Trump-Regime´s attack on Syrian airbase was a failure

[danielpalos]

the very latest?

 

[Bleipriester]

the very latest?

May differ according to the source.

 

[awesome american man]

heck yea mad dog! throw that bone hammer down on those knuckle heads

 

[danielpalos]

ok. sixty missiles were assigned to be launched; let's start there.

 

[DrainBamage]

I am sure my piles of bullshit intercepted these missiles.

Actually nothing intercepted those missiles, but speculating it was piles of bullshit that did it is about as good as any of the other inane stuff you've dreamed up.

 

[Bleipriester]

I am sure my piles of bullshit intercepted these missiles.

Actually nothing intercepted those missiles, but speculating it was piles of bullshit that did it is about as good as any of the other inane stuff you've dreamed up.

Your claims are not based on facts, hints and logic but on the claim of absolute invincibility. But invincible countries actually win their wars, note that.

 

[DrainBamage]

Your claims are not based on facts, hints and logic but on the claim of absolute invincibility.

Bullshit, as usual. You perceive simple explanations as to why Syrians couldn't shoot down half a dozen tomahawk missiles as claims of invincibility because you are too shallow minded to wrap your head around the flaws in your argument.

You swallowed some propaganda, repeated it here, and when challenged to explain it floundered. You've proven yourself completely naive on this subject.

But invincible countries actually win their wars, note that.

Nobody has made any claim to any country being invincible, you're still attacking straw men.

 

[Bleipriester]

Your claims are not based on facts, hints and logic but on the claim of absolute invincibility.

Bullshit, as usual. You perceive simple explanations as to why Syrians couldn't shoot down half a dozen tomahawk missiles as claims of invincibility because you are too shallow minded to wrap your head around the flaws in your argument.

You swallowed some propaganda, repeated it here, and when challenged to explain it floundered. You've proven yourself completely naive on this subject.

But invincible countries actually win their wars, note that.

Nobody has made any claim to any country being invincible, you're still attacking straw men.

I provided credible information on how the missiles were probably jammed. You just wear your tenth diaper.

 

[danielpalos]

We should expect a lot of damage with sixty missiles. Is it reasonable to expect total destruction of the airbase?

 

[DrainBamage]

I provided credible information on how the missiles were probably jammed. You just wear your tenth diaper.

No you didn't, and when it was explained to you why you weren't making sense you repeatedly (and still are) tried to derail into the politics of it and straw man arguments.

That is the surest sign of someone who's out of their depth in an argument... the derail attempts. You've made at least a dozen tries to turn this discussion into the politics of the attack, the reason is you cannot explain how Syria jammed 36 cruise missiles.

 

[DrainBamage]

We should expect a lot of damage with sixty missiles. Is it reasonable to expect total destruction of the airbase?

It isn't. Tomahawks aren't suited for destroying runways, so there is nothing they could have done to knock out the entire airbase. They destroyed some planes and facilities to send a message.

Bleipriester is basing his info on Russian propaganda claiming that only 23 missiles hit, and he's made numerous feeble attempts to explain how Syria shot them down (or jammed them as he later switched his story) but none of it makes any sense. Tomahawks have deep redundancy in mid-course guidance systems (inertial, terrain matching, GPS) and don't use an active radar in terminal homing, they use digital image matching where they compare what they see with a camera to images stored in their database that they are programmed to strike.

Where are the pictures of three dozen tomahawk missile wreckage sites? We all know if that happened it would be paraded around in photos, but we've got nothing. That says a lot.

Here is an analysis of high res images: ISI first to analyze Shayrat airfield missile attack - ISI they conclude there are 44 damage areas and many of those may have been hit twice.

 

[Bleipriester]

I provided credible information on how the missiles were probably jammed. You just wear your tenth diaper.

No you didn't, and when it was explained to you why you weren't making sense you repeatedly (and still are) tried to derail into the politics of it and straw man arguments.

That is the surest sign of someone who's out of their depth in an argument... the derail attempts. You've made at least a dozen tries to turn this discussion into the politics of the attack, the reason is you cannot explain how Syria jammed 36 cruise missiles.

You explained nothing. The terror missiles failed, period. They were jammed by a Krasukha 4.

 

[danielpalos]

It explains we may need a task force to keep that base busy, if we need to "get serious".

 

[Mushroom]

They were jammed by a Krasukha 4.

Care to explain how exactly?

The Krasukha is an EW system, designed to take out drones, and to scramble RADAR systems.

The Tomahawk is guided by Inertial Navagation, with Photographic and GPS used for route and target verification. The only Tomahawk that uses RADAR is the ASW variation.

So how exactly would this have worked?

 

[Bleipriester]

They were jammed by a Krasukha 4.

Care to explain how exactly?

The Krasukha is an EW system, designed to take out drones, and to scramble RADAR systems.

The Tomahawk is guided by Inertial Navagation, with Photographic and GPS used for route and target verification. The only Tomahawk that uses RADAR is the ASW variation.

So how exactly would this have worked?

Since Block II (second variant, 1984), the missiles use TERKOM (Terrain Contour Matching). This system uses radar to scan the surface and compare it with the data stored in the missile. If now the Krasukha 4 manages to feed a missile with corrupted surface information, the missile could get confused and fail.

 

[DrainBamage]

You explained nothing. The terror missiles failed, period. They were jammed by a Krasukha 4.

Sure I did, it just went over your head because you have a conclusion you're chasing instead of taking an impartial look. There are satellite photos showing over 40 target hits, so in addition to the technical failure issues of your jamming fantasy there is hard photographic evidence that 36 missiles didn't fail.

Since Block II (second variant, 1984), the missiles use TERKOM (Terrain Contour Matching). This system uses radar to scan the surface and compare it with the data stored in the missile. If now the Krasukha 4 manages to feed a missile with corrupted surface information, the missile could get confused and fail.

You're making things up. TERCOM (not TERKOM) uses a vertical downward facing altimeter, can you explain exactly how a truck mounted jamming system can feed false altimeter data to dozens of cruise missiles? It sure doesn't sound you have a clue how ECM works, and if you did corrupt the altimeter the missiles would continue on INS until either out of effective range of jamming or on terminal where they'd pop up and switch to electro-optical.

You're chanting the same thing over and over but clearly have zero ability to actually explain how what you claim is possible. Given you're the village idiot who believes the crap about Iran producing a 5th gen fighter that looks like it belongs on a carnival kids ride it's like a never ending string of laughable commentary.

 

[DrainBamage]

They were jammed by a Krasukha 4.

Care to explain how exactly?

The Krasukha is an EW system, designed to take out drones, and to scramble RADAR systems.

The Tomahawk is guided by Inertial Navagation, with Photographic and GPS used for route and target verification. The only Tomahawk that uses RADAR is the ASW variation.

So how exactly would this have worked?

This has been explained to him, he's too dense to wrap his pea brain around it. He read on one of his propaganda sources that Syrians shot down missiles, and he's evolved that to Russians deploying super magic jamming equipment that function on fairy dust.

 

[Bleipriester]

It is radar, Drain. So a system designed to jam radar may jam radar, right?

 

[DrainBamage]

It is radar, Drain. So a system designed to jam radar may jam radar, right?

I didn't ask you that, I asked you how a radar jammer causes an altimeter to be fed wrong data that makes the missile crash. You know, the missile that also has redundancy with INS and travels hundreds of kilometers.

We'll wait for your technical explanation while the crickets chirp.... then you can explain the photo with over 40 target impact points.

 

[Bleipriester]

It is radar, Drain. So a system designed to jam radar may jam radar, right?

I didn't ask you that, I asked you how a radar jammer causes an altimeter to be fed wrong data that makes the missile crash. You know, the missile that also has redundancy with INS and travels hundreds of kilometers.

We'll wait for your technical explanation while the crickets chirp.... then you can explain the photo with over 40 target impact points.

When will you stop bothering with your missile pride? All has been explained already, you just refuse to believe it because your stuff is infallible. There is no room for more discussion about this.