Syria Shoots Down Turkish Fighter Jet

[south]

Turkish spokesman says it was downed by AAA. I would be surprised if it was SA5

News Headlines
BEIRUT (Reuters) - Syrian air defenses had to react immediately to a Turkish jet flying at 100 meters (330 feet) altitude inside Syrian airspace in what was "a clear breach of Syrian sovereignty", Foreign Ministry spokesman Jihad Makdissi said on Monday.

"The plane disappeared and then reappeared in Syrian airspace, flying at 100 meters altitude and about 1-2 km (0.6-1.2 miles) from the Syrian coast," he told a news conference about the incident on Friday.

"We had to react immediately. Even if the plane was Syrian we would have shot it down," he added.

Makdissi said the jet -- a Turkish air force F4 Phantom -- was downed by anti-aircraft fire, not by a radar-guided missile. "The bullets only have a range of 2.5 km (1.5 miles)."

Turkey summoned a NATO meeting for Tuesday to consult its allies and agree on a response to what it says was an attack without warning in international airspace.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Turkish spokesman says it was downed by AAA. I would be surprised if it was SA5

It’s the Syrians saying it was shoot down by AAA. The Turks are saying it was shot down at 3,000 feet, 13 NM off the coast heading SSW.

Turkish spokesman says it was downed by AAA. I would be surprised if it was SA5

It’s the Syrians saying it was shoot down by AAA. The Turks are saying it was shot down at 3,000 feet, 13 NM off the coast heading SSW.

I’m inclined to agree with the Syrian presentation of events as it matches the NNE flyby as admitted by the Turks. However I do find it hard to believe a fast jet crossing target was hit ~1NM away by AAA. Many different guided missiles could have done it with Buk or Pantsyir top of the list. Optical command guidance could have enabled the hit without a RWR spike.

 

[swerve]

Apart from the fact that NATO Article 5 only applies to attacks on member state territory in “North America and Europe” and the Eastern Mediterranean is in Asia .

Article 6 (1)
For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:
on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France(2), on the territory of or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;
on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.
...
1. The definition of the territories to which Article 5 applies was revised by Article 2 of the Protocol to the North Atlantic Treaty on the accession of Greece and Turkey signed on 22 October 1951.
2. On January 16, 1963, the North Atlantic Council noted that insofar as the former Algerian Departments of France were concerned, the relevant clauses of this Treaty had become inapplicable as from July 3, 1962.

'Europe' in this context includes all of the territory of Turkey.

Therefore, if this aircraft was in international airspace it could, in theory, qualify, being over the Mediterranean. However, as you say, the circumstances (the admitted incursion) would appear to preclude that.

 

[Feanor]

What is the status of their SAM systems, are they integrated into a network or are they just single units operating on their own?

What is the condition of their S-300s?

They have no S-300s. The Pantsyrs and Buks should be easy to integrate, they're built with it in mind. Same goes for the upgraded Pechoras. The legacy gear, not so much. I don't know how they actually operate.

 

[Squillanzo]

What are the capabilities of Turkish RF-4E as a reconaissance platform? Does anyone have any info about it?

From the first report's it seemed a bit strange that the pilots didn't eject seeing as their Radar warning system would have been screaming if either a SAM or AAA system aquired a lock. The seats would have alerted S&R team to their location.
No pilots have been recovered. No family of the pilots have come forward. The sheer public relations gold mine they would represent, ensures that the pilots or their families could be utilised in a media frenzy to drum up NATO support.

The lack of this type of media barrage seems to be pointing to the unmanned version of the F-4 the QF-4 Phantom 2.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

From the first report's it seemed a bit strange that the pilots didn't eject seeing as their Radar warning system would have been screaming if either a SAM or AAA system aquired a lock. The seats would have alerted S&R team to their location.

Lots of planes have been shot down without the pilots being able to eject. It’s not a rare or new phenomena. Also if the aircrew had ejected their seats would have gone to the bottom of the Mediterranean Sea…

No pilots have been recovered. No family of the pilots have come forward. The sheer public relations gold mine they would represent, ensures that the pilots or their families could be utilised in a media frenzy to drum up NATO support.

Not everyone is a media tart waiting for their five minutes of fame. The usual response from most bereaved families is they want to be left alone.

The lack of this type of media barrage seems to be pointing to the unmanned version of the F-4 the QF-4 Phantom 2.

Ohh great another silly conspiracy theory with nothing but the wildest circumstances to support it. Do you conspiracy theorists actually believe that no one ever at anytime has actually done something for their stated reasons?

 

[Sampanviking]

The official Turkish explanation for the Phantoms mission was that it testing the capabilities of Turkeys own Air Defence Radars. I suspect however that in reality it was the Syrian or possibly even Russian Radars it was trying to test.

I do not think it unreasonable to assume that NATO commanders were keen to lean more about any recent hardening of Syrian AD Capabilities as an aid to any Air Exclusion/R2P mission that they may be called upon to perform at some later date.

I also think that the shooting down came as a very nasty surprise, not only to Turkey, but to NATO as a whole.

Even if this is wrong and the Turks were indeed only interested in testing their own Radars, it was still incredibly stupid to violate unfriendly airspace if active in that configuration. as who under the circumstances would give the other side the benefit of the doubt?

 

[FirstSpear]

Too far away to be Israeli?

Actually, as I said earlier, a SA-5 missile was used. Plus, no way they thought it was Israeli since the location is quite far away.

Sorry to disagree but there is very good reason to think that the Israeli strike that entered Syria in few years ago and demolished the North Korean-designed Nuclear weapons facility in Northeastern Syria did so using an approach from the Med and skirting the Turkish-Syrian border to get East enough before descending into the area of their target.

The Turks complained about the raid for an hour or so as they found the jettisoned fuel tanks of F15s and F16s. Presumably they shut up after that as Washington may well have told them to can it. The Israelis had already decided not to brag about the raid.

Also, the IDF/AF regularly tests Syrian air defenses and asserts its ability to overfly Lebanon with the understanding that Syrian AD that paint their planes will get an anti-radiation missile or even some JDAM as a thank you card.

Lastly, there is plenty of evidence that the IDF has overflown major political and military targets in Syria (often without bombing them) to make a point about the potential cost of Syrian-sponsored actions in Lebanon, on the Israeli border or anywhere else. So, I would argue that if you're in the Syrian military and you see a plane, you can, statistically-speaking, assume it's probably Israeli.

On the technology of these F4s, they were brought up to much of the SledgeHammer configuration originally defined as the Phantom 2000 by IAI but obviously without some key gadgets. That said, I would say the mission profile is highly suspicious. These planes are optimized for high altitude, medium range, side-looking surveillance, even elint. Flying the mission pattern in question, within AA and SAM range is all thumbs.

My crazy theory? The flight was a ham-fisted provocation designed to give Turkey the grounds to take the initiative across its border and walk into some territory they've always wanted. Like much of Syria and Lebanon! Also, still not convinced there was a crew onboard, that mission profile is so stupidly suspect that I wonder if they even bothered to fly it with anything but a good flight management system and remote control. That might be technically too organized for the Turkish AF but still, it's a pretty preposterous mission plan.

 

[Waylander]

IMHO the Turks are already fed up with their Arab and Kurdish minorities. I can't see them wanting more land with exactly these inhabitants. What they may want is more leeway when it comes to actions against PPK facilities in Syria and a more agressive stance against the Assad regime.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Also, still not convinced there was a crew onboard, that mission profile is so stupidly suspect that I wonder if they even bothered to fly it with anything but a good flight management system and remote control. That might be technically too organized for the Turkish AF but still, it's a pretty preposterous mission plan.

Briefly stopping back in the real world for a moment it is worthwhile pointing out that the identity of the lost Turkish aircrew is no secret and their families have made public statements. Of course such facts never seem to dent the belief in conspiracies.

LOCAL - 'No war over my son,' father of missing Turkish pilot says

As to the flight profile of the Phantom it is far from ludicrous if it is doing what the Turks say it was (testing their GCI radar) or even engaging in some sideways lateral photography or electronic reconnaissance. If the Turkish claim about flight path is true then at 3,000 feet and ~10 Nmi from the coast the Phantom would not have had much chance to physically evade a missile(s). Which is why you either fly very low or high when up against missile threats. Or use a high end ECM capability, which it would appear was lacking. The Phantom should have had plenty of warning from RWR and the ground based radar but obviously the Turks are supressing all this evidence as it wouldn’t be pleasant listening.

Of course it is perfectly reasonable for the Turks to not expect to get engaged. Flying a crossing path of a nation’s air space, even if you dip inside, has never brought a missile engagement without warning. Every ‘peacetime’ shootdown in the past has been of aircraft deeply penetrating into airspace after multiple warnings and the like.

 

[My2Cents]

Check the 2 maps at the bottom of this article:

BBC News - Turkey sends anti-aircraft guns to Syrian border

These maps show what supposedly happened according to Syria and Turkey. Not the different location of boundary line for Syrian territorial waters claimed by the 2 countries in the maps. This may account for some of the confusion in the Press.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

These maps show what supposedly happened according to Syria and Turkey. Not the different location of boundary line for Syrian territorial waters claimed by the 2 countries in the maps. This may account for some of the confusion in the Press.

There is no confusion over Syria’s grandiose territorial waters claims in excess of international law. The ‘confusion’ is because there are two different flight path claims. Lots of countries have unrecognised waters claims but that doesn’t mean they try and enforce them. If Syria had been enforcing their extra territorial waters claims they would have gone to war with Turkey, Greece, Israel, USA, UK, etc thousands of times in the past few years.

What is interesting is Syria claims they shot down the Phantom with gunfire so as to ensure that it ‘had’ to have been intercepted just off their cost on a penetration flight path (a justifiable act). Turkey claim they were shot down over international waters by an IR or laser guided missile despite their being no such surface launched missile with such range. Their claim keeps them an innocent party and ‘explains’ how they were shot down without any apparent warning (which helps their innocent party claim) or ability to countermeasure the missile (which avoids uncomfortable questions about their tactical proficiency).

The truth is probably somewhere in between with both parties guilty of what they are trying to hide. The Syrians shot down the Phantom as it flying lateral to their coast (a crossing target) with a radar guided missile. The Syrian action was unjustifiable and the Turkish were incompetent.

 

[Squillanzo]

Lots of planes have been shot down without the pilots being able to eject. It’s not a rare or new phenomena. Also if the aircrew had ejected their seats would have gone to the bottom of the Mediterranean Sea…

It is rare for a RF-4 to have not been warned by its electronic's suite specifically designed to avoid radar. That doesn't matter though. Or the Turkish ground crew not being aware their aircraft was over Syrian airspace? But that wouldn't matter either. Have they found the pilots yet? Or doesn't that matter either?

Not everyone is a media tart waiting for their five minutes of fame. The usual response from most bereaved families is they want to be left alone.

I'm sure you must know the names, rank and age of the pilots then? You seem to think that's not important, when every NATO nation will do so out of respect. But that's ok though, right?



Ohh great another silly conspiracy theory with nothing but the wildest circumstances to support it. Do you conspiracy theorists actually believe that no one ever at anytime has actually done something for their stated reasons?

So do you have any facts or legitamet information regarding this aircraft, or have you just failed to back you statements up with anything more than a "My dads bigger than your dad", shaped response?

At least provide some factual base to your argument, give an answer not a baseless accusation. Surprise us all, we're waiting?

 

[Abraham Gubler]

So do you have any facts or legitamet information regarding this aircraft, or have you just failed to back you statements up with anything more than a "My dads bigger than your dad", shaped response?

At least provide some factual base to your argument, give an answer not a baseless accusation. Surprise us all, we're waiting?

LOL. What is this a cut and paste generic internet debate response?

As to legitimate information I’ve referred to the various flight path claims made in the media and public statements of family members and you can scroll back through this thread to see the links. You on the other hand have claimed Turkey has a plane they don’t (QF-4) and this event is a manufactured casus belli for an intervention in Syria they aren’t actually advocating.

And BTW my dad is probably bigger than your dad!

 

[2007yellow430]

Does anyone know how deep the water is there? If it's shallow, they can pull up the wreckage and we'll know who has the accurate factual statement. Way too much he said she said here.

Art

 

[Squillanzo]

LOL. What is this a cut and paste generic internet debate response?

As to legitimate information I’ve referred to the various flight path claims made in the media and public statements of family members and you can scroll back through this thread to see the links. You on the other hand have claimed Turkey has a plane they don’t (QF-4) and this event is a manufactured casus belli for an intervention in Syria they aren’t actually advocating.

And BTW my dad is probably bigger than your dad!

"Flight Path Claims"? Unsubstantiated claims made by the media is not factual evidence, it's hear say evidence. And what family statements? Age, rank and surname? Do you have exclusive hear say evidence for that? Until you provide fact based evidence neither of your dads opinions will be acceptable.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

"Flight Path Claims"? Unsubstantiated claims made by the media is not factual evidence, it's hear say evidence. And what family statements? Age, rank and surname? Do you have exclusive hear say evidence for that? Until you provide fact based evidence neither of your dads opinions will be acceptable.

The media have made no claims but rather the Turkish and Syrian governments have made claims which have been reported in the media. As to the families of the aircrew their names, ranks, etc are all on the linked to news stories.

Clearly you didn’t even bother to read the linked to stories and are just here to make outrageous conspiracy claims and then back them up with some trolling. I think you will soon have a date with some moderator action…

 

[ADMk2]

"Flight Path Claims"? Unsubstantiated claims made by the media is not factual evidence, it's hear say evidence. And what family statements? Age, rank and surname? Do you have exclusive hear say evidence for that? Until you provide fact based evidence neither of your dads opinions will be acceptable.

Hello pot this is kettle? Name one single source for any of your claims so far? You've added 2 and 2 and come up with 5 and then tried to shoot down any other view by disparaging others for not providing sources.

Support your own arguments first mate, before criticising others...

 

[djpav]

RF4 was brought down using Pantsir-S1 30mm cannon fire

It seems to me that most people posting on this thread are completely clueless about how things work in that region of the world, especially when it comes to Turkey. So let's get some facts straight:

1) What the pair of Turkish RF4's were doing in Syria, is what they are doing practically every other day over Greek (or Cypriot) air defenses, i.e. getting as close as possible to photograph installations of interest. Anything else you hear about what they were doing (e.g. "testing Turkish air defences and accidentally straying in Syrian air space " is a bunch of Turkish hogwash. If you believe that, I have a bridge in Bosporus to sell you, and you are probably too naive to understand geopolitics and should refrain from reading further - period.).

2) In this case, the pair of RF4's got REALLY close, trying to test the Syrian AA defences in order to assess the feasibility of setting up a NATO-imposed no-fly zone (a la Libya), and/or photograph the Russian installations especially with regards to the P800 Yakhont supersonic anti-ship missile (in case of imposing a naval blockade on Syria)

3) The pair of RF4's were flying no more than 2 to 3 miles from the Latakia coast (some sources say even less, 1-2 km), at low speed (no more than 500 mph) and low altitude (5000 ft). The largest piece from the wreck of the RF4 (a tail section) was found only 2 miles from the shore.

4) The RF4's were engaged with AA cannon fire. They were not engaged with SA-5, S-300, or any other missiles. END OF STORY. One RF4 was brought down and the other made it back to Turkey with apparently little or minor damage.

5) The question is what AA fire brought the RF4 down. There are two candidates: the ZSU-23mm or the Pantsir S-1. Evidence points out that the RF4 WAS TRACKED BY AND BROUGHT DOWN BY CANNON FIRE FROM the Pantsir S1's 2A38M 30 mm autocannon guns. This is supported by the best detective work on the subject, carried out by the greek defence website, defencenet.gr, in which they compared the sound from the cannon fire from the amateur video of the incident, with cannon fire from the promotional video of the Pantsir S1 firing its 30mm autocannon. The sound is exactly the same (and different from ZSU-23mm cannon fire). This damn website will not let me post links to this so please search for it.

6) If you have a better theory with corroborating evidence I am all ears, but please do not insult my intelligence with official Turkish statements.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

It seems to me that most people posting on this thread are completely clueless about how things work in that region of the world, especially when it comes to Turkey. So let's get some facts straight:

So where are all the posts supporting the Turkish claims? I don’t see any in this thread. And please don’t think everyone here is ignorant of the local political situation. Plus some of us here actually know something about ground based air defence…

3) The pair of RF4's were flying no more than 2 to 3 miles from the Latakia coast (some sources say even less, 1-2 km), at low speed (no more than 500 mph) and low altitude (5000 ft). The largest piece from the wreck of the RF4 (a tail section) was found only 2 miles from the shore.

4) The RF4's were engaged with AA cannon fire. They were not engaged with SA-5, S-300, or any other missiles. END OF STORY.

No it isn’t. Because the type of engagement you suggest is so compelling is extremely difficult with even the most advanced gun system. And BTW 500 mph is 450 knots which is actually really fast. 450 knots, 2-3 miles and 5,000 feet altitude is incredibly hard shot for a gun system. If the target is crossing it’s almost impossible. Coming straight at you is a lot more possible.

sound from the cannon fire from the amateur video of the incident

This is total nonsense. The amateur YouTube video is as credible as various film of Big Foot.

6) If you have a better theory with corroborating evidence I am all ears, but please do not insult my intelligence with official Turkish statements.

See post history in this thread.