PDA

View Full Version : What if: Air war between Russia and USA?



jimnyc
06-23-2017, 07:18 PM
Even with the USA winning in such a scenario, it's still a scary thought when I read this. The battle via the air may show our superiority in that location, and it may not be a long battle - but it's the thought of what war may be created as a result and who else may get involved.

---

Here's how an air war between Russia and the US in Syria would go down

After the US downed a Syrian jet making a bombing run on US-backed forces fighting ISIS, Russia threatened to target US and US-led coalition planes West of the Euphrates river in Syria.

But while Russia has some advanced surface-to-air missile systems and very agile fighter aircraft in Syria, it wouldn't fare well in what would be a short, brutal air war against the US.

The US keeps an aircraft carrier with dozens of F/A-18E fighters aboard in the Mediterranean about all the time and hundreds of F-15s and F-16s scattered around Turkey, Qatar, and Jordan.

According to Omar Lamrani, a senior military analyst at Stratfor, a geopolitical analysis firm, Russia has "about 25 planes, only about ten of which are dedicated to air superiority (Su-35s and Su-30s), and against that they’ll have to face fifth-gen stealth fighters, dozens of strike fighters, F-15s, F-16s, as well as B-1 and B-52 bombers. And of course the vast US Navy and pretty much hundreds of Tomahawks."

"Russians have a lot of air defenses, they’re not exactly defenseless by any means," Lamrani told Business Insider, "But the US has very heavy air superiority." Even though individual Russian platforms come close to matching, and in some ways exceed the capability of US jets, it comes down to numbers.

So if Russia did follow through with its threat, and target a US aircraft that did not back down West of the Euphrates in Syria, and somehow managed to shoot it down, then what?

"The US coalition is very cautious," said Lamrani. "The whole US coalition is on edge for any moves from Russia at this point."

Lamrani also said that while F/A-18Es are more visible and doing most of the work, the US keeps a buffer of F-22 stealth jets between its forces and Russia's. If Russia did somehow manage to shoot down a US or US-led coalition plane, a US stealth jet would probably return fire before it ever reached the base.

At that point the Russians would have a moment to think very critically if they wanted to engage with the full might of the US Air Force after the eye-for-an-eye shoot downs.

If US surveillance detected a mass mobilization of Russian jets in response to the back-and-forth, the US wouldn't just wait politely for Russians to get their planes in the sky so they can fight back.

Instead, a giant salvo of cruise missiles would pour in from the USS George H. W. Bush carrier strike group, much like the April 7 strike on Syria's Sharyat air base. But this time, the missiles would have to saturate and defeat Russia's missile defenses first, which they could do by sheer numbers if not using electronic attack craft.

Then, after neutering Russia's defenses, the ships could target the air base, not only destroying planes on the ground but also tearing up the runways, so no planes could take off. At this point US and Coalition aircraft would have free reign to pass overhead and completely devastate Russian forces.

Russia would likely manage to score a couple intercepts and even shoot down some US assets, but overall the Russian contingent in Syria cannot stand up to the US, let alone the entire coalition of nations fighting ISIS.

Rest here - https://finance.yahoo.com/news/heres-air-war-between-russia-190726442.html

revelarts
06-23-2017, 07:38 PM
Ok remind me how long were Viet Nam, Afghanistan and Iraq were predicted to be?
"but that's different" I suspect

And what happens when Russia feels it's back is against the wall?
what if our backs were against the wall in possible defeat?

aboutime
06-23-2017, 07:51 PM
Ok remind me how long were Viet Nam, Afghanistan and Iraq were predicted to be?
"but that's different" I suspect

And what happens when Russia feels it's back is against the wall?
what if our backs were against the wall in possible defeat?


Thankfully. Smarter minds on both sides would draw rings around you rev. Stick to gossip, and your hatred for anyone who doesn't agree with you all the time.
And, Don't give up your day job. WHAT IF'S, and HYPOTHETICALS are for Hollywierd.

jimnyc
06-23-2017, 07:54 PM
Ok remind me how long were Viet Nam, Afghanistan and Iraq were predicted to be?
"but that's different" I suspect

And what happens when Russia feels it's back is against the wall?
what if our backs were against the wall in possible defeat?

Chill out! This is just a scenario, no one is saying we are going to war, nor even advocating for any war with Russia/Syria. I only posted it because of this scenario, and their thoughts on such a comparison between Russia and the US. So why you ALREADY want to put words into the mouths of anyone thinking of responding is beyond me.

aboutime
06-23-2017, 07:59 PM
Chill out! This is just a scenario, no one is saying we are going to war, nor even advocating for any war with Russia/Syria. I only posted it because of this scenario, and their thoughts on such a comparison between Russia and the US. So why you ALREADY want to put words into the mouths of anyone thinking of responding is beyond me.


jimnyc. Rev simply can't get rid of his LIBERAL character assassination techniques when it comes to DEFENDING anyone with whom he disagree's.

rev would probably cheer for any Russian air attacks to make the U.S. look bad.

Just because it makes rev's miserable life look better to everyone else.

I know rev has lots of fans here. But I don't care for anyone who seems to support NEGATIVE results that suit his hatred of Trump, or others who still despise Obama.

jimnyc
06-23-2017, 08:09 PM
jimnyc. Rev simply can't get rid of his LIBERAL character assassination techniques when it comes to DEFENDING anyone with whom he disagree's.

rev would probably cheer for any Russian air attacks to make the U.S. look bad.

Just because it makes rev's miserable life look better to everyone else.

I know rev has lots of fans here. But I don't care for anyone who seems to support NEGATIVE results that suit his hatred of Trump, or others who still despise Obama.

I know Rev is against war, and WAY against any war that may happen without the approval of congress. But often he reads too much into things.

I don't want to be disrespectful and talk away from you, Rev, even though I know you'll be reading. I often think you read too much into things and find negativity all over when it comes to war, the military & often our government.

Rev, I think it's good that we are trying to rid the world of ISIS. I also think it's good if we have an ally on the ground doing the same, and I have no problem protecting them. Outside of that, I'm certainly not looking for war with anyone.

revelarts
06-23-2017, 08:18 PM
Chill out! This is just a scenario, no one is saying we are going to war, nor even advocating for any war with Russia/Syria. I only posted it because of this scenario, and their thoughts on such a comparison between Russia and the US. So why you ALREADY want to put words into the mouths of anyone thinking of responding is beyond me.

I just asked some questions Jim.

As far as putting "words in people's mouth" Well you see AT already pissed in my direction but did not answer the questions.
But my questions make the simple point.
few to NONE of these "brief", "Clear victory" war predictions come true. So I see no reason to buy into this guys fantasy football.

And the idea that Russia is an aggressor in Syria is just BS. they are constantly fighting ISIS there. U.S. and NATO forces are helping both ISIS and Assad on any given day.

you might want to take a look at Statfor history as well here. They are kind of shady and basically in the warmonger biz. THEY'LL Make MONEY in a Russia v NATO war.

gabosaurus
06-23-2017, 08:22 PM
It is no secret that Russia's air and ground strength do not approach that of the U.S. The problem is that Putin knows this and would never engage. Any exchange with Russia would escalate into nuclear strikes. Putin is like Stalin in that regard. He is willing to putting everything on the line to avoid losing face.
The problem with current military strategies is that they are being planned by those with past war mindsets. There is no reason to have a huge military force or the most current aircraft technology. There is not going to be any ground war with Russia or China. Everything will happen in the air.
"When the hawks control the world's military forces, only vultures will remain."

jimnyc
06-23-2017, 08:24 PM
I just asked some questions Jim.

As far as putting "words in people's mouth" Well you see AT already pissed in my direction but did not answer the questions.
But my questions make the simple point.
few to NONE of these "brief", "Clear victory" war predictions come true. So I see no reason to buy into this guys fantasy football.

And the idea that Russia is an aggressor in Syria is just BS. they are constantly fighting ISIS there. U.S. and NATO forces are helping both ISIS and Assad on any given day.

you might want to take a look at Statfor history as well here. They are kind of shady and basically in the warmonger biz.

Don't get me wrong, nothing bad about questions, just seemed like you assumed right off the bat, with your very first line questioning other wars and how "but that's different" stuff, before a single person probably even read this thread.

I'm not getting into anything between yourself and AT, but seemed like he was responding to what you wrote, not for no reason.

The rest isn't anything I presented nor was looking to debate with you. :)

revelarts
06-23-2017, 08:30 PM
Don't get me wrong, nothing bad about questions, just seemed like you assumed right off the bat, with your very first line questioning other wars

Yes i put the prediction in context. seems a reasonable reply to me.
isn't it?

SaveSave

jimnyc
06-23-2017, 08:39 PM
Yes i put the prediction in context. seems a reasonable reply to me.
isn't it?

I suppose, I dunno :dunno:

I did not realize there was any context to it or anything like that. But yeah, I suppose with that. But I never said anything was wrong with anything. It was the quote you wrote, sounded like you were putting words... disregard me. :) :) I was just trying to make a comparison, and definitely not a prediction.

CSM
06-24-2017, 06:28 AM
It is no secret that Russia's air and ground strength do not approach that of the U.S. The problem is that Putin knows this and would never engage. Any exchange with Russia would escalate into nuclear strikes. Putin is like Stalin in that regard. He is willing to putting everything on the line to avoid losing face.
The problem with current military strategies is that they are being planned by those with past war mindsets. There is no reason to have a huge military force or the most current aircraft technology. There is not going to be any ground war with Russia or China. Everything will happen in the air.
"When the hawks control the world's military forces, only vultures will remain."

That's some analysis you present there. I am assuming it based on your extensive experience in strategic military analysis.

All I can say is that part of my job is developing and playing out just such scenarios. There are many, many variables that are involved. The original analysis presented here is far too simplistic; it totally ignores socio-political environment among other things. It is my experience that strategists often over/under estimate capabilities depending upon their personal (sometimes unknowing) bias. Technical capabilities is one thing but mixing in all the other very real variables (training, logistics, etc.) is another.

jimnyc
06-24-2017, 05:33 PM
That's some analysis you present there. I am assuming it based on your extensive experience in strategic military analysis.

All I can say is that part of my job is developing and playing out just such scenarios. There are many, many variables that are involved. The original analysis presented here is far too simplistic; it totally ignores socio-political environment among other things. It is my experience that strategists often over/under estimate capabilities depending upon their personal (sometimes unknowing) bias. Technical capabilities is one thing but mixing in all the other very real variables (training, logistics, etc.) is another.

Always love and respect your input. :) :saluting2:

Gunny
06-24-2017, 06:12 PM
Always love and respect your input. :) :saluting2:The Sergeant Major is correct. He just has more patience than I. The article presents a simplistic scenario with simplistic solutions. There are too many variables involved once the first round goes down range. Predicting the "winner" of a "what if" is just that.

Cooler heads have usually prevailed. Now would be a good time for someone to take away Trump's twitter before his mouth escalates a situation that can only end badly.