Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Afghan Update
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Around the Globe
Av Week Extra
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Body Armor Blues
Bomb Squad
Brownshoes in Action
Bubbleheads, etc.
Cammo Green
Catch the "Buzz"
Chem-Bio
Civilian Apps
Cloak and Dagger
Commandos
Comms
Contingency Ops
Cops and Robbers
Cyber-warfare
Data Diving
Defense Tech Poll
Dissent Tech
Drones
DT Administrivia
Eat DT's Dust
Extra! Extra!
Eye on China
Fast Movers
FCS Watch
Fire for Effect
FOS Files
Friday Funnies
Gadgets and Gear
Going Green
Grand 'Ol Osprey
Grand Ole Osprey
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
In the Weeds with Eric
Info War
Iraq Diary
Jarhead Jazz
JSF Watch
Just War Theories
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
M4 Monopoly
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Most Wanted
MRAP Edge
Net-Centric
Nukes
Old Skool
Our Shrinking Planet
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Politricks
Polmar's Perspective
Popular Mechanics
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Robots
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Snipertech
Space
Special Ops
Star Wars
Strategery
Stray Trons
Tactical Development
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
The Defense Biz
The Peoples' Site
The Sunday Paper
The Tanker Tango
The View from Av Week
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
Trimble on the Case
Video Lounge
War Update
Ward'z Wonderz
You can run...

See all Archives
Newsletters

Edited by Christian Lowe | Contact

A Closer Look at Israel's Syria Raid

IAF-UAV.jpg

As we mentioned several weeks ago, Defense Tech will begin featuring content from our friends at Aviation Week. Here's a story from one of the best reporters in the business on electronic attack, David Fulghum, and his colleague Doug Barrie, on how the Israelis spoofed Syrian air defenses to slip in undetected.

...U.S. officials say that close examination of the few details of the mission offers a glimpse of what’s new in the world of sophisticated electronic sleight-of-hand. That said, they fault the Pentagon for not moving more quickly to make cyberwarfare operational and for not integrating the capability into the U.S. military forces faster.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said last week that the Israelis struck a building site at Tall al-Abyad just south of the Turkish border on Sept. 6. Press reports from the region say witnesses saw the Israeli aircraft approach from the Mediterranean Sea while others said they found unmarked drop tanks in Turkey near the border with Syria. Israeli defense officials finally admitted Oct. 2 that the Israeli Air Force made the raid.

U.S. aerospace industry and retired military officials indicated the Israelis utilized a technology like the U.S.-developed “Suter” airborne network attack system developed by BAE Systems and integrated into U.S. unmanned aerial vehicle operations by L-3 Communications. Israel has long been adept at using unmanned systems to provoke and spoof Syrian surface-to-air missile (SAM) systems, as far back as the Bekka Valley engagements in 1982.

Air Force officials will often talk about jamming, but the term now involves increasingly sophisticated techniques such as network attack and information warfare. How many of their new electronic attack options were mixed and matched to pull off this raid is not known.

The U.S. version of the system has been at the very least tested operationally in Iraq and Afghanistan in the last year, most likely against insurgent communication networks. The technology allows users to invade communications networks, see what enemy sensors see and even take over as systems administrator so sensors can be manipulated into positions where approaching aircraft can’t be seen, they say. The process involves locating enemy emitters with great precision and then directing data streams into them that can include false targets and misleading messages that allow a number of activities including control...

...More interesting is the newspaper’s claim that “Russian experts are studying why the two state-of-the-art Russian-built radar systems in Syria did not detect the Israeli jets entering Syrian territory,” it said. “Iran reportedly has asked the same question, since it is buying the same systems and might have paid for the Syrian acquisitions.”

Syria’s most recent confirmed procurement was of the Tor-M1 (SA-15 Gauntlet) short-range mobile SAM system. It uses vehicle-mounted target-acquisition and target-tracking radars. It is not known whether any of the Tor systems were deployed in the point-defense role at the target site struck by Israeli aircraft. If, however, the target was as “high-value” as the Israeli raid would suggest, then Tor systems could well have been deployed.

Iran bought 29 of the Tor launchers from Russia for $750 million to guard its nuclear sites, and they were delivered in January, according to Agence France-Presse and ITAR-TASS. According to the Syrian press, they were tested in February. Syria has also upgraded some of its aging S-125s (SA-3 Goa) to the Pechora-2A standard. This upgrade swaps out obsolete analog components for digital.

Syrian air defense infrastructure is based on for the most part aging Soviet SAMs and associated radar. Damascus has been trying to acquire more capable “strategic” air defense systems, with the country repeatedly associated with efforts to purchase the Russian S-300 (SA-10 Grumble/SA-20) long-range SAM. It also still operates the obsolescent S-200 (SA-5 Gammon) long-range system and its associated 5N62 Square Pair target engagement radar. There are also unconfirmed reports of Syrian interest in the 36D6 Tin Shield search radar...

-- Christian

Comments


Enough speculation already. When are you going to start looking at what really happen Do you honestly believe any of that nuke stuff? Seems about as believable as the giants...

Posted by: Wembley at October 11, 2007 05:10 AM


With German warships off Lebanon and a British airbase and long-distance radar station on Cyprus, any claim that NATO didn't know about these events is spurious.

If the Germans have any sense (after the USS Liberty attack by the Israelis) then the warships off Lebanon are likely to be Sachsen class air-defense frigates. These are fitted with SMART-L which is probably the most capable long-range radar in the world able to detect aircraft at a range of 750km. For such a warship, located of southern Lebanon, the entire Syrian coast and much of the Turkish coast is within range (news today that radar on UN ships off Lebanon is disrupting Israeli satellite TV is a complete red herring. It is most likely an attempt to shut down the radar so that the Israelis can do what they want without others knowing. The only other interpretation is that the Israelis are worse than Hezbollah at handling satellite TV signals or their disruption. Hezbollah, after all, managed to keep their satellite channel on air throughout the war last year.

Posted by: blowback at October 10, 2007 08:06 PM


I had to go back to my source,Whatdoesitmean.com says that Russia's "Foreign Intelligence Service" reported that Israel attacked a spaceship full of Giants(God,doesn't this bring back memories of the golden age of National Enquirer?)

‘Ship of Giants’ Said Attacked By Israel in Strike on Syria

By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers

One of the most unusual reports we have seen, to date, on the Middle East war comes to us today from Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) on the reported Israeli Air Force strike on Syrian territory, and which, if accurate, does indeed explain Israeli opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu’s top adviser, Mossad veteran Uzi Arad’s statement to the American Newsweek News Service on this raid, and who is quoted as saying, "I do know what happened, and when it comes out it will stun everyone."

Western media reports on Israel’s raid into Syrian territory continue their attempting to link this strike with alleged nuclear material coming from North Korea to Syria, and which in some reports say that Israeli commandos seized ‘nuclear material’.

Syria continues, to this day, their stringent denials of an Israeli airstrike, of any kind, on its territory; North Korea, likewise, has issued a denial of transferring nuclear material to the Middle East.

Israeli officials, with the exception of the statement made by Benjamin Netanyahu, continue to maintain both a media blackout and an ‘official’ silence on the September 6th raid.

However, and according to these SVR reports, in the early morning hours of September 6th, an American Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) aircraft patrolling along the Syrian-Iraqi border alerted Israel’s Air Force to the entry of a ‘suspected non-terrestrial’ aircraft into Syrian airspace near the city of Aleppo 350 km north of Damascus.

[It can be speculated, though not stated in this report, that the SVR’s ability to decipher the NATO Link-11 secure communications system, used by both the American and Israeli Air Forces, was based, in part, by China’s capturing of a U.S. Navy EP-3E surveillance aircraft in 2001, and which was subsequently dismantled and examined by Chinese and Russian military scientists.]

These reports go on to state that upon receiving the ‘warning’ from the Americans, an Israeli Air Force Patrol squadron flying off the coast of Lebanon went into supersonic speed, raced into Turkish airspace, and in less than 20 minutes were over the ‘target area’ whereupon they ‘engaged’ an ‘unknown’ type of aircraft, and which upon being fired upon by the Israelis ‘ascended rapidly’ into the stratosphere and ‘disappeared’.

These reports do not identify the aircraft fired upon by the Israelis other than to mention that the American Air Force is suspected of having the World’s only aircraft capable of being classified as ‘non-terrestrial’ with hypersonic speed, and which has been called Aurora.

What brings these reports, however, about this ‘non-terrestrial’ aircraft, from the science of the known, to ancient science, were the interviews conducted by SVR and Syrian intelligence analysts with a number of the eyewitnesses to the Israeli attack upon the unknown aircraft, plus an examination of the site of the attack itself.

According to the Syrian villagers located outside of the ancient Syrian city of Aleppo, one of the oldest known cities in the World, it has been long known of ‘strange’ aircraft descending from the sky towards what are called the ancient burial grounds of the giants.

It is further believed by these villagers that the purpose for the ‘visits’ of these aircraft is for the retrieval of the remains of the giants, and which, apparently, was verified by the large number of recently excavated and empty graves of the giants seen by SVR and Syrian intelligence analysts on September 6th.

In attempting to understand why the ancient giant’s remains might have importance, to anyone, we can read the words of the World’s foremost authority on these ancient Syrian giants, Russian Scientist Professor Ernst Muldashev, and who has stated:

"Ancient giants may have never buried their dead in the ground the way we do. Different people in the present-day world bury the dead differently. It is a custom in India to burn the dead and throw the ashes in water. It seems to me that ancient people put the dead bodies into sarcophaguses where the bodies dematerialized and turned into a kind of energy blobs that were used by living people for various purposes. That is why the bones of giant people may never be found."

As to the greatest significance of these events; In a time when human beings will bring our World to the brink of total destruction, and as all the ancient religions prophesize, we are to look for the coming of the ancients (gods) ‘from the sky’ in our Earth’s ‘final hours’.

For our ultimate deliverance, or to our ultimate destruction, we do not know. However, it is interesting to note the words of the former American President, Ronald Reagan, who after his first meeting with Soviet Russia’s General Secretary Gorbachev stated:

"How easy his task and mine might be in these meetings that we held if suddenly there was a threat to this world from some other species from another planet outside in the universe. We'd forget all the little local differences that we have between our countries ..."

Yes,of course this is absurd(just thought we needed some levity).

Posted by: Roy Smith at October 9, 2007 03:37 AM


According to Whatdoesitmean.com the Israelis went into Syria to attack a spaceship full of giants otherwise known as Nephilim(you just can't make this stuff up,although Whatdoesitmean.com does a good job of trying).Again,according to Whatdoesitmean.com,the Israelis shot at the "UFO" & it went back into outer space.
Come on,everybody is treating the idea of there being a computer program that can interfere with Syrian air defense as if it is just as absurd.

Posted by: Roy Smith at October 8, 2007 09:49 PM


/quote
B, that's a bucket of assumptions there:
-Assuming that accurately depicts the Syrian side of the incident.
-Assuming that the planes Syria "saw" near Cyprus weren't drones, false returns, or both.
-Assuming the Cyprus planes weren't tankers, emergency backup, or both.
-Assuming Israel would risk a confrontation with Turkey in a simple move to provoke Syria when there's ample opportunity to do so without.
-Assuming Israel would abort a raid that had already crossed Turkish airspace on its way to Syria by dropping evidence all over the landscape.
-Assuming Syria would simply hold fire in the face of even a small raid.
-Assuming Syria has less reason to lie/obscure than Israel

Then yes, it possible the raid was a failed attempt to provoke Syria.
/endquote

1. There are some assumptions - not my assumptions, but those of the sources I quoted. You may think they are not credible, but at least they are not some "anonymous officials" who usually put out crap.

2. I don't get the Turkish involvement here. IAF could fly to Syria via the mediteranian - no Turkey involved. That the shunned external tank barelly landed in Turkey doesn't mean the planes crossed over to Turkey (even when, inofficially the Turks would not mind) or maybe did so excaping a possible Syrian air defense.

3. I don't know which side lies here. Most probably both do.

4. The Aviation Week story still stinks. Taking control of a system by manipulating input to a sensor? Not likely at least ...

Posted by: b at October 8, 2007 03:14 PM


There is also the simpler answer that Israel's military had Mossad agents in place to compromise Syria's air defenses and now are using this Suter/ASEA rumor as a cover for a successful intelligence operation.

Posted by: Trent Telenko at October 8, 2007 02:54 PM


B, that's a bucket of assumptions there:
-Assuming that accurately depicts the Syrian side of the incident.
-Assuming that the planes Syria "saw" near Cyprus weren't drones, false returns, or both.
-Assuming the Cyprus planes weren't tankers, emergency backup, or both.
-Assuming Israel would risk a confrontation with Turkey in a simple move to provoke Syria when there's ample opportunity to do so without.
-Assuming Israel would abort a raid that had already crossed Turkish airspace on its way to Syria by dropping evidence all over the landscape.
-Assuming Syria would simply hold fire in the face of even a small raid.
-Assuming Syria has less reason to lie/obscure than Israel

Then yes, it possible the raid was a failed attempt to provoke Syria.

Posted by: Moose at October 8, 2007 01:42 PM


"The technology allows users to invade communications networks, see what enemy sensors see and even take over as systems administrator so sensors can be manipulated into positions where approaching aircraft can’t be seen, they say."

That's like taking over a protected Unix computer by switching the printer on and off. From a technical system standpoint, hard to believe.

Also still no explanation why the Israeli fighter shunned its external fuel tanks. One doesn't do so until one needs to. If one needs manuverability because under possible attack that's a good move, otherwise it's waste and a give away intelligence wise. So why was this done?

There are in general several other accounts of the incident:

Alastair Crooke of Conflicts Forum:
"The Syrians saw on their radars the four fighters that penetrated into Northern Syria from the Mediterranean; but they also saw the much larger numbers of Israeli aircraft that were flying in a holding position close to Cyprus. The Syrians were not about to disclose their anti-aircraft missile capacities to Israel; and the intruders dropped the munitions and their long-range fuel tanks without pressing any attack, but returned to join the larger group still flying a holding pattern off Cyprus before all returned to Israel as a single formation.

The Israeli objective remains a matter of speculation, but the general conclusion is that Israel was only ready to run such a risk against unknown air defenses either as a proving run or, given the size of the numbers of aircraft off Cyprus, to destroy some target that for whatever reason they were unable to engage. Either way, the mission seems related to future conflict……"
via http://joshualandis.com/blog/?p=418

The military correspondent if the Israeli daily Haaretz writes:
"The farce came to a partial end yesterday, and even though there is still a gag order on most of the juicy details, we can safely say that behind the successful blackout campaign lies an enormous failure. The silence of official Israel was not meant to protect military secrets. The victim of the operation knows full well what he had and what happened to him.

Policy was shaped on the basis of a certain assumption about Bashar Assad's behavior in response to the operation. Since one option was chosen - silence - and not others, it is impossible to say with certainty what would have happened had Israel talked and thus added insult to the blow. Still, it seems that once again Assad surprised Israel; whoever expected him to respond to the operation in a military operation was wrong."
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/909310.html

Did Israel try to provoke an "incident"?

Posted by: b at October 8, 2007 01:13 PM


There is insufficient data to properly analyze this international incident. This article in Aviation Week actually raises more questions than it answers. New technology developed to defeat electronic air defenses is mentioned as is the new Tor1 SAM system, but this is speculative as is the intended Israeli target. It should be pointed out that should the Tor1 be operational in Syria, testing this new system could have been an IDF/AF priority, for both Israel and the US, in regards to a potential air strike against Iran. For if the new Russian SA-15 was actively engaged during the incident, I believe it marks the battlefield debut of this system. Again, I stress the fact that there is insufficient data with which to base any of these conclusions. Also, the Kuwaiti newspaper claims are highly suspect and probably offer no direct sources of information. As long as this incident remains cloaked in mystery, speculation will continue to abound.

Posted by: Mark Pyruz at October 8, 2007 11:49 AM


Wow,that Heron TP(Eitan) UAV & our Global Hawk UAV both have got to be the two largest UAVs in the Western Inventory I've ever seen(I'm excluding the conversion of obsolete jets fighters by the Chinese into UCAVs).I need to get out of my cave more often.
Anyway,this still is very intriguing technology(talking about Suter).I hope & pray that we can incorporate it into our battle doctrine along with stealth technology.There is room for both technologies.

Posted by: Roy Smith at October 8, 2007 11:14 AM


And the UAV pictured is probably Israel's Heron, if the photo in the linked article is accurate. This site also backs up that theory.

Posted by: J.R. at October 8, 2007 09:57 AM


Oh yeah,I also found out that that UAV pictured is an IAI Malat Heron TP(Eitan) MALE UAV,also being considered for being an Armed Hunter-Killer UAV by our Air Force.I wonder how many potential purchases of F-22s that would threaten? But then,people would say we could afford this purchase along with F-22s,& yet,feel totally threatened by Suter technology.

Posted by: Roy Smith at October 8, 2007 09:52 AM


I know that the F-16I Sufa or Soufa has a dorsal compartment that could house the Suter transmitter.I ask again,why can't we have both? Is the battle for dollars so great that we have to have an either/or situation? How myopic. I'd expect such short sightedness from Hollywood producers who have no clue whatsoever what the military does(& is why you have airmen doing infantrymen's jobs on Stargate SG1,or have helicopters shooting down jets like on,what was that stupid movie Nicolas Cage did about being an Apache pilot?),but I would also expect the military to know better.Some people have F-22s on the brain & their myopic tunnel vision refuses to see anything else. This is also excellent technology & shouldn't be pissed down the drain simply because it may be perceived to "threaten" the purchase of beloved stealth aircraft.Am I the only one seeing this?

Posted by: Roy Smith at October 8, 2007 09:46 AM


Roy -

Suter appears to use a transmitter of some sort to send fake returns to an adversary's sensors. If you fitted a stealth aircraft with such a transmitter, then the stealth aircraft would suddenly become visible to passive sensors. Transmitters also have a large RCS and are expensive to hide, because you have to keep the radars hidden behind the RCS equivalent of one-way glass, and those materials aren't cheap.

Just like the animal kingdom, specialization is going to be far more efficient than generalization.

Posted by: J.R. at October 8, 2007 09:18 AM


What is that UAV pictured?

Posted by: Roy Smith at October 8, 2007 08:44 AM


Now,Both Suter & Stealth technology are a real hammer & anvil one-two punch.Having both stealth planes like the F-22,the future FB-22(?),the F-35,& having properly upgraded F-16s & F-15Es,like what the Israelis have with Suter technology installed,that would really do damage.Throw in UCAVs on top of that.......Why can't we have BOTH Stealth planes & planes with Suter installed,why can't stealth planes also have Suter installed?

Posted by: Roy Smith at October 8, 2007 08:43 AM


Post a comment




Remember Me?


Please enter the code as seen in the image below to post your comment.