes or missiles some will come trough.
That a normal calculation for warfare as well as a lot more in the world.
Its also an economic war in what do You hit for what.
Russia’s air defences are still better.
US were always putting emphasis on air-dominance that’s way their AA defense systems sucks…
I suggest that you ponder this – how would US air-dominance work over Russian territory? It’s a question of objectives. US military objectives was always offensive. When they say “defence budget” we know its a lie. Only thing that they’re defending is their self proclaimed right to loot entire world.
Tudor, considering geographical spread of Russia it will not work. If you encount AA capabilities too, definitely will not work. But in ’57 as I recall US had a fleet to nuke over 70 cities in Soviet Union. Why didn’t they do so? Because of vastness of territory and back blast. Air supremacy is US tactics. For past 40 years not. Don’t forget ‘dead man switch’. To win war against Russia is a wet dream.
I wasn’t arguing about air superiority bering US tactics. I just say that effectiveness of this tactics is not a given.
I agree. We should go back to the end of WW2 before it had a chance.
At that time USA had many hangarships against Japan. If they moved them against USSR at Murmansk, The Baltic and Black sea, they could make big damage.
And much more of them are willing to come due to Russia-Turkey agreement.
1 drone is 10-50x cheaper than one defense missile.
russia will bleed out economically.
Air defense and electronic warfare systems. Article states most where launched from the towns of al-Lataminah, Khan Shaykhun. This is now SAA controlled territory. :)
“Article states most where launched from the towns of al-Lataminah, Khan Shaykhun.”
Hey, you, then maybe this is syrian russian military exercise! :)
(btw., I overlooked this information)
Censored.
Yeah! “It’s economy is in shatters!”(c) Obama.
Thats right. Most people here systematic line things up as a videogame. Smaller drones shot down also say an expensive missile has to be replaced.
We see it again and again. Whatever fx USA has, they have a lot of it and can send more.
Russians hardly can effort to use their own new tanks and none buys them because of the price and its “overkill”. So if Russians would like to export more tanks, they have to make simple and cheep ones. Thats a problem too, becaujse there already are many relative good ones for sale and relative cheep.
The many tanks by USA under WW2 was meant to be used much different from the german and russian ones. To get more mobility they were armed lighter and had smaller canons. So best is a relative.
USA in those days were the best coordinator with them, artillery and airplanes. Thier biggest problem i West was, they lost a full harbour in the weather at Normandie.