Monday, August 27, 2018

MIG-23s in Action

Tom Cooper's latest book is about the MIG-23 in arab air forces. Code named Flogger, the MIG-23 appeared in Egypt, Syria, Iraq and Libya. From 1980 to 1991 Floggers saw much action. Generally, because of technical issues, lack of integrated air defense, and insufficient training, the MIG-23 was a failure. But there were some fascinating encounters, and occasional successes.
Perhaps the greatest performance of arab MIG-23s was not in combat, but mock combat, against the US Navy's best--F-14 Tomcats. I was astounded to learn that, in February 1986, Libyan Floggers  maneuvered well against them. In one engagement, MIG-23s got on "their 6," or behind the Tomcats, causing them to flee. Pollack regarded Libyan pilots as among the worst in the arab world, so it was a remarkable account.
In actual combat, Iraqi airmen achieved the most. On two occasions, in January and June 1984, MIG-23MFs fired R-24 missiles at Iranian Phantoms. Although neither enemy jet was destroyed, both were hit and badly damaged. On other occasions, Iraq's Floggers killed Iranian F-5s. The greatest victory was in August 1984.
 Determined to eliminate F-14s patrolling over the northern Persian gulf, the Iraqis sent two MIG-23MLs to ambush them. By this time, the Iraqis were employing the "Giraffe" tactic--fly low toward the target, then zoom up and attack from behind. Despite the best efforts of ground controllers, the MIG-23MLs ascended to find themselves improperly positioned. One, piloted by Lt. Rahman, was too close for a missile attack, and was ordered to fall back. After doing so, Rahman fired an R-60 missile, which went into the right engine of a Tomcat, destroying it. The downing of an F-14 was undoubtedly the best combat success ever achieved by a MIG-23, in any air force.
Rahman soon faced an Iranian F-4, vectored toward him and his leader. He got a radar lock on it and fired a R-24R and then an R-24T heat seeking missile. The Phantom evaded both. Nevertheless, Rahman saw more action that day than any other Flogger pilot.
Syrian pilots fared worse than Iraqis, because they were facing a more capable enemy and were slower to acquire the best variants and weapons. The massacre of Syrian MIGs over Lebanon in June 1982 is well-known. But even then, Syrian airmen did what they could to mitigate the disaster.
On June 7, 1982, four MIG-23s left as-Se'en airbase (AKA Tsakal) and headed toward Lebanon. Seeking to evade detection, the jets descended between Lebanese hills. One pair, in front, stayed low while the rear pair rose to act as bait. Alerted by radar, the Israelis surprised them. While F-16s attacked the low flying MIGs, the higher pair encountered four F-15s. Yet remarkably, despite being greatly outnumbered by superior warplanes, only one MIG-23MF was downed.
Could the Syrians have done better with a somewhat altered plan? After descending between the hills, they could have slowed down so the Israelis--if they assumed the Syrians were maintaining the same speed--wound up in front of them. But even then the MIGs might've been hampered by faulty weapons, notably the R-23 missile.
In 1985, Syrian Floggers, even the newer variant, the MIG-23ML, still had the R-23. Again success would've been questionable even had their jets been better positioned to fight.
On November 19, 1985, four Syrian MIG-23MLs attempted to ambush a pair of Israeli F-15s over Lebanon. Attempting to emulate the "giraffe" tactic, one pair got beneath the Eagles, and climbed to attack. Unfortunately, a mistake by the ground controller caused both MIGs to end up in front of the F-15s, which shot them down.
It is unclear exactly how that happened. The MIGs may have ascended at too shallow an angle, so they appeared in front of the enemy. It is more likely the error resulted from the difficulty of positioning jets behind an enemy flying in a circular or racetrack pattern. As the Iraqis found out, this could be tricky.
Would the outcome have been different had the MIG-23MLs attained the right position? R-23s were not likely to be effective and in any event, using radar probably would've alerted the Israelis. The Syrians could've kept their radars off and tried to get close so they could use their 23mm guns. But even the guns were said to "lack the punch" of comparable Western weapons. This was a serious drawback when fighting F-15s, which were big and tough to kill. A MIG-23 probably would've had to approach very closely and fire into the Eagle's engines--rather dangerous if the Eagle exploded.
The last actions involving MIG-23s occurred in the Gulf war of 1991.Two Iraqi Floggers apparently hit US F-111F bombers with R-24Ts. Despite a "huge ball of fire" resulting from one of those attacks, there was no confirmed kill.















An R-23 missile.

103 Comments:

Anonymous Neal Robbins said...

The MIG23 was a good plane, especially when it was manned by competent pilots. While I was in the Air Force, I talked with some pilots who said that the MIG-23 was among the best planes that the Arabs had.

8:36 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Hi Neal. Who said that? After Egypt broke with the USSR, it gave its MIG-23s to the US, which used them for mock combat with its own jets. A book I got previously, F-15C vs MIG-23/25, quoted a US pilot as saying the MIG-23 was "the worst piece of junk in the sky." The early MIG-23s weren't maneuverable, and could be dangerous to pilot, hence didn't deserve their reputation. But that changed by the end of the '80s.

August 27, 2018

10:31 AM  
Anonymous Neal Robbins said...

It was a couple of pilots and I'm doubt that they were serious. The U.S. Air Force has a jet now which is called the Thunderbolt; it is nicknamed the Warthog. From what I've heard, it's one of the most up to date planes of the U.S. military.

5:23 AM  
Blogger starman said...

I suppose the MIG-23 WAS among the best planes the arabs had in the 80s. Btw the A-10 Warthog is pretty old by now.

5:40 AM  
Anonymous Neal Robbins said...

I looked up information on it and you're right; that is an old plane. The Air Force has changed since I got out of it. More so than I had realized. I found out that they did away with Strategic Air Command.

2:55 PM  
Blogger Adham said...

Alright! I am back, now that I have casted aside (temporarily) the struggles of life, I can comment about this.

So the MIG-23 being a "worst piece of junk in the sky", what advantages it had over the MIG-21? Putting aside the better armament it carries.

I always imagined what if the HA-300 Project had completed prototype phase and began mass production. How would it have held its "ground" against Mirage 3s, A-4s , F-4s and older IAF fighter/bombers.


The A-10 is old but its like the M2 Browning, ancient but extremely effective! The A-10 saved the countless US lives in Iraq and ESPECIALLY Afghanistan.

Also, It looks like you were right all along, the offensive will launch most likely in September, the rebels are already blowing up bridges.

5:47 PM  
Blogger starman said...

Good to see you here--both AdhamS and Neal!

I'm pretty sure the term "worst piece of junk in the sky" referred to the earliest MIG-23 variant, the MIG-23MS. In fact its armament was no better that that of a MIG-21. It was exactly the same....The MIG-23MS had Atoll missiles and one 23mm gun. It was also dangerous to fly and difficult to maintain. Its advantages were greater endurance, speed and rate of climb. A few of these defective MIGs were delivered to Egypt around 1975, then given to the US, were pilots weren't very impressed with them...
I don't think the next variant, the MIG-23MF, was much of an improvement. In theory its R-23 missiles were better but they were too unreliable.
The MIG-23ML finally represented a decent fighter. Not only did it have the R-24 missiles. The MIG-23ML itself was significantly improved, making it safer to fly.
Btw I haven't discussed the ground attack variant, the MIG-23BN.
I don't know about the HA-300. I agree about the A-10. A writer friend wrote an article about its performance in 1991. A-10s hit 4,000 targets and only four were lost.
Yes the rebels know what's coming. They're digging trenches and building berms, besides blowing up bridges. It is assumed, though, the SAA won't attack until after the September 10 summit between Russia, Iran and Turkey.


September 1, 2018

3:17 AM  
Blogger Emmanuel Ansu said...

if Syria's early MIG-23s,the MIG-23MS and the MIG-23MF,did not have good weapons,why didn't the Syrians seek a better jet from a nonRussian supplier?Why didn't Syria get F-1s from France like Iraq? What would've happened if Syria had F-1s in the late `70s and `80s?

9:21 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Unfortunately Syria couldn't afford F-1s. Iraq could, but lacking much oil revenue, Syria had to settle for cheaper Russian weapons. I may post about an alternate scenario in which Syria DID get F-1s by 1980.

September 1, 2018

10:14 AM  
Blogger starman said...

By the way, I think I should clarify something. Iraqi MIG-23MFs were equipped with R-24 missiles by 1984, but even Syrian MIG-23MLs did not have those missiles at first. Without money like Iraq, Syria lagged a bit behind.

10:26 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

We would love an alternate scenario if this plane had entered service in Egypt

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helwan_HA-300

11:34 PM  
Blogger starman said...

Too bad the HA-300 didn't become the principal Egyptian fighter by c 1970. With two 30mm guns or four 23mm guns it could've stood up to the Mirage, and would've been way deadlier than a MIG-21. But I don't know what kind of air to air missiles it would've carried. Also, could Egypt have built the HA-300 in sufficient quantity to match Israeli numbers, or manage without imported MIGs?

September 2, 2018

2:42 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

from wiki !

Data from Deutsches Museum Flugwerft Schleissheim,[9] airwar.ru,[10] theaircache.com,[11] aviationsmilitaires.net[12]

General characteristics

Crew: one (pilot)
Length: 12.40 m (40 ft 7 in)
Wingspan: 5.84 m (19 ft 16 in)
Height: 3.15 m (10 ft 33 in)
Wing area: 16.70 m2 (179.75 sq ft)
Empty weight: 2,100 kg (4,630 lb)
Loaded weight: 5,443 kg (12,000 lb)
Powerplant: 1 × Bristol Orpheus 703 or (Brandner E-300 turbojet fitted to the third prototype) turbojet
Dry thrust: 28 kN (6275 lbf)
Thrust with afterburner: 47 kN (10,582 lbf)
Performance

Maximum speed: Mach 1.7 (2,100 km/h) projected Mach 2 with Brandner E-300 engine
Range: 1,400 km (870 mi)
Service ceiling: 18,000 m (59,100 ft)
Rate of climb: 203 m/s (666 ft/s)
Wing loading: 125.749 kg/m² (25.755 lb/ft²)
Thrust/weight: 0.88
Armament
Guns: 2 × 30mm Hispano or 4 × 23mm Nudelman-Rikhter NR-23 cannon
Missiles: 4 × infrared homing air-to-air missiles

6:51 PM  
Blogger starman said...

So the HA-300 compared favorably to a Mirage not only in armament. It could soar faster and higher.
The Mirage III's rate of climb was 83m/s, its ceiling was 17,000 meters and speed was 2,350 km/hr.

September 3, 2018

2:51 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Indeed, although I highly doubt Egypt would have been able to mass produce them unless it got the required funding for it. The war in Yemen at that time was sucking up the budget and almost the entire Arab world demonized Nasser (especially the Kingdoms of the Middle East). Also, some speculate that the Soviets were behind the program's termination as it would have affect Soviet's fighter sales for 21s and 23s (later on).

2:28 PM  
Blogger starman said...

According to wiki, the HA-300 was cancelled in 1969, due to political and financial issues. Sure, the Soviets saw it as a reflection of Egypt's desire for self sufficiency, instead of dependence on them, and therefore opposed it at a time when Egypt needed them more than ever. So the Soviets got their way...Wiki also says German scientists helping with the HA-300 left Egypt after receiving death threats from the Mossad. That wouldn't be surprising since the Israelis killed German scientists working on a missile for Egypt (and later a super gun for Saddam).
Too bad the HA-300 was terminated. It would've been better than the MIG-23 as well as the MIG-21.


September 4, 2018

3:20 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Israelis killing scientists, thats one matter I am researching into as well as the philosophical and metaphysical views on such actions because you can argue that you are killing civilians and not military personnel. Again, this is a very controversial topic because you have civilians working in military factories and etc etc.

Anyways, I encountered several USAF pilots and each one of them has the view that Arabs (especially the ones who fought the IAF) are absolute crap. I actually showed one of them the wiki page for the HA-300 and he was shocked, never knew about it.

Anyways, I wanted to ask you, in your readings on the '67 war, was there any scenario where Egyptian soldiers decided to sacrifice themselves to allow their comrades retreat? Or did they all dash to the other side of the canal when the order came? What happened to the units (what are they , where were they stationed?) that the order didnt reach it?

9:45 PM  
Blogger starman said...

I view killing of scientists as state terrorism. I don't think the US (CIA) ever did it to prevent the USSR and China from developing nuclear bombs.
Some time ago, I mentioned how Kadri Hamid along with some other Egyptians, were sent to the US for training on Phantoms. He had the impression that US airmen looked down on the Egyptians because of the stories they had heard about them losing a lot of aircraft in battle. But when they demonstrated their flying skills, the American instructors were impressed, and said "Your people have a golden hand."
I also read, in F-15C vs MIG-23/25 that US pilots was impressed (at least once or twice) with the performance of Iraqi MIG-25 pilots.
There were times when Egyptian troops stood and fought and even counterattacked, after the retreat order was given. I don't have THE SIX DAY WAR now but recall an action in which T-55s and SU-100s were deployed to stop the Israelis, and knocked out about 10 tanks. There was also a counterattack in the Gafgafa pass area, in which around 40 T-55s almost overwhelmed an Israeli force--mostly AMX tanks if I remember right.
I don't know if there were any units that didn't hear the order. Of course infantry units along the frontier didn't live to hear it....I think part of 6th Mechanized abandoned its Stalin tanks somewhere in the Nakhl area, east of the Mitla.




September 6, 2018

3:06 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Thanks for the info! I will look through the accounts of veterans to see if I can find anything interesting. BTW, do you think if Egypt had not sent 1/3 of its forces to Yemen, would it have affected the outcome of '67 or would it have been more of the same? Just more KIA, WIA, MIA and destroyed materiel.

8:41 PM  
Blogger starman said...

My pleasure. :)
If Egypt didn't become involved in Yemen, but invested its time and resources preparing for war with Israel, including maneuvers in Sinai, that would've helped, no doubt. But it wouldn't have prevented defeat. Back in the early/mid '60s, it was assumed that Egypt, though well armed, was not ready to fight Israel and wouldn't be until 1970 at the earliest. Among other things, there was a problem with command and control of units in the field.
As Pollack wrote, the only way the Egyptians could've held out in '67 was to establish a defense line based on the passes. But this option was "politically inconceivable" presumably because it meant giving up over half of Sinai without a fight.

September 8, 2018

3:08 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Will get back to you on that (been bed ridden (however you spell it) ). Anyways check this out,

From an interview with Amy Aylon, one of the IDF commanders for operation Belamus 6 and his statements COMPLETELY CONTRADICTS Wikipedia which is mostly based on the "Jewish Library" website.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRz-IO1rhsg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Bulmus_6#cite_note-JVL-2

7:23 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Sorry to hear of your illness(?) or whatever has kept you in bed, but thanks for the Aylon interview! He said he was "wounded twice" and "we lost many friends" and that two of the 40 men were unhurt, the rest wounded or dead. Ha! Yes indeed that contradicts the wiki account. Maybe somebody should edit that account. :)


September 14, 2018

8:43 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

I am pretty sure even if someone did, somebody else will reverse the revision. I wonder how many other battles/ incidents we will never find out the truth or at least the closest to the truth because of Israel's control over the media.

10:02 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Do you remember what I wrote about Mitznefet/Om Habara (west of Fayid on the Bitter lake)? For a long time I've suspected the Israeli forces under Magen were mauled there and needed emergency reinforcements from the Golan. But there are no detailed descriptions of the battle (around October 21, 1973).

September 16, 2018

12:06 PM  
Blogger starman said...

Btw the post is "Obscure Battle 1973" which I wrote on April 2, 2017. I consider that the classic example of a setback covered up by Israel.

12:09 PM  
Blogger Adham said...

Unfortunately, I will have to re read it again. Seriously though, we need someone to expose or at least raise awareness on Israel's cover-ups. BTW, you should really write an article about how Israel harmed/is harming the United States.

12:43 PM  
Blogger starman said...

About a decade ago, professors Walt and Mearsheimer wrote a BOOK about the harmful effects (to the US) of the pro-Israel lobby. The book got a lot of attention but didn't really change anything. Look at Trump's abandonment of the Palestinians and moving the US embassy to Jerusalem. For a long time, I've predicted it would take a major disaster to wake Americans up and get them to take action against the lobby and the government under its thumb. The lobby is that strong and that well entrenched. But I'll continue to oppose the lobby now, so someday I (like others) can say "I told you so." :)
Btw any further comments on Egypt in Yemen, Idlib etc?

September 17, 2018

2:57 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Whats the name of that book? I really want to acquire it now. Egypt has purchased IRIS-T anti air system from Germany (7).

Regarding Egypt in Yemen, I am still diggin deep and thinking about translate Historian's 73 article and interview (written) from Arabic to English.

Idlib wise, Just saw a Kornet atgm system being sold for $3000 bucks as well as weapons from literally all over the world. Turkish blank pistols converted to 1903 American pistols , to an M1 Garand for 150-250, also, fancy AR-15 platforms all tricked out.

Ak103s RIGHT FROM THE STOCKPILE OF BASHAR's army. Like seriously, who the hell in Syrian army is selling the weapons and munitions in the armory to the rebels? No wonder they managed to shoot down the Russian plane LOL.

I dont buy the whole thing that Israel didnt know it was there, it knew and probably forced the plane to get into the crossfire.

BY THE WAY! I heard that Israel launch missiles from ship platforms disguised as civilian ships! I will try to find sources for that- if its true then Israel has sunk to a new low.

3:18 AM  
Blogger starman said...

The book is THE ISRAEL LOBBY AND US FOREIGN POLICY. By now it's old, as it was written about a decade ago. Of course, a lot of its material is still relevant; it's well researched. But by now, I was hoping there would be a new edition or new book of this kind.
I think Egypt should've either stayed out of Yemen or pulled out in '63 in exchange for a big Saudi payoff. Pollack wrote that the Egyptians launched offensives which were well-planned and might've accomplished a lot against a conventional enemy. After the first such operation, around '63, Cairo was in a good position to negotiate a pullout. I don't know how much the Saudis might've paid. But it would've been an easy way to "eliminate the Nasserist menace on their doorstep" as one writer put it.
Since 2011, the rebels included a lot of Syrian army deserters who kept their weapons.
Did the Russian Navy in the eastern Mediterranean report missile attacks on Syria from ship platforms? Israel has long had warships capable of firing missiles. But they may not have wanted to risk a clash with Russia.


September 21, 2018

4:15 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Btw, thanks for the news about Egypt purchasing the IRIS-T. It's good to see Cairo do what it can to match Israel--and I don't think the IRIS-T would be of much use against ISIS, lol. But how does the IRIS-T compare to Israeli missiles?


September 21, 2018

4:25 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

I didnt do any comparison yet but I will soon. Anyways, heard of the S-300 delivery to Syria within two weeks?

THAT'S A VERY DANGEROUS MOVE!

Either the system will prove reliable and manages to shoot down an incoming IDF plane- or it will fail miserably, hugely affecting Russia's arms deals no matter what excuse they use.

Russia will become the laughing stock of the entire world and Putin personally will not longer be that badass bear killer laser sharks rider.

8:16 AM  
Blogger starman said...

OK I await your comparison of the missiles. Sure, I heard of the S-300s for Syria. I'm skeptical they'll shoot down any IAF jets (an S-200 got one earlier this year, but that was very lucky). If the S-300 fails Russia can always blame it on Syria not the system itself. Moscow has been doing that for a long time. Back around 2012 I posted "Soviet claim 1967." The Soviets said the '67 defeat was not due to Russian weapons but Egyptian inaction. Most Egyptian tanks, it was alleged, didn't fire at all.
There was a report that two Russian SU-34s confronted two Israeli F-16s over Lebanon, causing them to turn back. There's also talk of a Russian "no fly zone" over Syria, backed by Russian SAMs and jets.


September 24, 2018

8:49 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

I am getting busy and will be away for some time but really quick- Israeli media companies are buying "frequencies" on ARAB SAT and setting up Israeli channels with content for its "Arab audience". Basically Egyptian/Arab soap drama, shows, movies, TV series' and so on.

Will add more details to that when I return back.

Anyways- check this out:

https://twitter.com/elintnews/status/1044994010530680833?s=21

3:47 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Thanks for the link. Hope you aren't gone too long...
Some people are skeptical that Syria will get, besides the six S-300 battalions, 20 Buk, 36 Pantsir, 25 Tor etc. But Syria already has some of these systems, so Russia could supply more. Someone said Tor is need to protect S-300s, so it wouldn't be surprising if they got some.
I hope this does bolster Syria's air defenses, to the point of stopping Israeli attacks. In theory the Israelis could try to overwhelm the new defenses before they're ready, or even after, but such a massive attack would risk a major clash with Russia and dangerous escalation.


September 27, 2018

5:19 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

https://twitter.com/HosamDakhakhni/status/1045288193413795840

12:36 AM  
Blogger starman said...

So Israel is trying to improve its apartheid image by making more use of Egyptian drama and media. Israel has been called a Master Race democracy, in addition to an apartheid state.


September 28, 2018

2:41 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

https://www.quora.com/What-would-have-happened-to-the-Egyptian-Third-Army-in-1973-if-the-ceasefire-had-not-been-imposed-Were-the-Israeli-forces-on-the-west-side-of-the-canal-strong-enough-to-maintain-the-siege-Would-it-have-held

3:12 PM  
Blogger starman said...

Thanks for the article. Did Gomig write it (lol)? It sounds like some of the things he used to say in the old Egypt subforum. It's always nice to see something from an Egyptian perspective, but I think the author is too optimistic.
He says that if the ceasefire had not been imposed, Egyptian forces would've fought their way to the Third Army, using the 600 or so tanks and other forces he says were available. In fact, from what I've read, the 3rd Army divisions were encircled precisely because Egyptian forces had failed to stop the advances to Suez city and Adabiya. They had tried, of course but the 4rth Armored and 6th mechanized divisions had been badly battered and just couldn't do it. It's true, as he writes, that the Egyptians repelled the attack on Suez city. But that was different. There the circumstances favored the defenders. In more open terrain they favored Israel's armored forces, backed by airpower.
If the Egyptians really had had enough strength to fight their way to the 3rd Army, they probably could have prevented its entrapment in the first place. But they didn't, because by October 22, they no longer had enough forces. There is an old report of Kabil, the commander of 4rth armored, refusing Wassel's order to attack to reopen the Cairo-Suez road. His excuse, it was said, was lack of SAM cover. The real reason was given by Shazly in THE CROSSING OF THE SUEZ. Asked right after the war if he could reach the Third Army, Kabil replied "My men and I are prepared to die to reopen the Cairo-Suez road. But if we try and fail, the road to Cairo is open." An attack was just too risky. By then the 4rth armored had already been badly depleted. I remember an old article in NEWSWEEK which stated that by the war's end "Sadat had only 46 tanks between the Israeli army and Cairo."
As for the two trapped divisions, the keep problem was lack of air cover. They would've been mercilessly pounded by the IAF. In fact they already had been. Egypt had to ask for blood for its wounded. On October 24, the EAF was forced to squander 14 MIG-21s in an attempt to provide air cover for the Third after the loss of SAM protection. I think Dupuy was probably right when he concluded that another week of war would've enabled the Israelis "to overcome Badawy's command" (The 7th and 19th divisions trapped on the east bank).
I'm not so sure about Shamel. I suppose by December replacements for Egypt and withdrawal of many Israeli troops to the east bank couldn't enabled Egypt to eliminate Israel's bridgehead on the west bank. Still, it would've been risky.


October 1, 2018

3:11 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Darn typos....In the second to last paragraph, beginning with "As for the two trapped..." the words "...keep problem..." should read "...KEY problem..."
The last sentence also has an error: "...couldn't enabled...." should be COULD'VE enabled...."

October 1, 2018

5:01 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Please do check the Israeli's post right after the one you criticized.

OH AND I GOT MY ARTICLE PUBLISHED!

https://twitter.com/Silah_Report/status/1046537683978391553

7:56 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

According to a documentary that interviewed the surviving defenders in Suez City (2010) one of the defenders claimed that during the 100-day siege on the city they would carry out around 4 to five attacks per day on the IDF. Don't know the extent of the damage and attrition they could have caused but from photos taken, most of them are armed with US/IDF weaponry , M2 browning, M72 LAW , FN FALs, Uzis , FN MAG...in fact, the AK was a rare sight in the photos.

They could play a major role in harassing the already attritioned IDF forces even further while an Egyptian offensive is happening.

8:07 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Congrats on your published article, on the Hakim! :) Yeah, it's a shame Egypt didn't become a more powerful, just society, with enhanced capabilities from its own industries.
I wonder if the IDF/US weapons the Egyptians had at Suez were from captured Bar Lev forts, or IDF units defeated in the early counterattacks. No doubt at least SOME were taken during their attacks of 1973-74.
The Israeli didn't take into account the effects of IAF attacks on the Third Army. He also said Sadat was right to reject a withdrawal. But Shazly wasn't advocating a total withdrawal, just pulling back a few armored brigades.


October 1, 2018

8:44 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Today is the 45th anniversary of the outbreak of the 1973 war. Like in 1973, this year October 6 is a Saturday.


October 6, 2018

3:14 AM  
Blogger Emmanuel Ansu said...

The Egyptian crossing went well,right?

5:49 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Yes it sure did. Many years later, Pollack praised the operation.

October 6, 2018

8:45 AM  
Blogger Emmanuel Ansu said...

What if the USSR had gotten the jet up to MIG-23ML standards as early as 1968, and send 400 of the jets to Egypt and Syria by 1972.How would that have affected the 1973 war?

11:50 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Wow, that could've had quite an impact!
If the Egyptian and Syrian air forces had been armed with MIG-23MLs in 1973 instead of MIG-21s, they would've been far better able to provide air cover--drastically reducing the need for SAMs. R-24R missiles would've come as a deadly surprise to Mirages and Phantoms. Many would've been blown out of the sky before they could engage their targets, in the air or on the ground. R-24Ts could've destroyed many Skyhawks and F-4s as they were heading home and exposing their hot engines. R-60s too, would've taken a toll. With FAR better air to air missiles than Atolls, the EAF and SAF probably could've inflicted as many losses as the ground based air defenses did in '73, perhaps many more.
It is likely that, with 200 MIG-23MLs each, Egypt and Syria would've needed only 50% of the SAMs and flak they deployed historically. Much of the talented manpower assigned to SAMs could've instead bolstered the artillery, armor and infantry units.
But this scenario is fantasy, and not only because of the lack of ANY arab MIG-23s in 1973, let alone the best variants. Forewarned of advanced arab jets, the Israelis would've clamored for F-15s before the '73 war even began.


October 7, 2018

3:04 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

You owe me a halal beer- will reply soon on the other stuff

https://twitter.com/mahmouedgamal44/status/1050119612141109248

3:05 PM  
Blogger starman said...

I knew about the SCUDs and Frogs. One SCUD launched late in the war killed some Israelis at the crossing point. I know the Syrians launched FROGs at Ramat David and, if I remember right, these caused some casualties but not much damage.
I look forward to any further info or comments you have.
I wonder what will happen if some of the Syrian rebels refuse to pull out of the demilitarized zone around Idlib.

October 11, 2018

3:25 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Another article by moi- In the conclusion paragraph I went a bit melodramatic but thats my personal touch I guess haha..

http://silahreport.com/2018/10/14/the-legend-of-the-egyptian-thompson/

Anyways, yes, some rebels (mainly HTS affiliates) refused to fall back and carried bombardment attacks. Other groups with pulled out all the heavy weaponry such as field artillery and armored vehicles with videos documenting the pullout.

Regarding the IDF weaponry in Suez- according to the few interviews I watched the militia was desperate for weapons and they entered the "armory" of Suez Hospital where the weaponry and equipment of fallen / WIA soldiers was stored and they had just found one RPG-7, another former militiaman who was interviewed claims that he found an Egyptian soldier dragging an RPG-7 with a "sophisticated" scope which belonged to his fallen comrade, the soldier was convinced to give it to the militia.....

During the very first battle, the Militias had just 2-3 anti-tank weapons (RPGs). Probably meaning we can rule out the existence of IDF weaponry in Suez City before the arrival of IDF forces.

Plus they mention how they looted an M2 Browning and got a blacksmith to weld it on a cart lol.

They mentioned their confrontations with M48A3s (yes they said M48 "Aelf" 3) and Centurions).

1:07 AM  
Blogger starman said...

I like the comment you got on that site--"Bravo Adham..keep it up." :)
What may happen if HTS rebels won't pull back their heavy weapons? It would be interesting if fighting erupts between HTS and the Turks, and both sides suffer high losses. It'll help induce the Turks to pull out, and weaken HTS, which would make the SAA's job easier. Assad says the present arrangement is only temporary.

October 16, 2018

3:19 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Hahaha I think we are finally on opposite sides of this conflict.

I am on the Turkish side as I believe that Bashar proved to be no different than the rulers of old who were assigned by the Colonial Powers to look over their interests in the region.

Actually, that already happened late last year with casualties being in the hundred and that was before the recent massive SAA gains. HTS and their kind totally bashed the Syrian revolution.

Plus, can you imagine the SAA's retribution if they ever took control over Idlib? There are reports of former rebels and civilians getting kidnapped in Daraa..

Even in opposing Israel, SAA wont stand a chance against an IDF blitzkrieg- they will need decades to rebuild their army. Turkey isn't friendly with Israel anymore and the Turkish people are becoming antagonistic towards Israel.

Plus, Bashar might be forced to bend down to the Kurds' demands while Erdogan is pushing his limits with Trump. Which is necessary to stop the Kurds from gaining more.

I plan very soon to write an article which will interest you big time on the Kurds and I am trying to interview some of the famous Kurdish journalists/twitter pages and ask them the hot stuff- especially how they view Israel and etc...

7:03 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Sure, SAA wouldn't stand a chance against Israel now. In fact, I wrote several times, even before the civil war started in 2011, that Syria was far behind Israel militarily and would need a lot of time and money to restore the balance of '73.
Recent years haven't been a total disaster for the Syrian military. The war reinforced close ties with Russia, essential to Syrian rearmament. And it has given a lot of people combat experience.
I hope Turkey becomes even more anti-Israel in the future, and participates in a future conflict. But to do that it would have to be on good terms with the Syrian regime.
I look forward to your article on the Kurds!


October 17, 2018

3:15 AM  
Blogger starman said...

By the way, can you believe the idiotic historical mistake in this article?!!

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/1973-yom-kippur-war-gave-world-horrifying-glimpse-what-modern-mechanized-warfare-would


October 17, 2018

4:01 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

"However, Israeli fighters did trounce opposing MiGs and Sukhois in air-to-air combat, eventually shooting down two to three hundred opposing fighters for around five losses. At sea, the Israeli missile boats sank nineteen Arab surface combatants—and, accidentally, a Soviet merchant ship—without loss, dodging 52 anti-ship missiles fired in response."

First page was alright but then this.........

9:51 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Yeah, the figures on air to air combat losses are biased. As far back as 1974 Dupuy indicated Israel lost 21 aircraft in air to air action. More recently Cooper said 25-30. Even Pollack said Israel lost more than 5 on BOTH fronts.
But the REALLY stupid thing I had in mind was on the first page. The author wrote that Sadat began the war of attrition and agreed to a ceasefire in August 1970!! So Roblin never heard of Nasser?! If I had made such a dumb error, in an article with such wide distribution, I'd crawl into the bushes and die of shame, lol.


October 17, 2018

11:21 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

I ACTUALLY MISSED THAT!!! WHAT?!!?!?!?!! WHAAAAAAAAAAAAAT?!?!

*heart attack ensues*


9:49 AM  
Blogger starman said...

I posted the link to the flawed article elsewhere. On one site the goof was spotted immediately, on another the admin. didn't seem to have a clue himself...
Btw any thoughts on the Kashoggi affair? It might delegitimize the Saudi regime and hasten its downfall. Or, if tensions rise a lot, and Saudi oil output is affected, that might undermine sanctions against Iran. A number of nations might decide to cut back on purchases of Saudi oil, so they'd have to turn to other producers. At least, this is shifting the focus of international attention away from Iran.


October 19, 2018

3:26 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

https://scontent.fkwi5-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/44046046_2328226817204979_8149208910922776576_n.jpg?_nc_cat=110&_nc_ht=scontent.fkwi5-1.fna&oh=c9fe86b9ec1e8a7951b94ae0feba607e&oe=5C4B9BBE


Saudi Arabia will definitely receive an international hard blow, but Trump showed resistance to all the demands to impose sanctions especially arms sales on the KSA.

Still, though, a lot of the public support the royal monarchy and *laughs* believe it is a Turkish MB conspiracy plan to ruin their image .....wow....lol ...and there are journalists who project that claim to the masses.

I am going to sit with someone soon who's family is involved in the war in Yemen and will try to get some "inside scoops".


3:23 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

right after six day war within the same year

https://scontent-lht6-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/37111242_2180696721957990_7351192567007936512_n.jpg?_nc_cat=106&_nc_ht=scontent-lht6-1.xx&oh=67e60ed4e8bbd0d1510fd493d1fc1aaa&oe=5C4543DF

4:48 AM  
Blogger starman said...

The saudis used a double--someone dressed like Khashoggi--to make it appear he left the consulate safely. There had to have been a conspiracy to kill him and dispose of the body. And several of the 15 members of the hit squad have ties to the Crown Prince. I don't think there's any doubt Salman ordered Khashoggi killed. There was a clear motive-- he criticized the saudi regime.
When all the evidence is revealed it'll be awfully embarrassing for Salman. True, Trump doesn't want to lose lucrative contracts with KSA. But political pressure has caused this before. The pro-Israel lobby stopped at least one sale to KSA decades ago, and Trump will come under a lot of pressure to do something. How might the monarchy be affected by proof Salman had Khashoggi killed? It'll gravely worsen the crown prince's image and relations with the rest of the world. Conceivably, the consequences could destabilize the monarchy, in the short and long term.
Thanks for the links and good luck getting "inside scoops" on the war in Yemen!


October 23, 2018

6:37 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/14431044921/

I could have sent pics of destroyed Super shermans during '67 war but found this pic with IDF manning a mortar on what could possibly be a Ber Lev position and they are equipped with flak jackets and M16A2s

2:37 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Israeli HQ in Metla pass

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/14247792118/

2:39 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Acts of terrorism as you put it

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/14135229556/

2:40 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Here is an incident where its claimed that on the 6th of June 1967, Egyptian Su-7 (Pilot= Ali Khamees) managed to shoot down a Super Mystere (pilot= Begal Shohat) in Northern Sinai. Begal was shot again on the 3rd of August 1970 and left the air force to work as a Dentist.

All of that is written on the photo

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/9125094003/

2:45 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Down IAF UAV called "Shokar" At least thats how its read in Arabic  

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/9700491220/

2:50 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Egyptian Mi-8 with rocket pods shot down

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/9126273644/

2:58 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8866307102/

3:24 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

executed Egyptian POWs

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8866285030/

3:25 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

The moment an IDF soldier got shot

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8866282738/

I assume his photo afterward

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8866283190/

3:26 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8866047288/

3:32 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

the infamous chinese farms

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8866092952/

3:35 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Thanks for all the great pics!! I was already familiar with the one showing Israeli soldiers diving down to avoid strafing MIG-17s. The others, however, were new.
So Begal got it again in August 1970, just before the cease fire. He wasn't the only IDF pilot downed more than once. I recall there was somebody else--Karmai(?)--who was downed at least twice, maybe three times, in 1973-74.
Btw I noticed on that site another pic showing Sadat shaking hands with soldiers, probably after the war. I think Gamasy is on his right.

October 24, 2018

3:36 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

part of a wrecked bunker with what I assume to be an IDF captured (recaptured) BTR-152/ Waleed variant perhaps

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8866089794/

3:37 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8866034288/

3:41 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8865984540/

Egyptians discussing their attack plan on royalist locations in Yemen

3:42 AM  
Blogger starman said...

The Egyptians sure exacted retribution on Reshef's brigade in the Chinese Farm. That brigade repelled the Egyptian attack on Hamadia (on the 14th) but two of its battalions were mauled by Egyptian ambush positions on the 15-16th. But the Egyptians should not have let the first battalion pass and hit Second Army positions farther north.

October 24, 2018

3:43 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Hey! I found a picture of you! LOL

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8866281162/

Pilot Veteran Mohammed Okasha discussing a MIG-17 attack he carried out to the historian David Nicole

3:45 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8865972384/

BGM-71 TOWs on IDF cars

3:47 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Jimmy Carter is having fun in Egypt I guess

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/c8/5b/2d/c85b2d23319a9bb8b04ca3e6b17d81e6.jpg

3:57 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Destroyed IDF bridge erector thingy by Egyptian artillery

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8865759907/

3:59 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8865767759/

4:22 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

During '67

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8865354952/

4:32 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Lol, I'm not that old guy. But Okasha looks like he's telling a great story!

October 24, 2018

5:34 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8865645919/

Kissenger's Shenanigans..

https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8865424739/

HA-300 factory stage
https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8865686347/

IAF Mirage getting ambushed MIG 21 gun cam
https://www.flickr.com/photos/group73historians/8864723683/

5:58 AM  
Blogger starman said...

The pic of the Mirage in the gunsight of a MIG-21 first appeared in AVIATION WEEK AND SPACE TECHNOLOGY. I still have the 1975 publication BOTH SIDES OF THE SUEZ, which has it. The Mirage was on the tail of one MIG-21 when another, behind it, shot at it. I wonder if the MIG-21 in front was acting as bait. Also, if the Mirage was knocked down, why aren't there gun camera pics of that? There is one well publicized pic of a Mirage in flames.


October 24, 2018

6:12 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

I will try to get more info on that but for now


Here are some stuff for Suez City

COLORED VIDEO for Suez city early in 1974 - with a patriotic song about the city- The IDF tank crew had a nasty habit when they initially entered the city for standing out of their tanks- according to one interview which I will, later on, add subtitles to it in English- the first tank to be disabled had its tank commander decapitated BY AN RPG-7!! His head ripped off and his body fell into the tank- making the rest of the crew panic. The city was semi-abandoned by the time of 6th October

Facebook.com



Martyr's Mosque- Main HQ for for the Popular Resistance in Suez

Scontent.fkwi6-1.fna.fbcdn.net

From inside the mosque- BTW the guy with the LMG doesnt look like an FN MAG- will check more

Scontent.fkwi6-1.fna.fbcdn.net

Scontent.fkwi6-1.fna.fbcdn.net

Scontent.fkwi6-1.fna.fbcdn.net

Scontent.fkwi6-1.fna.fbcdn.net

Scontent.fkwi6-1.fna.fbcdn.net

Scontent.fkwi6-1.fna.fbcdn.net

Scontent.fkwi6-1.fna.fbcdn.net

Scontent.fkwi6-1.fna.fbcdn.net

The police HQ ^^ IDF paratroopers hid there for a while until they managed to fall back to their lines (the survivors, that is) They used captured Egyptian vehicles and possibly some of them might even be captured since 1967!!! IDF had a habbit of flying of Arab flags especially Algerian when approaching Egyptian units - sometimes the trick would work sometimes not.

Scontent.fkwi6-1.fna.fbcdn.net

12:25 PM  
Blogger starman said...

I assume you're referring to the Israeli setback at Suez city at the end of the '73 war, and the subsequent escape of the IDF troops initially holed up there--the survivors that is :).
According to a version I read--I think it is in Rabinovich's THE YOM KIPPUR WAR--Gonen contacted the Israelis in Suez city and, based on a map he had, gave them directions to escape.


October 27, 2018

1:14 PM  
Blogger Adham said...

Found some photos for Israeli field guns, field artillery and tanks in Suez's Military Museum and I find it odd how the description for the photos say they were captured during Suez Battles in 73?!

I shall post them later, anyways check this out

https://twitter.com/DrMikeH49

I am trying to get my hands on his book

1:39 PM  
Blogger starman said...

Don't know if that means literally the SUEZ battles of '73 i.e. at the end of the war. It may refer to the whole Third Army area (?) where various equipment was captured (although some Israeli tanks were captured in Suez).
I heard about that Dr Mike.

October 29, 2018

3:14 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Been very busy but will get back to you soon anyways check THIS OUT!!!

https://twitter.com/EgyGreenfly/status/1059344916344651778


https://twitter.com/EgyGreenfly/status/1059357123371524097

7:49 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Thanks for the links! KSA is using its economic clout to silence criticism stemming from the Khashoggi affair. And Egypt is paying the price, with Germany.
The cancellation of the order for TKMS Meko frigates may not be so bad, however, if the criticism of Cairo's naval buildup is justified.
It's interesting that terrorism is considered "more of a nuisance than an existential threat," so the focus remains on "big ticket" conventional weapons. I think Egypt is wise to limit its involvement in Yemen (they sure learned from experience, lol). There is a report of a new offensive to wrest Hodeida from the Houthis. Maybe it'll succeed, but the Houthis seem capable.
If Egyptian forces mostly stay home, we may see new maneuvers like Badr in '96.

November 5, 2018

10:26 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

You know what ticks me off? I was checking some gun forums (I have an interview for a job tomorrow AND I might end up writing for TFB (The Firearm Blog) as well wohoo) and other military/historical forums. How Israel managed to convey this message that Israeli people, especially the Jews (of course, like how Salafis/Wahabis see themselves THE Muslims- THe zionists likewise), that are undefeatable almost supernatural warriors who have an innate thing for being warriors. Thats how they virtually defeated 5 arab armies combined although military technology gap wasnt big at all etc etc.

Seriously, we need a new study or a new book (hopefully written by you) that 1967 scenario is nothing short of what was expected to happen to the Iraqis in the GUlf War 1991.

11:37 AM  
Blogger starman said...

You know, the ironic thing is, this "Israeli superman" image turns the old perception of jews on its head. Back in 1948 there were rumors that Russians were running the Israeli war effort. It was said that "Few people in 1948 were prepared to believe the jews could fight."
Actually, propagandists have usually portrayed Israel as an underdog, "fighting for its very existence" agains hordes of arabs bent on exterminating it.
True, the US Joint Chiefs expected Israel to win the '67 war within a week, "no matter what happened." But I wouldn't say the odds against Egypt and Syria were as long in '67 as they were against Iraq in '91. Syria could have repelled the attack on Golan. Likewise, Egypt could have fought Israel to a standstill, and maybe even beat the invader. (I once wrote something about this--"Best Egyptian Strategy 1967.")
Even Iraq could've done better in '91. Some previous post--I think it was "Alternate Scenarios Iraq 1980-91"--goes into that.


November 6, 2018

3:42 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Couldnt the Iraqis have held in Kuwait City and the urban areas instead of trying to pull out their forces and get mauled like on the infamous "highway of Death"? With US force not really accustomed back then to urban combat as it is now, couldnt it have been bloody enough for some sort of conditional surrender? A good example is Mosul and how well prepared the defenders were for the Iraqi forces, which earned the Battle of Mosul the title of worst battle in history since Stalingrad.

Also, here is a video recording for the east side of Qantara with actually real gunfight heard in the background. IIRC Egyptians faced hand to hand combat to liberate that part of the city.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKnhb3jwUno

12:42 PM  
Blogger starman said...

I've always thought it was foolish for the Iraqis to deploy their army along the southern border of Kuwait. There, in the open desert, they got hammered mercilessly, suffered a lot of desertion, and saw their logistical tether torn to shreds. It would've been better to deploy in an urban area instead. One problem, though, is that pulling back to Kuwait City would've meant giving up the oilfields--the main reason for taking Kuwait. I don't know if the defenders could've extracted any concessions from the coalition but they could've at least inflicted more casualties.
Thanks for the vid! I liked the scenes of knocked out Israeli tanks. :) I remember THE YOM KIPPUR WAR, by the London Insight Team, said that "the veracity (i.e. truthfullness) of the Egyptian communiques sagged the next day when they reported that the people of Qantara came out to greet their liberators. Qantara has been a ghost town...."
The American journalist Arnaud de Borchgrave reported that when the cease fire fire was announced "the whole area of Qantara became a blaze of automatic weapons fire." The Egyptian troops were protesting the cease fire that way.
I still have a few old NEWSWEEK reports from de Borchgrave and communicated with him in 2014, a few months before his death.

November 9, 2018

4:10 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Wow, never heard of the Egyptian Radio mentioning that, lol, or even heard of the whole automatic fire as a protest against the cease-fire.

Remember that iconic picture of the writing on some cardboard I think by an Israeli in English saying "To our friends from Egypt....".

Haha....The guys in Qantara have something else to say.

Anyways , I translated (google translate- shockingly the translation wasnt bad this time) for one of Group 73's articles on Battle of Suez and I think you will like it big time.

10:39 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

the Defsor neighborhood. Where the Israeli army managed to attack west of the canal. Their armored battalions were trying to achieve some strategic objectives, including the destruction of Egyptian air defense positions and the completion of the encirclement of the Third Field Army, which was besieged on the eastern side of the canal.

For the encirclement provisions, the Israeli army had to seize all the crossing points from the western side of the canal and the Red Sea. While the cease-fire was being negotiated, the Israeli government wanted to seize as much Egyptian land as possible to improve its negotiating position.

Accordingly, the Adan Group (2 Armored Brigade) was assigned to seize the port of Suez on the Red Sea on the morning of 24 October.

The Adan Group's plan was to attack the Suez Canal. The 460th Armored Brigade is attacking and completing the encirclement of the western part of the city. The 217 armored brigade is attacking in the form of battalions in the city to capture three major road junctions inside the city. This was in line with Israel's military doctrine of armor in urban warfare.

10:40 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

Armored Brigade 217 takes over its targets using speed, firepower and shock. When targets are controlled, armored groups and infantry destroy pockets of resistance. Israeli commanders expected that the attack would send Egyptian combat troops (two infantry and secret battalion tankers) into battle because of the speed of the attack. The commander of the Armored Brigade received a warning from his commander not to turn the operation into another Stalingrad.







The attack started with a bad start, as the fog prevented the aerial air strikes from supporting the attack. Major General 217 Armored Corps began his offensive without infantry support and was quickly stopped by M / D (anti-tank) and anti-tank fire. The infantry joined the brigade and the attack was resumed.

In the first objective, the Armored Brigade faced the first problem: a barrage of small arms fire, missiles and M / D fire, as well as M / I (23mm) fire targeting the front battalion. Most of the battalion members were killed or injured. Some tanks and tanks were destroyed.Destroyed armored vehicles blocked part of the road, and vehicles that used secondary roads were attacked and destroyed. The battalion fought until it reached the first goal of the armored brigade and headed for the final goal.

The battalion was surrounded by a paratrooper company in tanks in transport vehicles.When the forward battalions came under fire, the paratroopers left and hid in nearby buildings. The arrival of the armored battalion to the target resulted in the departure of the paratroopers, riding the vehicles and trying to move through the target. Because of the lack of protection inside the vehicles, the paratroopers got off and tried to secure a few adjacent buildings which they could defend. The paratroopers found themselves inside the buildings, isolated and unable to transport their victims, including the commander of the armored battalion. Paratroopers were at first target and unable to maneuver with casualties.

Other paratroopers quickly got off and found themselves in street wars. The brigade has received some losses in the vehicles and has not been able to progress.

By 1100 the Israeli offensive had reached its peak. Elements of the 217 Armored Brigade were deployed in the three targets in the city, but the armored battalion, which achieved the greatest penetrating depth was without infantry support subjected to fire M / d. The paratroopers were secluded and entrenched. In addition, an attempt to join paratroopers failed. At the same time, the residents interacted, erected barriers and ambushes for the isolated Israeli forces and carried supplies and information to the Egyptian forces.





The commander of the armored brigade ordered the brigade to disengage and leave the city.The armored battalion managed to fight its way out of the city during the day, while paratroopers had to wait until night and sneak out of the city carrying their wounded. Israeli forces lost 88 dead and hundreds wounded, in addition to 28 armored vehicles.

10:41 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

The Suez battle effectively demonstrated a number of defensive techniques. And clearly showed the great impact of urban wars on defense operations.

The Egyptian defense showed the impact of urban terrain on the movement and the mobilization of the firepower of the armored forces. The Israelis were trapped in lines on the roads unable to mobilize their firepower on a specific target, or coordinate and synchronize their firepower.
Short-range battles are characteristic of urban wars, which have reduced the range between Israeli armor, light weapons and portable M / D weapons, which have had a significant impact on street wars. In addition, small arms fire and sniper fire succeeded in targeting command and control elements.
The Egyptian defense succeeded in isolating the Israeli armored forces by planning and defending in depth. Egyptian forces were coordinated with the entire Israeli forces at the same time. Prompting the Israelis to fight on several fronts. As well as the isolation and separation of Israeli infantry from armored forces and prevented the formation of combinations of weapons needed for exposure operations in urban wars.
Suez also showed the influence of civilians when they were in the ranks of the defending forces, where the popular resistance established the barriers and ambushes of the isolated pockets of Israeli forces, preventing the Israelis from reorganizing. It also delivered information to the Egyptian forces and hindered any Israeli movement in broad daylight.
The Suez battle demonstrated how a well-planned defense in the civilized environment could prove superior forces as well. Despite the warning of the Israeli commander to avoid the reconfiguration of Stalingrad, the brigade, brigade and brigade commanders found themselves trapped and unable to disengage easily.
Had the defense of the city limits been made, it would have been less effective.

An important element of the success of the Egyptian defense is the inadequate Israeli poll, although the Israeli forces were aware of the approximate number of the defending forces, they had no idea about the distribution of Egyptian forces, and therefore an important factor for the success of the defense is sufficient security to protect the defense concentrations from the exploratory effort Which contributed to the surprise of the Israeli forces and the impact of the shock.
The battle of Suez highlighted the strength and influence of the urban environment on defense operations, with members of small arms, members of the police and popular resistance defeated elite Israeli forces.



Source:

FM 3-06 Urban Ops (2006)

Chapter 8 Defensive Operations

https: //www.globalsecurity . org / military / library / policy / army / fm / 3-06 / fm3-06_2006.pdf

Page 170

10:41 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Thanks for the info on the Suez battle! :) I recall Pollack, in his ARABS AT WAR, said the Egyptians fought worse on the west bank than they did on the east. I don't think that's true. Besides Suez, there were Israeli setbacks at Mitznefet and near Ismailia. There was the initial repulse of Adan's forces at the Tsach crossroad position, and the retreat of IDF tanks just after the first ceasefire on the 22nd.
But getting back to Suez: I wonder if the war would've turned out much differently if there had been a major Egyptian urban center close to the crossing point (much closer than Ismailia). The bulk of the IDF invaders might've become bogged down and mauled, in a "stalingrad" before they got anywhere... :)
Of course one could argue the IDF never would've chosen a crossing point close to a big Egyptian city. Dayan never liked the idea of capturing arab cities.

November 9, 2018

11:51 AM  
Blogger Adham said...

The 73 Historians attacked personally "Tom Cooper" for saying the air battle of Mansoura never happened and tagged him in this photo and ridiculed him for saying the battle isn't "real".

https://scontent.fkwi5-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/45610875_2367017786659215_5607988860526002176_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ht=scontent.fkwi5-1.fna&oh=336b3d86422372209cb4dccb8846c7b1&oe=5C82C7F7

Well, nevertheless, IDF managed to get itself bogged in Suez and repulsed in Ismalia. IDF, in my opinion, reached its full limit by the end of the battle for Ismalia. If the war had continued, they would have to face constant Egyptian harassment, raids, and fresh expedition forces coming from nearby Arab countries. Even if the 3rd army was destroyed (why couldn't the 3rd army try to break the siege?), it would be the price for most, if not all the IDF forces on the western side of the canal.

7:06 AM  
Blogger starman said...

Thanks for the latest comment. I'd like to answer in the latest thread, above.

November 11, 2018

3:50 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home