NationStates Jolt Archive

Here's an interesting little article.

How to Take Down an F-117

November 21, 2005: The Serbian battery commander, whose missiles downed an American F-16, and, most impressively, an F-117, in 1999, has retired, as a colonel, and revealed many of the techniques he used to achieve all this. Colonel Dani Zoltan, in 1999, commanded the 3rd battery of the 250th Missile Brigade. He had search and control radars, as well as a TV tracking unit. The battery had four quad launchers for the 21 foot long, 880 pound SA-3 missiles. The SA-3 entered service in 1961 and, while it had undergone some upgrades, was considered a minor threat to NATO aircraft. Zoltan was an example of how an imaginative and energetic leader can make a big difference. While Zoltan’s peers and superiors were pretty demoralized with the electronic countermeasures NATO (especially American) aircraft used to support their bombing missions, he believed he could still turn his ancient missiles into lethal weapons. The list of measures he took, and the results he got, should be warning to any who believe that superior technology alone will provide a decisive edge in combat. People still make a big difference. In addition to shooting down two aircraft, Zoltan’s battery caused dozens of others to abort their bombing missions to escape his unexpectedly accurate missiles. This is how he did it.

--- Zoltan had about 200 troops under his command. He got to know them well, trained hard and made sure everyone could do what was expected of them. This level of quality leadership was essential, for Zoltan's achievements were a group effort.

--- Zoltan used a lot of effective techniques that American air defense experts expected, but did not expect to encounter because of poor leadership by the enemy. For example, Zoltan knew that his major foe was HARM (anti-radar) missiles and electronic detection systems used by the Americans, as well as smart bombs from aircraft who had spotted him. To get around this, he used landlines for all his communications (no cell phones or radio). This was more of a hassle, often requiring him to use messengers on foot or in cars. But it meant the American intel people overhead were never sure where he was.

--- His radars and missile launchers were moved frequently, meaning that some of his people were always busy looking for new sites to set up in, or setting up or taking down the equipment. His battery traveled over 100,000 kilometers during the 78 day NATO bombing campaign, just to avoid getting hit. They did, and his troops knew all that effort was worth the effort.

--- The Serbs had spies outside the Italian airbase most of the bombers operated from. When the bombers took off, the information on what aircraft they, and how many, quickly made it to Zoltan and the other battery commanders.

--- Zoltan studied all the information he could get on American stealth technology, and the F-117. There was a lot of unclassified data, and speculation, out there. He developed some ideas on how to beat stealth, based on the fact that the technology didn’t make the F-117 invisible to radar, just very to get, and keep, a good idea of exactly where the aircraft was. Zoltan figured out how to tweak his radars to get a better lock on stealth type targets. This has not been discussed openly.

--- The Serbs also set up a system of human observers, who would report on sightings of bombers entering Serbia, and track their progress.

--- The spies and observers enabled Zoltan to keep his radars on for a minimal amount of time. This made it difficult for the American SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses) to use their HARM missiles (that homed in on radar transmissions.) Zoltan never lost a radar to a HARM missile.

--- Zoltan used the human spotters and brief use of radar, with short range shots at American bombers. The SA-3 was guided from the ground, so you had to use surprise to get an accurate shot in before the target used jamming and evasive maneuvers to make the missile miss. The F-117 he shot down was only 13 kilometers away.

Zoltan got some help from his enemies. The NATO commanders often sent their bombers in along the same routes, and didn’t make a big effort to find out if hotshots like Zoltan were down there, and do something about it. Never underestimate your enemy.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/articles/20051121.aspx

Hmm, I'll keep that in mind.:cool:

No system is foolproof to say the least. This should be a wake up call to anyone that thinks this. However the biggest mistake that NATO made was to use the same flight paths. This fact alone increased the enemies odds many times in the success of shooting down a NATO bird. I can give the Serbian commander kudos for being aware of NATO flaws.

Impressive.

In the same spirit:
How to sink the US Navy (http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,786992,00.html)
Van Riper had at his disposal a computer-generated flotilla of small boats and planes, many of them civilian, which he kept buzzing around the virtual Persian Gulf in circles as the game was about to get under way. As the US fleet entered the Gulf, Van Riper gave a signal - not in a radio transmission that might have been intercepted, but in a coded message broadcast from the minarets of mosques at the call to prayer. The seemingly harmless pleasure craft and propeller planes suddenly turned deadly, ramming into Blue boats and airfields along the Gulf in scores of al-Qaida-style suicide attacks. Meanwhile, Chinese Silkworm-type cruise missiles fired from some of the small boats sank the US fleet's only aircraft carrier and two marine helicopter carriers. The tactics were reminiscent of the al-Qaida attack on the USS Cole in Yemen two years ago, but the Blue fleet did not seem prepared. Sixteen ships were sunk altogether, along with thousands of marines. If it had really happened, it would have been the worst naval disaster since Pearl Harbor.

I remember that event. Kudos on Zoltan!

Now, that's the kind of leader you want in a war.

The Russians also developed a kind of radar that can follow stealth airplanes. I don't know if it's deployed, though, or if they gave the technology to the US or what.

Here's another idea: use multiple emmiters and recievers on a single network. Most Stealth designs redirect a lot of the radar, so if you have a lot of passive recievers and a few uberstrong emitters, you can set up an interesting net. Just guard the emiters with some crazy AA and then hide the recievers. Recievers can't be caught by radar anyhow, so HARMs are less than useless against them.

is this a viable strategy?

Now, that's the kind of leader you want in a war.

The Russians also developed a kind of radar that can follow stealth airplanes. I don't know if it's deployed, though, or if they gave the technology to the US or what.

I heard that too. I believe that the Ukranians were the source of it though. Seeing how the US backed the current Ukranian admin. Im sure we have knowledge of how it works.

I don't get why the news openly gives out this information to the whole world and more mornically, how it was done... :confused:

The better you know how your enemy works, the better it is to defeat him. Now that we know how Zolton did it, we know how to prevent our evil Imperial bombers from getting hit, and our plan to rule the world will be-!

Opps, said too much

I don't get why the news openly gives out this information to the whole world and more mornically, how it was done... :confused:

Re-read the article. What does it tell you? Col Dani sent Lt Lani to the Italian airport with a cell phone and said give me a ring whenever they take off. When Lt Lani called, Col Dani sent private Mani up on a hill top with a pair of Binos and said, "Yell when you see one". Private Mani saw them coming and yelled, "Col Dani! De Plane, De Plane" Col Dani said, Turn on the radar and fire!

The end result is hitting 1 plane out of how many sorties...20,000 maybe? But the truely amazing thing is that sometime between the time they fired their 4 SA-3's they were able to morph into the 2 SA 6's that actually shot the plane down. Somehow I doubt all the radar tweaking in the world is going to accomplish this.

They most likely got their hands on a bistatic web system that uses radio frequencies and software to plot it's positon.

My dad was part of a radar van crew with an air defense regiment in the late seventies/early eighties.
He reckons if the Soviets had attacked he would've lived about 20 minutes before being vapourised.

Anything to do with being close to a radar installation is not a good job in a serious war these days...

But this Zoltan guy did a good job, as I said, I'm impressed.

I don't get why the news openly gives out this information to the whole world and more mornically, how it was done... :confused:

It doesn't really tell anything crucial. Not at least anything someone without a faint grasp of strategy can cook up. Sun Tzu after all did start it off some what, 2000 years ago? Know your enemy and know yourself. Only then can you beat your foe.

This Zoltan paid attention to what his enemies were doing and how they did it. Then he devised his countermeasures. Anyone who fails to understand that doesn't belong in a command structure.

Here's an interesting little article.



http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/articles/20051121.aspx

It didn't hurt that do to poor procedural security, planning and organization, the Stealth fighters had been flying the exact same flightplans at the exact same times since the beggining of the war and that a Liason officer (I believe french, could be mistaken) decided this and the actual flight plans and time schedules was information that his Serbian friend just Had to have.

other advantages Zoltan and his battery had:
A previously unknown-to-the-west range of sensory capabilities including additional frequency range and a more accurate Infra-Red capability than had been anticipated

His opponent was a first generation low observable (Note the fact that I didn't say stealth, even the Military never said stealth, it was all media, nobody but the Media and the public fooled themselves about the technology) fighter bomber. If Zoltan had tried the same trick (searching he same patch of sky night after night until he established a pattern) with say, a B-2 or even a later version of the F-117 he would never have even cought a glimpse.

His final advantage was that he was using outdated technology (Yes, you heard me, outdated) His radar, while more capable than expected, functioned on an older, shorter wavelength band that is less efficient for tracking now stealthed target but worked a little bit against the F-117A which was designed to counter wavelenghts that had been in use by the Russians. that the fighter would be used this irresponsibly against a positively ancient SAM site never entered into the equation.

It is also telling that throughout the entire campaign the entire American Air losses amounted to
One F-117
and!
One F-16

wow, way to show those americans and definately they proved their superior techniques for shooting down aircraft in all of two shot down aircraft amid thousands of succesful sorties they didn't even touch.

wow, way to show those americans and definately they proved their superior techniques for shooting down aircraft in all of two shot down aircraft amid thousands of succesful sorties they didn't even touch.

Thats the thing you see. The F-117A to date had never had a single loss. Then they went and lost one, extenuating circumstances notwithstanding (its war, you expect screw ups one way or another).

True, the loss is a small thing and relatively easy to replace, but the boost to prestige of the commander and propoganda black eye dealt out the air force is worth about maybe a dozen more F-117As.

Maybe you won't win the war, but you have told the world in very simple terms this: Your foe can be beaten.

Very interesting nonetheless.

Impressive.

In the same spirit:
How to sink the US Navy (http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,786992,00.html)


How will a silkworm sink a carrier ? Even if its hit by twenty of them ?

At any rate the military needs to be defeated by as many methods as possible if it is to keep up with its counter measures and training doctrine .
Great jobs by both groups to instill some humility in a much needed fashion .

Here's an interesting little article.
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/articles/20051121.aspx

Very old news. All of this was published in the book, The Transformation of American Air Power, a long time ago. In much greater detail.

Sometimes, if you wait for something to get out on the Internet, the books will beat you - especially where military information is concerned.

I heard that too. I believe that the Ukranians were the source of it though. Seeing how the US backed the current Ukranian admin. Im sure we have knowledge of how it works.

Both the Ukranians and the Czechs have developed such systems. The US has done some work in the area of bistatic radar but, to my knowledge, hasn't fielded anything yet.

Very old news. All of this was published in the book, The Transformation of American Air Power, a long time ago. In much greater detail.

Sometimes, if you wait for something to get out on the Internet, the books will beat you - especially where military information is concerned.

While I know the generals of it were known almost immediately, but it is my understanding that this is the first time the good Colonel has gone on public record.

And unfortunately, the local bookstores have limited shelf space for English titles, a great deal of which is taken up by crap. (Does the US really need to export 21 Jump Street books. That may well constitute an international crime against humanity far greater than the current supposed ones in Iraq.)

While I know the generals of it were known almost immediately, but it is my understanding that this is the first time the good Colonel has gone on public record.

And unfortunately, the local bookstores have limited shelf space for English titles, a great deal of which is taken up by crap. (Does the US really need to export 21 Jump Street books. That may well constitute an international crime against humanity far greater than the current supposed ones in Iraq.)

that's why there's amazon
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0801438160/104-9754433-6253553?v=glance&n=283155&n=507846&s=books&v=glance

Interesting, but all missing the big lingering question: was the Chinese embassy later deliberately bombed by the US as a way of telling them to back off after they tried to purchase parts of the downed plane for study, or was it just a piece of military incompetence?

Interesting, but all missing the big lingering question: was the Chinese embassy later deliberately bombed by the US as a way of telling them to back off after they tried to purchase parts of the downed plane for study, or was it just a piece of military incompetence?

China voiced its opposition to Operation Allied Force. Its embassy was bombed.

France refused to support Operation Eldorado Canyon (the US air strikes against Libya in the '80s). The French embassy in Tripoli was bombed.

Coincidence? ;)

Interesting, but all missing the big lingering question: was the Chinese embassy later deliberately bombed by the US as a way of telling them to back off after they tried to purchase parts of the downed plane for study, or was it just a piece of military incompetence?

It's the US military. Of course it was incompetence.

that's why there's amazon
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0801438160/104-9754433-6253553?v=glance&n=283155&n=507846&s=books&v=glance

I got a million good excuses. ;)
Just out of curiosity, did Lambert actually get information from Col. Zoltan? Or is the book just the generals of it. Like I said before, it's my understanding he has just gone public within the last few weeks.

China voiced its opposition to Operation Allied Force. Its embassy was bombed.

France refused to support Operation Eldorado Canyon (the US air strikes against Libya in the '80s). The French embassy in Tripoli was bombed.

Coincidence? ;)

Yep. That accidental events seemed to have been planned is the very definition of the word coincidence (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=coincidence).

It's the US military. Of course it was incompetence.

As the simiplest formulation of Halon's razor says: cock up before conspiracy.

I got a million good excuses. ;)
Just out of curiosity, did Lambert actually get information from Col. Zoltan? Or is the book just the generals of it. Like I said before, it's my understanding he has just gone public within the last few weeks.

Lambert had access to declassified information - information that was declassified at his request. He has a lot of friends in the Air Force.

The book is about more than the stealth - but there's a whole chapter on Kosovo and the air operations there, and the impact of stealth, among other things.

Lambert had access to declassified information - information that was declassified at his request. He has a lot of friends in the Air Force.

The book is about more than the stealth - but there's a whole chapter on Kosovo and the air operations there, and the impact of stealth, among other things.

Yes, I know all that was available quite some time ago. But did he have Col. Zoltan's input? If not then this is not old news.

(IIRC you are a reincarnation of a player who I have noted is quick to call things "old news" when such is not neccesarily the case.)

Yes, I know all that was available quite some time ago. But did he have Col. Zoltan's input? If not then this is not old news.

(IIRC you are a reincarnation of a player who I have noted is quick to call things "old news" when such is not neccesarily the case.)

Probably not Zoltan's input - but all of the methods you listed are in Lambert's book.

The Serbs were seen using the techniques (including the spies outside the base, use of bistatic radar, moving radars around), and the US had already anticipated what techniques could be used against the F-117's version of stealth.

It is further noted in the book that the B-2 version of stealth relies on a different concept.

As the simiplest formulation of Halon's razor says: cock up before conspiracy.
Uh-Huh.

You most surely got that right.

Yep. That accidental events seemed to have been planned is the very definition of the word coincidence (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=coincidence).

Oh, I'd bet it was just a coincidence. Though if it weren't, I'd have no problem with it.

China voiced its opposition to Operation Allied Force. Its embassy was bombed.

France refused to support Operation Eldorado Canyon (the US air strikes against Libya in the '80s). The French embassy in Tripoli was bombed.

Coincidence? ;)

Maybe it went something like this. :p

"Now, I'm not saying you should go and bomb those embassies. They're our friends. But if you happen to be in the area, well, you know, you might be low on fuel and might need to lighten the load to get home. Of course, you'll be carrying some MK82s. Standard flight patterns you know. *nudge* *nudge*"

Maybe it went something like this. :p

"Now, I'm not saying you should go and bomb those embassies. They're our friends. But if you happen to be in the area, well, you know, you might be low on fuel and might need to lighten the load to get home. Of course, you'll be carrying some MK82s. Standard flight patterns you know. *nudge* *nudge*"

Well, in both cases, the bombs were precision strike weapons.

In the case of the French Embassy, it was a laser guided bomb.

The Chinese embassy was hit by a JDAM.

Well, in both cases, the bombs were precision strike weapons.

In the case of the French Embassy, it was a laser guided bomb.

The Chinese embassy was hit by a JDAM.

It was two of them that hit the embassy of China. I always maintain they did that on purpose. Most likely to send the Chinese a message.

Well, in both cases, the bombs were precision strike weapons.

In the case of the French Embassy, it was a laser guided bomb.

The Chinese embassy was hit by a JDAM.

Well then, it would seem to me that the strikes were deliberate then no? Unless these precision weapons aren't quite so precise.

"Oops. I hit the Chinese Embassy"

"Oops. I hit the French Embassy"

"Oops. I hit a British Tank"

Really, it makes you wonder if the airforce makes it mandatory to OD their pilots on performance boosting drugs until they can't tell up from down.

Unless of course the strikes in all cases were deliberate.

It was two of them that hit the embassy of China. I always maintain they did that on purpose. Most likely to send the Chinese a message.
We'll never know.

The JDAM is a GPS guided weapon - put in the wrong coordinates, and it goes to those coordinates, regardless of what the pilot wants.

Lots of possibilities have been raised - wrong coordinates from CIA, wrong coordinates from Defense Mapping Agency, wrong coordinates input by fat finger, old maps, intentional, etc.

We'll never know.

The JDAM is a GPS guided weapon - put in the wrong coordinates, and it goes to those coordinates, regardless of what the pilot wants.

Lots of possibilities have been raised - wrong coordinates from CIA, wrong coordinates from Defense Mapping Agency, wrong coordinates input by fat finger, old maps, intentional, etc.

Exactly.

It's long been my understanding that it was innaccurate, out of date maps. Generally speaking, from both anecdotal and personal experience, US government maps can be great. But they can also be horrible.

Here's another idea: use multiple emmiters and recievers on a single network. Most Stealth designs redirect a lot of the radar, so if you have a lot of passive recievers and a few uberstrong emitters, you can set up an interesting net. Just guard the emiters with some crazy AA and then hide the recievers. Recievers can't be caught by radar anyhow, so HARMs are less than useless against them.

is this a viable strategy?

Yup, seen it last week in class. A radar emits a wave and detects the direct reflection on the plane. Stealth planes are designed to minimise the amplitude of the reflected wave in the direction of the radar. This can be bypassed by using one emitter and one receiver, where the receiver detects the waves reflected in other directions. In practice you'll be using a network of emitters and receivers that act together as a radar system. Our professor noted that the chinese seem to be using this type of radar a lot ...

-snip-


Probably cheaper for the recievers, and the recivers probably have insane survivability survivability too. The transmitters will have crappy survivability, but they'll be fewer in number, insanely overprotected, and extremely powerful.



Plus, if it looks like it can block US bomber forces, why not implement it?

I don't get why the news openly gives out this information to the whole world and more mornically, how it was done... :confused:All the news are belong to US?

Is that what you think?

Dani Zoltan is a National War Hero...The Servian Newspapers did release the news...and others International Media did find it interesting..

Why wouldnt they?

We'll never know.

The JDAM is a GPS guided weapon - put in the wrong coordinates, and it goes to those coordinates, regardless of what the pilot wants.

Lots of possibilities have been raised - wrong coordinates from CIA, wrong coordinates from Defense Mapping Agency, wrong coordinates input by fat finger, old maps, intentional, etc.reminds me of the downed Iranian airliner...

Interesting, but all missing the big lingering question: was the Chinese embassy later deliberately bombed by the US as a way of telling them to back off after they tried to purchase parts of the downed plane for study, or was it just a piece of military incompetence?

Nah, it was bombed because they stonewalled the UN on the issue. :D

It's the US military. Of course it was incompetence.

The US military is not incompetant at it's job (blowing stuff up), it just has problems differentiating between friend and foe.

Or maybe all these "accidents" aren't so accidental...

:cool:

How will a silkworm sink a carrier ? Even if its hit by twenty of them ?
I guess it will. Turned out van Riper was playing as Israel rather than Iraq, so I'm not sure whether he'd have used Silkworms or something else.
But they spent a lot of money on the simulation, and I have to assume that he managed to hit the thing somewhere where it did enough damage to sink it.

Old news. Inside of 20km, stealth is of minimal use at best. F117's have been caught at up to 40km, and all thier systems worked fine.

Old news. Inside of 20km, stealth is of minimal use at best. F117's have been caught at up to 40km, and all thier systems worked fine.

As has been covered a few times now, the interesting part is Colonel Zoltan's speaking about it.

The better you know how your enemy works, the better it is to defeat him. Now that we know how Zolton did it, we know how to prevent our evil Imperial bombers from getting hit, and our plan to rule the world will be-!

Opps, said too much

Hope the black suit guys don't drop by your house for dinner anytime soon :eek:

IMO the WORST mistake any military or warrior can make is thinking you invincible. Also I have a thought, the best weapon to defeat Hi tech is low tech? Worked in Nam to a large degree, in WW2 in Europe the hedgesrow were nearly invincible to the tanks. In fact the tanks got caught in them. What do y'all think? Think it could work?

Go Zoltan.

Now, if we only had people like that in the Pentagon...

IMO the WORST mistake any military or warrior can make is thinking you invincible. Also I have a thought, the best weapon to defeat Hi tech is low tech? Worked in Nam to a large degree, in WW2 in Europe the hedgesrow were nearly invincible to the tanks. In fact the tanks got caught in them. What do y'all think? Think it could work?

Didn't the Germans have some kind of nerve gas back in WWII that was scentless and colourless? I think it would still be very effective nowadays if you could manufacture it. Wax sealed bottles and slingshots and viola! Low tech delivery of invisible death.

Besides, dealing death even with an old fashioned rock in the skull always works. Its just that the circumstances that made them possible are trickier now.

Thats the thing you see. The F-117A to date had never had a single loss. Then they went and lost one, extenuating circumstances notwithstanding (its war, you expect screw ups one way or another).

True, the loss is a small thing and relatively easy to replace, but the boost to prestige of the commander and propoganda black eye dealt out the air force is worth about maybe a dozen more F-117As.

Maybe you won't win the war, but you have told the world in very simple terms this: Your foe can be beaten.

but this incident did no such thing, it was a fluke. The circumstances are irreplicable. he Zoltan had so much going for him that he couldn't possibly fail, after that happened America made sure that no matter what, itwouldn't happen again, and it won't. Despite the value of shorter wavelength radars Vs. stealth, no one has reintroduced those bands and the radars that still use them are slowly falling into disrepair, and even if the weren't even the later versions of the F-117 had decreased visibility against the shorter wavelengths.

If it had been some sort of proof that america could be beaten, don't you think they're would have been more losses? We lossed more aircraft to the USSR than we did to serbia and we were never even officially at war with the USSR. I'm not saying America was or is invincible. but this particular incident was not prrof that it isn't. This is just an overblown accident he could have Zoltan could have done exactly the same thing in exactly the same circumstances and if say, the temperature was so much as half a degree warmer ont he night he would have otherwise shot down an F117A, then his chances would have disappeared. with only a slight temperature difference he never would have seen so much as a blip, certainly not enough to launch a missile.

Problem with short wave length radar is it attenuates, refracts, and reflects off of everything. By the very nature of over the horizon and stand off radars, would it be practical to use a radar that only had a 20km maximum range, and would be blocked by something as insignificant as a cloud, or in the case of extremely short wave, something as small as an atmospheric anomaly (inversion)?


The one plane the system would possibly detect, it would allow 1000's of others through. The phased array field is still probably the best detection system, powerful long range emitters and then a wide field of passive forward recivers. Problem is, its only effective in alerting the country that
"something" is comming, its not effective in an accurate guidance system.

Unless like Iraq, and previously, Germany in WWII, the country simply filled the sky with lead and missles. The cure for that, JDAM, and standoff weapons, droped from high altitude and long range away, and let the bomb make the run to the target. The down side, more civilian casualties, but hell if the country is willing to rain lead on its own people, what sacrafice is the military to make to bring the weapon in from a 100 meter error to a 10 meter error. Miss one day, blow it up the next.

Go Zoltan.

Now, if we only had people like that in the Pentagon...

We have some. We also have quite a few in the military in general. It's just that in a peace time (or what might be termed low activity) military they don't tend to get promoted as much.

Didn't the Germans have some kind of nerve gas back in WWII that was scentless and colourless? I think it would still be very effective nowadays if you could manufacture it. Wax sealed bottles and slingshots and viola! Low tech delivery of invisible death.

All pure nerve agents are basically colorless and either largely or completely odorless. However, when they are sometimes manufactured impurely, they may have a brownish or yellowish color.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/intro/cw-nerve.htm


Something like what you suggest was used in the Aum Shinrikyo Sarin attack on the Tokyo subways back in 1995. The people who carried out the attacks carried sealed plastic bags of Sarin (a nerve agent) and popped them open with sharpened umbrella tips as they were getting off the subway. However, it wasn't the most effective means of delivery. It was also quite dangerous , as one of the 5 attackers poisoned himself.
wiki article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin_gas_attack_on_the_Tokyo_subway#The_attack)

In addition, if carried out, it would:
a) most likely be a war crime and condemned (even if carried out by a party not signartory to the various treaties on chemical weapons).
b) likely bring down retaliation in kind or worse.

Finally, while it is relatively easy to get the ingredients and make nerve agents, it's not as easy to make as some other agents that are still quite effective and are less likely to bring down the wrath of the victem.

but this incident did no such thing, it was a fluke.

Fluke or no fluke, a much promoted bomber was still brought down by equipment it was touted as invisible against. A lot of embarrasment no matter how you try to spin it away.


Something like what you suggest was used in the Aum Shinrikyo Sarin attack on the Tokyo subways back in 1995. The people who carried out the attacks carried sealed plastic bags of Sarin (a nerve agent) and popped them open with sharpened umbrella tips as they were getting off the subway. However, it wasn't the most effective means of delivery. It was also quite dangerous , as one of the 5 attackers poisoned himself.
wiki article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin_gas_attack_on_the_Tokyo_subway#The_attack)

Naah, its not the same thing. What happened in the Tokyo subways was like a suicide bombing. The slingshot method is basically a delivery method that puts the user out of the immediate strike area. i.e. convoy ambush and so on. No muzzle flash, no gunshot, nothing to give away the location of the attacker.


In addition, if carried out, it would:
a) most likely be a war crime and condemned (even if carried out by a party not signartory to the various treaties on chemical weapons).
b) likely bring down retaliation in kind or worse.

Finally, while it is relatively easy to get the ingredients and make nerve agents, it's not as easy to make as some other agents that are still quite effective and are less likely to bring down the wrath of the victem.

The question was whether it would be effective, not whether it would be against international conventions. I suppose if you wanted to be more practical about it, I think flammable liquids suspended in a bottle would do. Either that or a glass divider in the bottle with two chemically volatile liquids in each side. If memory serves, the same stuff the ME-163 used as fuel would suffice.

Naah, its not the same thing. What happened in the Tokyo subways was like a suicide bombing.

Nope. Not at all a suicide attack. The AUM attackers had a whole set up of get away drivers and safe houses. They also were equiped with DIY atropine kits (that's what saved Kennichi Hirose, the attacker who was poisoned).


The slingshot method is basically a delivery method that puts the user out of the immediate strike area. i.e. convoy ambush and so on. No muzzle flash, no gunshot, nothing to give away the location of the attacker.

Your run of the mill slingshot simply isn't going to be able to do that. You would either not hit the target with a sufficient amount or you would have to be so close that you'd be in danger. Not to mention that it's going to be slow
to disperse - that's why military chemical shells have an explosive charge.

The question was whether it would be effective, not whether it would be against international conventions. I suppose if you wanted to be more practical about it, I think flammable liquids suspended in a bottle would do. Either that or a glass divider in the bottle with two chemically volatile liquids in each side. If memory serves, the same stuff the ME-163 used as fuel would suffice.

Molotov cocktails are certainly more practical. That's why they're used and not the nerve agent slingshot.

And if by two chemically volatile liquids you mean a binary nerve agent, remember that binary agents are mixed in flight via the shells rotation. They would mix at the impact site just a bit, but it would end up more of an inconvenience than a weapon.

And that's basically what would be the result of this, especially for a technologically superior foe.

Nope. Not at all a suicide attack. The AUM attackers had a whole set up of get away drivers and safe houses. They also were equiped with DIY atropine kits (that's what saved Kennichi Hirose, the attacker who was poisoned).

Odd that the delivery method puts the person in the target zone at the time of the attack though.


Your run of the mill slingshot simply isn't going to be able to do that. You would either not hit the target with a sufficient amount or you would have to be so close that you'd be in danger.

I wasn't talking about run of the mill slingshots. I was thinking maybe the inner tubes you get from tires. You'll probably need to affix the stand to something though.


Molotov cocktails are certainly more practical. That's why they're used and not the nerve agent slingshot.

As far as I can tell, Molotov Cocktails have been generally chucked by hand, not slingshot.


And if by two chemically volatile liquids you mean a binary nerve agent, remember that binary agents are mixed in flight via the shells rotation. They would mix at the impact site just a bit, but it would end up more of an inconvenience than a weapon.

No, not binary nerve agents. I mean volatile liquids as in if you mix the two with kinetic force, they go boom. The ME163 Komet was a rocket propelled fighter that used the same principle as a means of thrust. Supposedly, they were so volatile that during landing, the liquids would sometimes slosh together and make the plane go boom.

Thats the kind of liquid I'm talking about.

I guess it will. Turned out van Riper was playing as Israel rather than Iraq, so I'm not sure whether he'd have used Silkworms or something else.
But they spent a lot of money on the simulation, and I have to assume that he managed to hit the thing somewhere where it did enough damage to sink it.

All the simulations I have ever read or watched , showed the carrier being damaged severely or otherwise put out of action ..but not by silkworm / exocet type missiles . They have way too small of a warhead and on a target like a carrier its like being hit with a spitball ....a flaming explosive spitball IF it can actually hit at a very bad time in a very bad place and no one what so ever is doing anything but watching while it happens ..or pouring av gas on it . Carriers are way more vulnerable to a simple torpedo if a sub can get close enough ..one can cripple or sink it .

Carriers are way more vulnerable to a simple torpedo if a sub can get close enough ..one can cripple or sink it .

Wasn't there a case in one of those wargames where a diesal sub eluded detection by a carrier task force and actually sank the carrier as well as a bunch of its escorts before getting away undetected?

Wasn't there a case in one of those wargames where a diesal sub eluded detection by a carrier task force and actually sank the carrier as well as a bunch of its escorts before getting away undetected?
I don't know, but it sounds very similar to the plot from the superlative comedy 'Down Periscope'.

Problem with short wave length radar is it attenuates, refracts, and reflects off of everything. By the very nature of over the horizon and stand off radars, would it be practical to use a radar that only had a 20km maximum range, and would be blocked by something as insignificant as a cloud, or in the case of extremely short wave, something as small as an atmospheric anomaly (inversion)?


The one plane the system would possibly detect, it would allow 1000's of others through. The phased array field is still probably the best detection system, powerful long range emitters and then a wide field of passive forward recivers. Problem is, its only effective in alerting the country that
"something" is comming, its not effective in an accurate guidance system.



The czech/ukrainian version is a passive radar-system that uses just everything in the air. You don't need to send by yourself, in nearly every country are so many permanent radio-waves on the air, that a "stealth"-aircraft stands out by NOT reflecting the waves. As civilian aircrafts tend to reflect waves you can be sure that there is a little bad bird on its way.

Am I the only guy thinking that serb should be lauded not because he shot planes down, but because he actually survived unscatched the war, against all odds?

Am I the only guy thinking that serb should be lauded not because he shot planes down, but because he actually survived unscatched the war, against all odds?

No. The number of Serb deaths in relation to the amount of infrastructure wiped out is really low.

All he had to do is stay away from the radar van, and stay out of known bunkers.

Camping outdoors in a simple tent would have been excellent protection from the NATO targeting strategies.

From what i remember there are sensors that can determine an aircraft's position based on the sonic waves it outputs. Just use one of those.

The Russians pioneered the development of sound networks across their country that would detect the sound of jet engines. This was developed in the 1960s as a counter to the idea that US B-52 aircraft would fly below 500 feet in order to avoid detection by radar. However, this only gives a vague solution to the location of the aircraft, and little information on its actual vector.

This is, however, enough to send interceptors to the area to look for the bomber. The latest Russian fighters have very large forward looking infrared sensors meant specifically to see stealth aircraft, but these sensors have an effective range of only a few kilometers. The missiles are also IR homing, and so do not rely on radar. The typical Russian interceptor pilot also has a helmet sight with the IR missiles slaved to track where he looks.

All in all, essentially hearing where a bomber might be, sending interceptors to visually acquire a target, and firing on visual.

It's not perfect, but it's a workable solution.

(Replies in bold.)
Odd that the delivery method puts the person in the target zone at the time of the attack though.

Not really. That's what a primative delivery system like you suggest entails.

I wasn't talking about run of the mill slingshots. I was thinking maybe the inner tubes you get from tires. You'll probably need to affix the stand to something though.

That's still going to be run of the mill. You'll need something with a lot more power than tension to do what you want.

As far as I can tell, Molotov Cocktails have been generally chucked by hand, not slingshot.

Bingo. You might wonder why they don't use a slingshot... (Hint: vessels that break on impact are likely to break in the slingshot.)

No, not binary nerve agents. I mean volatile liquids as in if you mix the two with kinetic force, they go boom. The ME163 Komet was a rocket propelled fighter that used the same principle as a means of thrust. Supposedly, they were so volatile that during landing, the liquids would sometimes slosh together and make the plane go boom.

Thats the kind of liquid I'm talking about.

OK. Molotov cocktails. Have you perchance figured out some of the many reasons why a nerve agent slingshot would be impractable?

Am I the only guy thinking that serb should be lauded not because he shot planes down, but because he actually survived unscatched the war, against all odds?


We need to convince him to join our military .

I don't know, but it sounds very similar to the plot from the superlative comedy 'Down Periscope'.

Maybe, but I do know that with an experienced crew, a diesal sub runs quieter than a nuclear one. No reactor noises for one since it runs on batteries when underwater. So theoretically, it is possible for a good crew in a diesal hunter killer to actually slip past nuclear subs without being spotted.

Maybe, but I do know that with an experienced crew, a diesal sub runs quieter than a nuclear one. No reactor noises for one since it runs on batteries when underwater. So theoretically, it is possible for a good crew in a diesal hunter killer to actually slip past nuclear subs without being spotted.
It better...the German Navy has only Diesel Subs, and they were meant to clean up the Baltic against the Soviets.
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/type_212/

Replies in bold.


Not really. That's what a primative delivery system like you suggest entails.

What I suggested puts you a little further away than starting it in the impact zone no?

That's still going to be run of the mill. You'll need something with a lot more power than tension to do what you want.

You can't get enough tension out of an inner tube to launch something a hundred feet or so?

Bingo. You might wonder why they don't use a slingshot... (Hint: vessels that break on impact are likely to break in the slingshot.)

Properly constructed, the object to be launched won't impact on any of the struts of the slingshot. And if the setup is so that you don't use the bottle to pull back the sling, there won't be any stress on it. So why would it break?

OK. Molotov cocktails. Have you perchance figured out some of the many reasons why a nerve agent slingshot would be impractable?

Damnit, they're not molotov cocktails. They don't burn. They go boom. And a big one at that. Molotov cocktails just spread a wave of fire.

And the only reason why active nerve agents in slingshots would be impractical as you say would be the response of the opposing force. But if you're low tech enough to use slingshots, that more or less indicates a guerilla force. Which means unconventional tactics are required.

Camping outdoors in a simple tent would have been excellent protection from the NATO targeting strategies.

Well maybe in most circumstances. But I specifically remember hearing of a B-52 carpet bombing a group of Serbs gathering for an offensive. I heard over 2000 casualties from that one drop. Sorry couldnt find a good link to describe it.

The czech/ukrainian version is a passive radar-system that uses just everything in the air. You don't need to send by yourself, in nearly every country are so many permanent radio-waves on the air, that a "stealth"-aircraft stands out by NOT reflecting the waves. As civilian aircrafts tend to reflect waves you can be sure that there is a little bad bird on its way.


It doesn't fly as a black hole, the materials and the construction of the aircraft take the thing the size of a fighter and give it a directed radar return of little more than the average size goose. The plane isn't radar invisiable, as many others have said, its simply very small in observance when compared to what most radars are looking for.

Well maybe in most circumstances. But I specifically remember hearing of a B-52 carpet bombing a group of Serbs gathering for an offensive. I heard over 2000 casualties from that one drop. Sorry couldnt find a good link to describe it.


I don't believe any B52's were used during Kosovo and the end to the Serbian war. Almost all the aircraft flown in that theater were fighter and fighter/bomber size.

The place where the B52's did use standard carpet bombing practice was in Afganistan. Seems the powers that be within that country believed in WWII tactics and trench warfare, making it very easy to come in and rain iron on entire armies.

It doesn't fly as a black hole, the materials and the construction of the aircraft take the thing the size of a fighter and give it a directed radar return of little more than the average size goose. The plane isn't radar invisiable, as many others have said, its simply very small in observance when compared to what most radars are looking for.

And thus it develops a black hole in the net. If most of the power is absorbed or diverted away from earth, you notice that.

Point is: Every weapon or technique might be countered in time. And a passive-all-wavelengths-radar is the counter for current stealth-techniques. You don't look for the goose-sized reflection, you look for the wave-blocker.