Investigation of a military commander from the United States dispels myths about the invincibility of "Bayraktar"


The wars in Syria, Libya, and then in Nagorno-Karabakh became the best advertisement for attack drones. UAVs of Turkish and Israeli production colorfully destroyed the armored vehicles of the Syrian government army, the army of Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar, and then the Armenians who defended Artsakh. At the same time, they also destroyed a number of Pantsir-S1 air defense missile systems, which called into question the effectiveness of Russian-made short-range air defense systems. However, over time, more and more information appears that allows us to look at this issue from a different angle.


So what do we have. On the one hand, there is Bayraktar TB2, a Turkish medium-altitude operational tactical unmanned aerial vehicle capable of staying in the air for up to 2 hours and carrying 12 UMTAS air-to-ground anti-tank missiles with laser guidance. There is also a variant equipped with Roketsan MAM-C, MAM-L corrected high-precision gliding bombs. During the battle for northern Syria, the confrontation near Tripoli and the 4-week war for Nagorno-Karabakh, "Bayraktars" proved to be a formidable weapon, effectively hitting enemy armored vehicles at a distance of up to 6 kilometers.

The production of these UAVs is carried out by Baykar Makina, owned by a relative of President Erdogan, businessman Ozdemir Bayraktar. In 2016, his son Selcuk married the youngest daughter of the "Sultan", and President of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev and Emir of Qatar Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani attended the wedding as honorable bones. We are deliberately pointing out these nuances, since the attitude towards Baykar Makina products will clearly be biased with a plus sign both in Ankara and in Baku. East is a delicate matter.

On the other hand, there is the Russian Pantsir-S1 air defense missile system. It is a self-propelled short-range air defense system designed to cover military and civilian targets. It is considered a "bodyguard" for the S-400 "Favorite" air defense system. This air defense missile system was created in close cooperation with the UAE with funds allocated by the Arab sheikhs. For this reason, a lot of "Shells" with the index "E" ended up in the hands of the army of Khalifa Haftar in Libya. It is no secret that the Emirates are one of the active sponsors of the Field Marshal. Taking into account the fact that Russian air defense systems were in service with the Syrian government army, the Libyan national army (LNA) and the Armenian army, the attitude towards domestic air defense systems on the part of our Middle Eastern "friends and partners" standing on the other side of these conflicts is clearly biased with a sign "minus". We will also have to take this nuance into account.

Let's go further. I would like to quote one without exaggeration of a great man, German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck:

They never lie so much as during the war, after the hunt and before the election.

In war, everyone always lies, overestimating the enemy's losses and underestimating their own. This is, in general, the norm, an element of disinformation and propaganda. Should the conflicts in Syria, Libya and Nagorno-Karabakh be an exception to this rule? Why would you?

Last summer, the Ukrainian publication "Defense Express", calling itself "Vіyskovy portal", told the world that Turkish attack UAVs in just a few years destroyed at least 23 "Shells" in Syria and Libya. To suspect an "information and consulting company" specializing in highlighting the achievements of the military-industrial complex of Ukraine, its weapons and military equipment, in sympathy or at least an objective attitude towards Russia and its military-industrial complex, is not possible. Also, the reports of huge losses of Russian-made air defense missile systems from the Turkish Anadolu agency are not particularly credible.

No, we will not deny the very fact of the destruction of several Pantsir-S1 complexes of the Bayraktar UAV. There was a case, and there are several explanations for this. In particular, the low level of training of local Arab settlements. In more skillful hands, anti-aircraft complexes showed themselves much better. The question is in the number of actually knocked out air defense missile systems and downed UAVs following the results of their confrontation. These figures are openly embellished in favor of the Turkish side, which is not surprising. But there are also other views on this issue.

For example, a certain resonance was caused by publication American "fan of military technology" Jeff Jaworski (Jeff Jaworski). He counted, with reference to his own sources, a completely different amount of destroyed equipment. According to him, in Libya, the Turks were able to knock out only 9 Russian-made air defense missile systems, and they, in turn, knocked down 47 Turkish Bayraktar TB2s. If we take into account the comparative cost of "Armor" and attack UAVs, then the LNA even won, if, of course, we take the death of the calculations aside and count it like an accountant. 9 air defense missile systems cost the purchasers $ 118 million, and 47 UAVs - $ 245 million.

Of course, the private opinion of the American "fan of military technology" cannot be considered the ultimate truth. But all the more, it cannot be the openly biased position of the Ukrainian publication "Defense Express" or the Turkish "Anadolu". It so often happens that the truth is gradually selected from under the heap of information and propaganda slops poured on it. It is quite possible that this is exactly the case. Time will tell.

Let's make a reservation that we do not question the effectiveness of Turkish or Israeli attack UAVs. They did really well against an unprepared opponent. But the fact of the matter is that they work well only where there are no modern anti-aircraft systems with highly qualified experimental calculations. The main area of ​​application of such attack drones in reality is mainly regional or local conflicts with a relatively low intensity.
11 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Ser sash Offline Ser sash
    Ser sash (Ser Sash) 13 March 2021 20: 00
    +1
    I repeat, again, the lack of preparation of calculations is not an excuse.
    This only indicates that the technique is difficult to master, and this is rather a minus in modern realities.
    Now the emphasis is on automating the process in order to make the operator's participation, and therefore the human factor, minimal.
    And with this we have obvious problems. The third generation ATGM has not yet been made.
  2. Wanderer039 Offline Wanderer039
    Wanderer039 13 March 2021 20: 43
    +4
    Even if you count as an accountant, the preparation of the dead calculations also costs money and not small. The most expensive part of an airplane is a good pilot, the story is the same with the air defense system.
    1. Binder Online Binder
      Binder (Miron) 13 March 2021 21: 29
      -3
      Quote: Wanderer039
      The most expensive part of an airplane is a good pilot, the story is the same with the air defense system.

      Quite right. It is for this reason that the future belongs to drones, a good operator sits in an air-conditioned room, sips coffee and controls UAVs, which are just a consumable, just a piece of iron with plastic, a set of stamped parts that can be easily and naturally replicated and improved without exposing danger to the lives of their soldiers. And in the confrontation between the UAV and the ZRPK, if it is defeated, the calculation of the complex dies, or at least gets injured, the drone always has an advantage.
  3. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 13 March 2021 21: 57
    -3
    Ha. All bullshit. Either they refer to the eternally doused ukrov, or to some Yusovite, without verification.
    The military probably keeps records, but they are silent. And surely they could boast ...
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 14 March 2021 08: 06
      +1
      Ukrainians are interested persons, an American - what is his profit?
      To the military to boast for what and to which particular military? It was about Libya. There, as it were, not our military are fighting, but the LNA.
      1. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
        Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 14 March 2021 10: 47
        0
        If they do not keep track of at least their sold Shells, then this is F ...
        Surely there are instructors, a repair center, for spare parts, for the supply of spent weapons, etc.

        And on UAVs - they could also collect information. Almost a full-time job of an analyst. And this would be an advantage over the Yusovite - not only newspapers, but also internal information about supplies, about application, from instructors ...
        If this is not the case, then F ....., IMHO ..
    2. akarfoxhound Offline akarfoxhound
      akarfoxhound 15 March 2021 17: 39
      +1
      No one will ever give out real numbers about their equipment, this is the real available combat effectiveness of equipment, therefore "the military could not and cannot boast," especially to satisfy the curiosity of idle fans to grind "for war".
  4. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 14 March 2021 08: 09
    0
    Quote: Ser Sash
    I repeat, again, the lack of preparation of calculations is not an excuse.
    This only indicates that the technique is difficult to master, and this is rather a minus in modern realities.

    This is the argument! Bravo. Let's continue this logic.
    I think the American F-35 is a g ... but an airplane, since you can't just get into it and fly on a combat mission. Also, you know, you have to study for many years. Nonsense, not an excuse!
    1. Ser sash Offline Ser sash
      Ser sash (Ser Sash) 14 March 2021 09: 18
      -1
      Have you flown the F - 35? Where does the information come from that piloting it requires special skills?
  5. Vladest Offline Vladest
    Vladest (Vladimir) 15 March 2021 01: 56
    -4
    Someone claimed that Bayraktars are invincible? They were also shot down quite a bit. But the damage that they did is much more.
    Bayraktars pay for themselves.
    The year 2020 can be safely called the year of Bayraktar! )))
  6. Cyril Offline Cyril
    Cyril (Kirill) 17 March 2021 13: 40
    -1
    Firstly, no one has ever called drones - neither Turkish, nor American, nor Israeli, etc. - invincible. No one, including in Turkey, denied that their UAVs were destroyed by anti-aircraft systems - Russian or some other.

    Secondly, the essence of the UAV is that even if the aircraft itself is lost, the main thing is not lost - the pilot.

    No, we will not deny the very fact of the destruction of several Pantsir-S1 complexes of the Bayraktar UAV. There was a case, and there are several explanations for this. In particular, low level of training of local Arab settlements

    Arab calculations are being trained by Russian specialists. At least in Syria. That is, the teachers from the Russians turned out to be so-so, or what?

    In more skillful hands, anti-aircraft complexes showed themselves much better.

    Is it about Russia? Nobody has used Bayraktars against Russia yet. Used handicraft UAV-kamikaze.

    The question is in the number of air defense missile systems actually knocked out and UAVs shot down following their confrontation.

    Not. The question is in achieving military goals.