On June 22 this year, a Turkish RF-4E aircraft was shot down near the Syrian coast. The actions of the air defense of Syria drew a barrage of criticism from Western countries. Official Damascus, in turn, claims that Turkish pilots invaded Syrian airspace, after which their flight was forcibly terminated. The exact course of events on the morning of June 22 has not yet become known to the general public, which caused a lot of versions to appear. Among others, the provocative nature of the flight is mentioned: Turkey deliberately sent its plane (not the newest one) in order to accuse Syria of aggression and make this incident a casus belli. On the other hand, despite all the rather malicious statements, Ankara is in no hurry to open a front and go to war against Syria. Why?
There is an interesting version, according to which Syria has not yet been attacked due to the correct military-technical policy of the administration of President B. Assad. In fact, the Turkish fighter that violated Syrian airspace was destroyed within minutes of crossing the air border. This indicates a good development of the Syrian air defense. It is with air defense that one of the versions of events is associated. It says that the Turkish "Phantom" reconnaissance modification flew in order to force the Syrian air defense to reveal their positions. Thus, the aircraft had to detect the location of the radar detection stations, determine the coverage areas and find the "blind spots". Apparently, the pilots actually managed to locate the radar locations. However, the events that followed were completely different from what they probably expected in Turkey. The Syrian air defense not only revealed itself, but also successfully carried out an attack on the intruder.
Among the statements that followed the downing of the plane, the words of NATO Secretary General A. F. Rasmussen. Despite Ankara's hysteria at five minutes, he limited himself to a simple warning about the inadmissibility of such actions. It turns out that the leadership of the Alliance understands the threat posed by the air defense of Syria and therefore does not start active hostilities. This assumption is supported by a comparison of last year's war in Libya and events in Syria. It is easy to see that NATO aircraft began bombing Libyan targets just a few months after the first attacks against the Jamahiriya. But in Syria, protests, shelling and clashes have been going on for a year and a half. And during all this time, there has been only talk of a possible intervention, but not an open attack.
ZU-23-2
100 mm KS-19
As you can see, the version of a decent air defense, capable of cooling excessively hot heads, looks quite plausible. Consider the technical equipment of the Syrian air defense forces. According to The Military Balance, Syria is still armed with several models of Soviet anti-aircraft guns, from 23mm ZU-23-2 to 100mm KS-19, the total number of which exceeds six hundred. Also, the Syrian military has about three hundred anti-aircraft self-propelled guns ZSU-23-4 "Shilka", which theoretically could still pose a threat to front-line aviation. As for anti-aircraft missile systems, Syria has both stationary air defense systems for the defense of important objects, and mobile ones to protect troops on the march. The basis of air defense missile systems is the Soviet-made S-125 and S-200 complexes. These complexes cannot be called new and modern, but, according to a number of Western experts, they still pose a threat to some aircraft. As for the military air defense, in this area Syria has a whole range of types: from "Osa-AK" to "Pantsir-S1".
ZSU-23-4 "Shilka"
SAM S-125M "Neva-M"
Anti-aircraft system S-200
It remains only to find out which ammunition of the complex "flew" into the Turkish plane. Reuters, citing the Syrian Foreign Ministry, writes that RF-4E was destroyed by anti-aircraft artillery. Of course, there is very little information, but even from it an interesting conclusion can be drawn. The firing range of any barreled anti-aircraft system is relatively short. Accordingly, to enter the affected area, the aircraft had to not only invade Syrian airspace, but come a relatively short distance to the anti-aircraft batteries. In light of this assumption, the words of Turkish representatives about an accidental violation of airspace look doubtful. True, Turkish President A. Gul, making excuses, said about the accidental crossing of the air border, they say, the flight speed was high and the pilots did not have time to turn it away. Sounds convincing enough. But not every anti-aircraft gun can effectively hit near- or supersonic targets. According to the available information, the Pantsir-S1 anti-aircraft missile and cannon system is capable of working on targets flying at speeds of this range. As a matter of fact, this is precisely why the version about the defeat of the Turkish Phantom by the Syrian Shell appeared almost immediately. True, the exact data on the type of anti-aircraft weapon that destroyed the intruder has not yet been announced.
SAM "Osa" 9K33
ZRPK "Pantsir-C1"
In general, it should be noted that over the past few years, Damascus has paid particular attention to the development of its air defense. After the characteristic actions of NATO forces during the "Desert Storm", the administration of presidents Hafez Assad, and then his son Bashar, began to actively renew the fleet of equipment of the air defense forces. As a result, in just a few years, fully cannon-based air defense equipment became rocket-cannon, and modern systems entered the troops. These actions of Damascus look especially interesting against the background of the modernization of the Libyan air defense system. For some reason, the old Libyan leadership did not manage to sufficiently update their defenses against an air attack. The result of such short-sightedness is obvious - intervention, death or captivity of representatives of the legitimate government and a complete change of the country's leadership and political course. Obviously, both Assads, while in the presidency, did the right thing and distributed the military budget taking into account all possible threats. As a result of these actions, Syria has one of the best air defense systems in the Middle East, second only to Israel.
It turns out that only one shot down plane clearly demonstrated the need to refrain from a full-scale military operation with air attacks. The air defense of Syria is a fairly powerful force. So hotheads from Turkey, NATO or other countries should first assess the risks and think three times before giving the order to attack. Obviously, it will not be possible to turn the Iraqi or Libyan scenario without problems, and Syria, in turn, does not intend to surrender without a fight.
