"Russia Is Using Old, Dumb Bombs, Making Syria..." Topic

… Air War Even More Brutal.

"Not only do Putin's fighter jets not appear to be targeting ISIS, their inaccurate attacks look worryingly similar to those of Assad's own regime—and could kill thousands of civilians.On September 30, Russian warplanes launched their first air raids in Syria, striking eight targets around Homs, north of Damascus. In a second day of strikes on October 1, Moscow's planes hit another five targets, according to the Russian Defense Ministry.

The Kremlin insists it's hitting militants from the so-called Islamic State. But the locations of the aerial strikes imply otherwise—that Russia's bombing civilians and U.S.-backed rebels instead. Chillingly, video and photographs from Russia's new air war seem to indicate that the attacks are inaccurate and indiscriminate…"
Full article here
link

Amicalement
Armand

It's the Russian way of war, especially when you're on a tight budget…..

The Russians have… shall we say… a pragmatic way of waging war.

That said, it seems that the USAF has bombed a hospital in Kunduz, so perhaps we shouldn't be casting aspersions…

Just another sensationalist article. I was going to make some wise-crack, but it is just too sad for that. It is all so crazy, and I just go play games to get away from it.

Do you fight to win wars or minimise civilian casualties? Sadly, civilian casualties – including 'unnecessary' ones, are a natural result of war – and not many nations have the luxury of being able to avoid causing them.

Rather depend son your objectives doesn't it?

In Afghanistan, where you need the support of the civilian population, it would seem the NATO doctrine has had a better hearts and minds effect than the Russian one.

Given no nation-wide uprising against the NATO forces.

So it seems NATO doctrine is superior.

Unless of course, you don't care about the point of view of the locals and feel you can flatten or cow them through violence…

Russia doesn't have a good record on winning wars either.

I don't think the Russians really get COIN, but I'm not sure DAESH is a counter-insurgency anymore.

I suspect that the Russians are using up the oldest crap in their stockpile first, which are probably unguided munitions. Given their forces historical lack of concern for civilian casualties, one shouldn't be surprised that they're not using the expensive stuff to avoid hurting them.

I could be wrong, but about the hospital bit. I think a hospital or school or whatever loses its protected status if the enemy uses it for a military purpose – i.e. stockpiles weapons, shoots from it, etc. So it may have been a hospital, but it also may have been a legitimate target. (I'm not saying that I like the idea of bombing hospitals, and I'm not saying that the hospital in question was in fact being used in a way that made it a target since I don't know. I do know that people in that part of the world keep trying to hide behind civilians with predictable results.)

The hospital in Kunduz was run by the renowned French charity MSF. The strike lasted for 30 minutes, poor inteligence is my guess. Fences to mend with France.

The Afghans were not won over by any Hearts and Minds strategy but money has its own charm. Stop the money lose the hearts and minds as we are currently seeing.

Mind you I would have thought the British Government's recent decision to abandon its Afghan interpeters to certain death will have diminished even the charms of cash.

Afghanistan is lost to the West.

What I'd like to know is are the Saudis bankrolling AQ against the Talibs?

We donate to Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders (MSF) every year. Very sad news.

Nick – it was a hospital full of medical personnel treating wounded ppeople i.e. fully covered by the Geneva Conventions.

Furthermore MSF state they'd given the location to both Afghan and US authorities.

So it looks like something of a cluster.

The Russians have… shall we say… a pragmatic way of waging war.

An old bomb will kill you justas dead as new bomb …

That said, it seems that the USAF has bombed a hospital in Kunduz, so perhaps we shouldn't be casting aspersions…

Yes, as I constantly, in guerilla/COIN, with the enemy not wearing a uniform and hiding amount the populous. CD will happen.

Do you fight to win wars or minimise civilian casualties? Sadly, civilian casualties – including 'unnecessary' ones, are a natural result of war – and not many nations have the luxury of being able to avoid causing them.

Very well said … all we can do is try to limit CD. But regardless, especially in COIN … it's going to happen.

Rather depend son your objectives doesn't it?

In Afghanistan, where you need the support of the civilian population, it would seem the NATO doctrine has had a better hearts and minds effect than the Russian one.

Given no nation-wide uprising against the NATO forces.

So it seems NATO doctrine is superior.

Unless of course, you don't care about the point of view of the locals and feel you can flatten or cow them through violence…

Russia doesn't have a good record on winning wars either.

All true .. but again, the Afghan region is not a unified entity and tribalism rules over the loose, corrupt, weak government in Kabul.

Unless of course, you don't care about the point of view of the locals and feel you can flatten or cow them through violence…

Seem like a deadly paradigm … The locals hate each other on any given day. Because of tribal, religious, etc., differences, plus warlord affilaitions, etc. … So again who is the enemy and who is not ? So I don't think the locals have a unified POV or much of unfied anything.

My friend in SF operating in A'stan a few years back. Said all the tribal leaders were complaining about the other tribes, mullahs etc. … Nothing was getting done. Which was the norm in tribal areas. He finally pointed to the US flag on his uniform and said, "This is the most powerful Tribe in the world !" Which he was pointing out get your together and work together. But as we see, this has little effect on how the Afghans do business.

Afghans were not won over by any Hearts and Minds strategy but money has its own charm. Stop the money lose the hearts and minds as we are currently seeing.

That is the botton line. Their "loyality" can be bought, and otherwise they are all out for themselves. Not a honorable lot, generally IMO … And that among their other "quaint" predilections will keep them in the current situation they find themselves in and it has been that way for some time. And if/when the Taliban take control of the region. It will change little. And the violence for a varity of reasons will continue. Nothing is going to change … ever, it appears …

In war, truth is the first casualty. -- Aeschylus

Would the French admit they allowed insurgents to stockpile arms and ammo (and possibly set up a command post) in the hospital?
(Allowed as in they were made an "offer they couldn't refuse").

Would the US admit they blew-up a non-target?

Nick – it was a hospital full of medical personnel treating wounded ppeople i.e. fully covered by the Geneva Conventions.

Furthermore MSF state they'd given the location to both Afghan and US authorities.

So it looks like something of a clusterBleeped text.

Yes, again business as usual in the region. Who gave the grids to the pilots ? Were the pilots briefed on the hospital's location ? Was the hospital marked to be seen from the air ? Who was giving terminal guidance to the pilots making the strike ? If anyone ? Were there any Taliban near the hospital ? In the hospital ? Etc. etc., etc. .. I have said before, I was an Air Ops Officer in the 101 in my youth, there is a varity of ways for things to get Frakk'd up. I know from experience.

In war, truth is the first casualty. -- Aeschylus

Would the French admit they allowed insurgents to stockpile arms and ammo (and possibly set up a command post) in the hospital?
(Allowed as in they were made an "offer they couldn't refuse").

Would the US admit they blew-up a non-target?

Amen … and as we see … another twist to the story … Whose hands are clean ? Who is really to blame ? In my mind the Taliban is to blame … again.

For a start MSF is nothing to do with the French government. It's a charity with a French name…

I'm guessing that MSF told the people they were told to tell about the location of their facilities and that information wasn't passed on. Given the rapidity in which Kunduz became a war zone I doubt it was marked.

Nor, if the chain of command works properly, should it need to be. After all anyone can stick a Red Crescent on a building.

Not the fault of the pilots but someone somewhere has dropped the ball.and caused an avoidable tragedy…if all is as reported.

Not the fault of the pilots but someone somewhere has dropped the ball.and caused an avoidable tragedy…if all is as reported.

I agree completely. There are 100+ things that have to go right when tossing 500lb or higher bombs around in an urban setting and given the, all things considered, light damage, I suspect a near miss.

The spotter/designator/JTAC has to see and perceive the potential target correctly assuming they know with 100% certainty that where they are designating is in fact what they want dead as well as a 50-100 meter circle around the target. The communication to the strike aircraft has to be 100% clear and the marker/designator has to be 100% correct and sight designated 100% accurate. The guided weapon has to function perfectly and even now, with a laser or GPS, I believe the CEP is still 5-10 meters simply because of things such as wind, variances in guidance fins etc.

A 500lb bomb can flatten a city block of relatively fragile brick/block/stick and mortar construction. Choosing to use that sort of weapon in an urban environment is choosing to accept that absent perfect intelligence and performance throughout the chain of decisions and actions will inevitably lead to that sort of thing happening. And it will happen again and again in conflict. All you can do is identify mistakes that are correctable and try and fix those while accepting that if you want to beat the other fellow, you have to kill him while at the same time, trying to kill as few non-combatants as possible unless you are willing to become as bad as the folks you are trying to kill.

If it's true that fighters wer ein the compound, then an air strike is not the correct way to winkle them out of a hospital.

The USAF seems to be stating it was collateral damage caused by them hitting a bunch of fighters nearby….

…which again is the improper use of an air strike. If they knew the hospital was there and called in an attack likely to damage it to this degree then someone needs to face charges because that's a GC offence.

Russians aren't going to waste money on precision smart bombs. they will use iron bombs, in the case of Syria, cluster bombs.

Their purpose is to prop-up the Assad regime. This doesn't just mean killing FSA, but to totally demoralize their supporters. Flattening city blocks with cluster bombs achieves this short-term goal since civvies will want FSA fighters to leave their areas.

We will have to wait & see what long term affect this has, since the Arab world is really enraged over this.

like any good host you save the good stuff for important occasions

Bangorstu, that's not strictly true. By the letter of the law everyone has an inherent right to self defence, a good example would be if in this case a JTAC or coalition troops had been in a building next to the hospital and were pinned down or about to be overrun. They would be legally able to use minimum force to remove the threat, if that minimum force is a 500lb bomb into a building so be it. In that case you don't have to worry about collateral damage. Legally fine, but undoubtedly morally wrong if you know it's going to take out a lot of civvies.
In my last tour of Afghanistan as a JTAC we were forbidden from damaging any structures for any reason except the previous. I know if I had been about to be overrun I would have been dropping compounds like it's going out of fashion, morally wrong? so what, I'm going home to my wife and kids.

Of course we don't know the circumstances behind this yet, the fewer coalition troops on the ground the more this will happen.

Bombing the MSF site saddens me. I've met some really talented and selfless people who donated their abilities to treating those without any means.

Sad that whenever it seems like the US is finally doing something good like driving out ISIS, a tragedy like this happens.

This will mean that the Western Coalition will probably become gunshy and will return to triple-verification of all bombing runs (=delayed & ineffective strike delivery.)

From pictures onBBC news a couple days ago, yes Russians are using dumb bombs, the smaller ones had a blunt nose (hi-drag).
The SU-24s needed their nose cone painting.

tberry7403 said :

In war, truth is the first casualty. -- Aeschylus

Would the French admit they allowed insurgents to stockpile arms and ammo (and possibly set up a command post) in the hospital?
(Allowed as in they were made an "offer they couldn't refuse").

Would the US admit they blew-up a non-target?
________________________________________________________________

MSF has nothing to do with the French government. Google it.

MSF has a strict policy on NO WEAPONS inside their facilities. Google it.

If a MSF facility is overrun they normally withdraw immediately, as happened on their two missions in Syria.

My sister was there in that bombed facility until a few days ago but luckily got out in time. She is the bravest person I have ever met.

RIP to the MSF workers.

Foxweasel… in a fluid situatiom where the Talibs were on the back foot I doubt that hitting the area with.a.bomb was the only solution available. At least, as Jacques says, time for an evacuation should have been allowed.

If you can't contain a dozen or so blokes without an air strike in a sitiation where SpecFor are available….

Seems sloppy to my amateur eyes.

"Policies" aren't exactly proof against evil people with weapons.

Guess who wins that argument?

Hard to withdraw/leave, when/if you're being held at the point of a gun, as a human shield.

I heard this morning that the leaders were aware of the errant targeting, and continued to bombing for another 30 minutes afterwards, anyways, so there must have been some significant reason for them to do that, I suspect.

Bangorstu, totally agree with you, I was just pointing out that in certain circumstances killing innocents can be legally justified. We just don't know the total picture right now.
In this case there was probably no one on the ground to read the coordinates back to and the pilot just put a 6 instead of a 9 when he punched in the grid for the bomb to go to. As has been said, there's a lot of things that have to be right before you get a bomb on target.

The latest reports on the Kunduz tragedy say that it may have been an AC-130 Spectre gunship supporting US special forces in the area that's responsible.

Mako…well given it wasn't a hostage situation I've no idea why ypu brought that up.

If Talibs were firing on US SpecFor, as seems possible, there was nothing preventing the SpecFor from withdrawing, using snipers or any number of things rather than bombing a hospital….

As I said, given the US knew the hospital was there, someone has blundered badly and frankly IMHO it should be career ending at least.

It should also be noted that just because HQ was notified that MSF was using the building, that is no guarantee that information was disseminated in a fast, accurate or broad basis.

My service experience is 45 years out of date but in my experience, you are 100% guaranteed that in any and all circumstances, somebody who vitally needs information will not get it.

Jacques,

MSF is not just "French". In English, they are called Doctors Without Borders and include people from all over the world. It was originally started in France but is now represented by almost every nation in the world.

The ones I met were mostly British, Danish, Japanese a Ukrainian and some Americans.

McKinstry – in which case the desk jockey who thought those at the sharp end didn't need to know where hospitals were is the one who should lose his pension….

Not only is this wrong as an absolute, it does nothing for the reputation of the US armed forces, especially if they're going to complain about Russia behaviour.

The reasons why Putin joined in are discussed in this video from a year ago. Start play at the 40 minute mark.

YouTube link

The video is scrambled briefly at the 45 minute mark.

Stu – the inability of everyone to get on the same page at the same time in high stress fluid situations is a human constant. Once you have decided to use 500lb bombs in a close urban setting, how things go pear shaped is subject to variation but the fact that they will is absolute. I honestly doubt there will be a single culpable individual nor is this an institutional failure unique to the USAF or SOCCOM. Once the decision to support the ANF with close in support in an urban setting was made, the odds that someone other than combatants were going to get it in the neck increased greatly. Had those bombs not hit near a first world NGO, this wouldn't have made a ripple in the news cycle as blowing up people without good media access and image is perfectly acceptable as most Yemenis or Syrians can attest. To quote Vonnegut's take on the Golden Rule, you can do what you want with nobody's as long as they aren't connected.

Sorry but dumb bombs are just dumb and not very effective. It can take anywhere from 10 to a 100 dumb bombs to do the job of one smart guided bomb,, depending on a number of factors from pilot skill to targeting controls.

Why would Russia use dumb bombs unless they think this is all just a face saving gesture and publicity stunt? Or is it the fact that Russian smart bombs are not very good?

The other fact is you can send 10 smart bombs or a 1,000 dumb bombs to an air base, which is actually easier on logistics? It just doesnt mack a lot of sense to supply a remote base with dumb bombs. Plus what kind of impression does it make on the Western militaries if all your bombs miss their targets.

Another factor might be that the Russian pilots have either very little training or actually are terrible pilots.

Did Putin send the C team to Syria and keep the A team in Ukraine?

Depends upon how much you really wish to spend to "aid" your "allies", I suspect, and whether or not you have those smart bombs in theater, or they are being reserved for other things, e.g. Eastern Ukraine, the Baltics, etc., etc..

Supposedly, they've seen the new thermobaric rocket launcher in Eastern Ukraine, TOS-1, that the loyalists never had. Apparently, the Ukrainians captured one a while back, and it is believed the weapon has been used in the Debaltseve or Donetsk regions. It sounds as if it expels a fuel-air mixture, which can supposedly level a two-city block wide area, when the rockets detonate.

link

Apparently, it is almost a direct fire weapon, with only a 3,500m range, which is a bit surprising, given the size of the rockets. Most of them must be allocated to the onboard warhead payload.

Here, you can see the devastating effects it can wreak on an opponent:

link

Oh, wait. I thought war was supposed to be brutal.

The news media is criticizing them for not using more humane weapons against a sadistic death cult that is never going to play by any rules? What a joke journalists have become.

Dan

Except the Russians haven't been targeting any sadistic death cult, but rather anti-Assad FSA members as well as civilians, and quite indiscriminantly.

the inability of everyone to get on the same page at the same time in high stress fluid situations is a human constant.

Surely it should be possible to get everyone to know where the only well-established hospital in town is?

I mean we're not talking about a hastily flung together aid station here – it's been there for a while.

cwlinsj wrote :

Jacques,

MSF is not just "French". In English, they are called Doctors Without Borders and include people from all over the world. It was originally started in France but is now represented by almost every nation in the world.

The ones I met were mostly British, Danish, Japanese a Ukrainian and some Americans.
____________________________________________________________

Yes, where did I say they are just French ??

Yes that is what MSF means in English,in Afrikaans MSF means "Dokters Sonder Grense". What was your point ??

Yes, also working for them are Russians, Australians, Norwegians, Swedes, South Africans, Italians, Spanish, Portugese, as you said most countries of the world have people working for MSF.

I follow MSF quite closely and make monthly financial contributions to them. As indicated in my first post I have a sister that is working for them.

MSF always lets the opposing parties know where their field hospitals are, so as to avoid getting hit. The Afghan government definitely knew where the hospital was. The coalition would as a matter of course and according to standard MSF operating procedures also been informed of the hospitals location. Its been there since about 2010/2011.

All indications are that it was a coalition airstrike. Witness evidence does not indicate that the facility had been overrun or occupied by the Taliban.

Somebody made a big mistake and caused the death of many innocent people.

Going back to the original post on this topic, perhaps it would be wise to see what the Russians are showing, and what they are saying that they are using. For example:

Aviation of the Russian Federation in Syria uses a precision-guided missile Kh-29L

The representative of the FSI Russian Colonel Igor Klimov said that the missile Kh-29L-class "air-surface" has a laser seeker. When starting the pilot illuminates aim a laser sight, and the plane can continue to maneuver.

Latakia (Syria), October 4 – RIA Novosti. The Russian combat aircraft group in Syria is using precision-guided missile Kh-29L, told the representative of videoconferencing Colonel Igor Klimov.
"Kh-29L-class" air-surface "has a laser seeker. When a start-up, the purpose of the pilot illuminates a laser sight, and the aircraft can continue to maneuver," – said Klimov.
The missile is capable of striking targets with an accuracy of plus or minus two meters.

"The weight of the missile – 500 kilograms. It is capable of hitting targets and precision has increased effects of a high-explosive and fragmentation" – said Klimov.

These missiles put on bombers Su-24 and Su-34.

link

VKS RF aerial bomb used against the IG, guided by GLONASS

MOSCOW, October 3 – RIA Novosti. The Russian combat aircraft used in Syria against terrorists "Islamic State" (IG), the latest high-precision bombs, be corrected with the help of GLONASS, said on Saturday, RIA Novosti Russian videoconferencing.

Russian President Vladimir Putin earlier appealed to the Federation Council for permission to use the Russian armed forces abroad. Federation Council approved this request. Russian Defense Ministry reported that Russian aircraft videoconferencing started to air operations with pinpoint strikes on terrorists from the "Islamic State" in Syria. Russia intends to only use aircraft, acting at the request of the Syrian President Bashar Assad, leading the fight against the IG.
"When processing infrastructure militants Russian aircraft uses the latest high-precision weapons, in particular corrected air bomb. This bomb carries out adjustments after separation from the wing by satellite GLONASS. She also receives the coordinates of the plane. Thus, the accuracy of its occurrence is plus or minus two meters, regardless of weather conditions and time of year. It allows you to accurately destroy objects militants and eliminating civilian casualties, "- a spokesman said.
KAB-250 aerial bombs dropped from a bomber Su-34 with a height of five kilometers, he added.

Russian Defense Ministry earlier said that the use of multifunctional Su-34 allows you to strike the IG on the whole territory of Syria and with absolute precision. The Ambassador of Syria to Russia Riyad Haddad previously confirmed that strikes are precisely terrorist armed groups and not by the opposition and the civilian population. According to the Ambassador, the Syrian army has the exact coordinates of terrorists.

Cwlinsj: "Except the Russians haven't been targeting any sadistic death cult, but rather anti-Assad FSA members as well as civilians, and quite indiscriminantly."

According to whom? US news media, or one of its partners? I don't trust any of our polarized news media, regardless of the side. They are just tools.

Dan

<Q>…which again is the improper use of an air strike. If they knew the hospital was there and called in an attack likely to damage it to this degree then someone needs to face charges because that's a GC offence.</Q>

Why is it that you never mention the GC offenses committed by the Taliban or ISIS? Hiding behind civilians is an offense against the GC too.

Reports I heard yesterday were that the hospital was "occupied" by the Taliban for at least a while, which is probably why it was targeted, assuming it was, and not a mistake.

Cacique Caribe – there's plenty of people on the ground reporting where the attacks are landing…

Carne – because I still cling to the belief that America can be held to a higher standard than the Taliban….

And there's still no confirmation the Talibs were in the hospital.

MSF says they've no confirmation of that and the USAF say they were targeting a building next door.

If both are telling the truth, the Talibs in this case hadn't committed a war crime and the USA has… albeit probably through incompetence.

Accidents aren't war crimes, Bangor.

The Taliban go out of their way to kill innocent people, and we try to avoid that, so your moral equivalency claims are just ridiculous, over the top, hyperbole.

War is a deadly, and dangerous business, and all too frequently, innocent people get caught in the middle.

During WWII, hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, if not more were caught up in the carnage.

If they deliberately targetted forces too close to the hospital it would be.

And I've made no moral equivalence… would love you to quote the passage where you think I did.

But in this instance the Taliban left the hospital alone and the US, despite both prior notice and warnings during what was a sustained bombardment, didn't.

It would be nice if the Americans even apologised to MSF. Apparently they've yet to bother., according to MSF.

And this isn't WW2. The Americans are supposedly more accurate now.

There is exactly no excuse for this happening aside from simple incompetency. Ditto with hitting the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade and the AJ TV offices in Baghdad….

The RAF had one incident where they hit an air-raid shelter in Baghdad and kill a lot of civilians but that at least had been a military command centre until a few weeks previously.

The hospital has been there for years. So, I asusme, had the Chinese embassy been.

If you can't contain a dozen or so blokes without an air strike in a sitiation where SpecFor are available….

Seems sloppy to my amateur eyes.

Assuming that your SpecFor are actually allowed to shoot things. ROEs in asscrackistan have been obscenely tight since 2009, and have gotten tighter every year. This has a correlation in the % of forces killed and wounded.