SA-24 'Grinch' in Libya

New and old developments in aviation technology.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post23 Mar 2011, 23:59

How dangerous is this weapon to NATO aircraft in the area, how are they most likely to be used, and which fighters are most vulnerable?



"Who Sold Libya Its Super-Missiles?" Wired
By Adam Rawnsley March 23, 2011 | 5:02 pm | Categories: Weapons and Ammo


The U.S. government calls it the “one of the most lethal” weapons of its kind — an advanced, portable missile, designed to knock planes out of the sky. A variant of it just showed up in Gadhafi’s army and nobody seems to know how exactly it got there. But diplomatic cables, unearthed by WikiLeaks, suggest one potential culprit: the Chavez regime in Venezuela.

Aviation Week’s eagle-eyed reporter David Fulghum spotted a Russian SA-24 Grinch surface-to-air missile mounted on a Libyan army truck in recent cable news footage. And that’s a cause for concern: the SA-24 is more accurate, longer-flying, and more lethal than than earlier models of surface-to-air missiles. It also has a dual-band infrared seeker and is more difficult to jam than older systems.

The missiles “reportedly have counter-countermeasures that may be difficult for planes with just flares to counter,” Matthew Schroeder, director of the Federation of American Scientists’ Arms Sales Monitoring Project, tells Danger Room. ”Overall it’s just a much more capable system.”

Aviation Week reports that the majority of coalition combat air patrols are conducted at 20,000 feet or higher, putting them above the roughly 11,000 foot range of the SA-24. But as Fulghum notes, this still leaves plenty of humanitarian, evacuation or other lower-flying operations at risk.

So how did the missile get there and where did it come from? Thanks to a shaky system of international arms sale monitoring, its hard to say.


Russia has shown a willingness to sell Libya other sophisticated air defense systems in the recent past. In 2010, Moscow announced a deal to sell Tripoli a $1.8 billion package of arms that included two batteries of its big, bleeding-edge S-300 air defense missiles, in addition to to Sukhoi fighter jets and T-90 tanks. But the deal was never finalized.

Schroeder says he can’t find any other Russian missile sales in the last seven years. But countries aren’t always keen to be candid about their arms deals.

“Many countries do not report – or report inconsistently – to the UN Arms Register, and even those that do report often withhold key information, such as the model of the weapons that are transferred,” Schroeder says.

Russia has sold to Venezuela a shoulder-fired version of the SA-24, which is a bit different from the truck-mounted model found by Aviation Week. In classified cables released by WikiLeaks, American diplomats expressed alarm at Russia’s deal with Venezuela, writing that the missile, “considered one of the most lethal portable air defense systems ever made,” was at risk of falling into other hands.

Faced with evidence that Russia’s sales of ammunition to Venezuela had ended up in the hands of Colombian terrorists, Russian diplomats tried to reassure their American counterparts that they had their arms sales under control. “Russian law provides specific measures to prevent illegal transfers to third parties,” one cable quoted a Russian diplomat. I’m sure coalition pilots are completely reassured.

Gadhafi is reportedly close to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, who has blasted the coalition attacks on Libya. The two are so close that, at one point last month, many speculated the Libyan dictator had sought exile in Venezuela. Perhaps there was a different arrangement.
Offline

geogen

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2948
  • Joined: 11 Mar 2008, 15:28
  • Location: 45 km offshore, New England

Unread post24 Mar 2011, 04:47

Nice catch, if David Fulghum in truth was the first to identify this system in the field. Very unfortunate, nevertheless.

So if this is true, then unfortunately US, EU and NATO should privately put both Kremlin (or whichever rogue elements within) and Venezuela on notice to no longer transfer any additional such technology either directly or INDIRECTLY, according to the UN authorized embargo. imho.
The Super-Viper has not yet begun to concede.
Offline

leumas

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 19:11
  • Location: New York

Unread post24 Mar 2011, 13:37

Why haven't any coalition aircraft been downed by Qaddafi's SA-24's?
Offline

yakuza

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 205
  • Joined: 08 Nov 2008, 18:17

Unread post24 Mar 2011, 16:11

coz they´re flying at 20k feet or higher,as stated in the aricle,the Grinch just 11k feet
Offline

1st503rdsgt

Banned

  • Posts: 1547
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2011, 01:23

Unread post29 Mar 2011, 23:30

New details:



Libya’s Got Vlad’s Missiles and Kim’s Guns
By Adam Rawnsley March 29, 2011 | 4:43 pm | Categories: Weapons and Ammo


The war in Libya is putting an uncomfortable spotlight on some of the country’s arms suppliers. North Korean rockets and guns have turned up in Libya and a Russian weapons manufacturer just copped to selling Gadhafi advanced anti-aircraft missiles.

The Daily NK flagged a report from South Korea’s SBS television channel showing North Korean weapons in Ras Lanuf after Gadhafi’s forces fled the town. SBS broadcast footage of a North Korean anti-aircraft gun apparently used by the Libyan military and (not particularly well) disguised boxes from North Korea, marked “parts of bulldozer,” containing rockets.

The label painted on the gun reads “64 Machinegun” in Korean. However, the weapon depicted in the SBS video bears a strong resemblance to the ZPU-4, a 14.5 millimeter anti-aircraft gun originally made by the Soviets way back in 1949. China makes a versions of the ZPU-4 it calls the “Type 56? and North Korea produces the gun, as well. Despite its age, it’s a widely-sold anti-aircraft gun that’s been used by a number of countries, including Iraq, Cuba, Sudan, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Lebanon and others. BBC has reported that both rebel and Gadhafi forces are possession of ZPU-4s and double barrel ZPU-2s. Reporter Mike Elkin also happened upon a ZPU-1, a single-barreled cousin of the ZPU-4, stashed in a secret underground Libyan arsenal.

The rockets and anti-aircraft guns aren’t the only example of North Korea’s weapons turning up in Libya’s war. The New Yorker’s John Lee Anderson, reporting from near Brega in eastern Libya earlier this month, came across an ammunition box marked similarly to the one in the SBS report (“D.P.R. of Korea”).

There’s also new information on the origin of another, more sophisticated part of Libya’s air defenses. A few days ago, footage of the Russian-made SA-24/Igla-S in the hands of Libyan military surfaced, raising questions about how exactly they got to the country. As it turns out, Libya didn’t buy the weapon from a customer like Venezuela, but instead went directly to the source. Aviation Week reports that KBM, the Russian company that manufactures the truck-mounted SA-24 seen in the footage, has fessed up to selling the advanced anti-aircraft missiles to Libya.

The appearance of the SA-24 in Gadhafi’s arsenal caused concern because of its relative sophistication over other surface-to-air missiles made by KBM or used by the Libyan military. The SA-24 is more accurate, longer-flying, and more lethal than previous KBM missiles. It’s also reportedly harder to jam and evade with countermeasures.

KBM told Aviation Week that the truck-mounted SA-24 sold to Gadhafi’s forces can’t be turned into a man-portable, shoulder-launched missile because it lacks the right trigger mechanism. If true, that somewhat decreases the chances that the missile could end up in the hands of terrorists in the event the Libyan military collapses. KBM also claims that Libya’s truck-mounted version can’t fire its two missiles simultaneously.
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1373
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post30 Mar 2011, 00:53

Why haven't any coalition aircraft been downed by Qaddafi's SA-24's?


I am still skeptical about the F-15E that went down. When an F-16C went down during Operation Allied Force initial reports said it was because of mechanical issues.
Offline

Roscoe

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1308
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2004, 20:14
  • Location: Las Vegas

Unread post30 Mar 2011, 04:13

SA-24's are MANPADS. They are a threat but not a huge one to fast moving, high flying fighters. With precision weapons, we don't need to fly that low to be worried about MANPADS.
Roscoe

"It's time to get medieval, I'm goin' in for guns" - Dos Gringos
Offline

leumas

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 9
  • Joined: 13 Feb 2010, 19:11
  • Location: New York

Unread post30 Mar 2011, 04:33

yakuza wrote:coz they´re flying at 20k feet or higher,as stated in the aricle,the Grinch just 11k feet

Not anymore:

Defensetech.org wrote:Spectres and Warthogs Join Libyan Fight
The Pentagon briefed today that two new airplanes joined the Odyssey Dawn mix last weekend: the A-10 and the AC-130.
At this morning’s NFZ ops brief, Vice Admiral “Shortney” Gortney allowed that Spectres and Warthogs had been “employed” but only in support of the UN-backed resolutions to protect Libyan civilians.
“We’re not in direct support of the opposition, that’s not part of our mandate, and we’re not coordinating with the opposition,” he said.

http://defensetech.org/2011/03/28/spect ... yan-fight/

I'm hoping Libya's SA-24's aren't as much of a threat as they're made out to be.
Offline

Roscoe

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1308
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2004, 20:14
  • Location: Las Vegas

Unread post01 Apr 2011, 06:28

SA-24 is a bad boy and certainly is a threat. Flares help but there's still a risk. I've tested IR flares against MANPADS as recently as 14 months ago...dropped them from King Airs, Vipers, Eagles, and 'Hogs. Needless to say I can't discuss results, but SA-24 and it's older sibling the SA-18 are truly the big boys on the block.
Roscoe

"It's time to get medieval, I'm goin' in for guns" - Dos Gringos
Offline

ricko

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2011, 16:08

Unread post05 Apr 2011, 22:40

leumas wrote:Why haven't any coalition aircraft been downed by Qaddafi's SA-24's?


following this : http://www.armyrecognition.com/russia_r ... ns_uk.html
SA-24 can engage target up to 6 km. That's why coalition aircraft fly up to 6.2 km altitude...
Offline

snypa777

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1550
  • Joined: 26 Jul 2005, 02:00

Unread post13 Apr 2011, 14:30

Unless they have dozens of units and the Army are trained to use them, no biggie. As said earlier, we are plinking tanks well out of reach of trashfire and MANPADS. i would be more worried when we start flying low and use A-10`s etc, then the SA-24 would be the least of our worries.
"I may not agree with what you say....but I will defend to the death your right to say it".

Return to Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests