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 whats 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 cant 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 newspapers 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.
Syrias 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…
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?
What is that UAV pictured?
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.
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?
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.
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.
“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
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.
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.
/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 …
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.
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?)
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.
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…