F-16 down

[Zimme83]

Syrian Air defence took down an Israeli F-16, According to the reports IAF where attacking targets in S Syria after a drone was intercepted when it entered Israeli Air space. Several SAM:s where fired by the Syrians (Looks like S-200) and scored a hit on one of the F-16:s, the crew parachuted over israeli territory and are now in hospital.

[mthrockmor]

Eye opening

Boo

[Gman]

Reports are that a barrage of SA3 and SA5 were fired at the IAF aircraft, and a mobile newer SA17, the newer Buk system, also fired on them.  The SA17 is much more dangerous than the older systems, but any of them could have been the missiles that hit the iAF planes.  Several defense sites have said an F15 variant was damaged and had to make an emergency landing as well.

There are pics online of a dud AGM130 stuck half way into the pavement on a road, no doubt launched by the IAF - the pics of the F16 crash look like it landed pretty flat, you can make out the front part of the aircraft pretty well which didn't burn much.  Both IAF pilots got out, one with serious injuries, and there are pictures of both of them after being picked up by a SAR helicopter online too.

It is eye opening, I agree, as the IAF has typically been able to hit targets in Syria (and elsewhere) at will, and their EW and ECM systems have worked very well recently.  There are some pics of Syrian SAM smoke trails flying right at IAF jets (their contrails at least), and then both SAMs trails veer off in formation, the pictures got a lot of press a couple years ago when they went online, obviously showing that IAF EW works pretty well.  The shoot down of the F16 and the F15 being hit as well - perhapds the SA17 systems that launched work a bit better than thought, perhaps it was also the number of missiles in the air, reports are saying over 2 dozen were launched in a very short timespan, and that's a lot to defend against at once in such a small piece of airspace.

After the F16i was shot down, the IAF attacked 3 SA5 and SA17 batteries and destroyed them, as well as a bunch of other targets.  An IAF Apache also shot down the drone (Iranian Israel has claimed) that entered Israel's airspace as well, video online of that, IAF spokesman said they wanted to shoot it down well inside Israeli airspace in order to get intel on what was left of it (not much by the video, it was blown into small bits from what I could see). 

It's the first IAF loss from enemy first since 2006, and that was a helicopter that was shot down IIRC, and not a small tactical one, but a larger transport.   


edit - Today (Feb 11th), the IAF has said that the F16i was fired on by 4 different batteries and types, including SA6 units as well as the previously mentioned other 3 systems.  They also claim it wasn't a direct hit, but shrapnel from a SAM that detonated close to the F16i, which sounds reasonable based on the pictures of the crash, it looked to be pretty intact when it bellied into the ground.

[Devil 505]

They also claim it wasn't a direct hit, but shrapnel from a SAM that detonated close to the F16i,

Um, that's how SAMs work. 

[Gman]

I think what they're trying to claim is that the F16 was outside of the typical proximity fuze lethal blast distance.  It's just political crap either way IMO, trying to make it look like a "lucky shot" which typically wouldn't cause a catastrophic hit.  Israel isn't used to losing fighters.

In defense of the article (thin defense), there are quite a few hit-to-kill vehicles/missile systems out there, and even more where the missile is an intended hit-to-kill with the proximity fuze there in case that fails.  That said all the missiles they claimed fired on IAF planes all have proximity fuzed warheads, heh but the author may not know that.  Again though, it's just posturing to make the IAF look less vulnerable, I don't think they'll fool many with that line either...

Should have just stuck with the barrage line - anyone seeing the F16 evade 6 or 7 sams in videos from the Gulf would understand how a 2 ship or whatever having to deal with 2 dozen or more missiles from several different systems, wouldn't think the IAF toothless now because they lose a plane to such a spirited defense.

[Vraciu]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uh4yMAx2UA

[Zimme83]

2 hits in ~2 dozen missiles sounds quite good, normally the hit rate is more like 1 in a 100. SAM:s alone have historically never been able to deny fighters access to an area with the exception of the Egypts over Sinai, but they had a ridiculous amount of SAM:s in the area. The fighters will take some losses but they will get through. 
Modern mobile SAM:s are on the other hand really hard to hunt down if their crews know how to act, (from the back of my memory) during the air war over Serbia NATO forces the hit rate of the HARM against mobile SAM:s where < 1% due to Serbian tactic of turning off their radars and move. (they also had far below 1% hit rate...)

Worth noting is that western air forces so far havent encountered the most modern Russian SAM systems. AFAIK this was the first time SA-11/17 have been fired against western fighters, it was a bit ironically used against the Russian by Georgia in 2008 and killed 3 Su-25 and a Tu-22 bomber
https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htada/articles/20080814.aspx

[Gman]

Article claims it was the crew's error not defending against the SA5 properly...

Interesting information if it's accurate.

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/iaf-investigation-finds-f-16i-shot-crew-failed-defend-sufficiently/

The Israeli Air Force (IAF) has completed its investigations on the lost of a F-16I to a Syrian S-200 (NATO: SA-5 Gammon) missile on Feb. 5.

The service determined that the crew, in its quest to complete the mission, had failed to defend themselves from the incoming missile. Seven other aircraft were able to complete their missions by deploying countermeasures.

“Their actions did not correlate with standard procedure while under enemy fire.”

As we have previously explained the incident came after an Israeli AH-64 Apache combat helicopter successfully intercepted an Iranian unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) launched from Syria that infiltrated the country’s airspace early Saturday, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) said in a statement.

IAF F-16Is were scrambled to attack 12 Syrian and Iranian targets in Syria in retaliation. On their way back to base, the Israeli combat planes came under Syrian anti-aircraft fire, with one missile exploding near one of the aircraft and bringing it down.

According Ynetnews the pilot and navigator were able to bail out of the plane before it crashed near Kibbutz Harduf. The pilot was seriously injured, while the navigator was only lightly hurt. Both have since been discharged from the hospital.

The investigation into the incident, which was presented to Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot, determined that the advanced planning for the operation was done properly, and the intelligence for the mission was sufficient, leading to the successful destruction of the targets, which were marked prior to the retaliatory strike.

In total, the Syrian aerial defense apparatus launched 27 surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) at IAF planes throughout the night and early morning as events unfolded, 13 of them were fired while Israeli jets were attacking the Iranian drone’s control and command center. One of the missiles, a large long-range outdated SA-5 missile, hit the Israeli F-16.

The warning systems in the F-16I that was hit alerted the pilot and navigator of the threat on time.

Despite this, the crew of the downed F-16I failed to deploy countermeasures.

The pilot and navigator failed to take heed of the SA-5 missile, which locked onto their plane. The IAF determined that to be a “professional error.”

The crew should have defended themselves as a priority over completing the offensive mission, a senior IAF officer said.

“The mission was completed successful and still, the plane should not have been downed, that is the standard we expect and we train for this,” he concluded.

[Mister Fork]

Article claims it was the crew's error not defending against the SA5 properly...

Interesting information if it's accurate.

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/iaf-investigation-finds-f-16i-shot-crew-failed-defend-sufficiently/

I'm wondering if the crew had a guided munitions launched and breaking to defend themselves would of resulted in a disconnection so they held on long enough to complete their run but it meant taking a hit from the SA-5?

[DaveBB]

The crew should have defended themselves as a priority over completing the offensive mission, a senior IAF officer said.

Sounds like that's what happened.  Doing something (such as launching guided munitions) instead of evasive actions.  Of course if the missile had missed their F-16 and they destroyed the target, they would be heroes.