Montrose Toast

ARINC completes the upgrade of Iraq's new Mi171s. http://www.arinc.com/news/2011/08-04-11_mi_17_helicopters_delivered%20.html

Thanks. I knew they were finishing but, this confirms it...

Hmmm, I missed Jack's comment on the Hawk. A sensible choice seeing as how they could field an IADS faster than an actual air force. My only question is, does whoever made the missile (Raytheon?) still support it? What do you think DJ? (about the choice that is, not who made them.)

Ok, just answered my own question... http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/hawk/

TW: Yup. Upgrade version is an AMRAAM terminal stage. Good system for air defense but, no ABM capability. Which makes it much cheaper than Patriot. //// Have you noticed the propaganda in Iraq recently? Talking about IA having 4,000 tanks in 2003 and how they were carted away by Iran and KRG. 1. Iraq had half that. 2. Iran didn't get any of them and KRG got much fewer than claimed - most no good as anything but inmobile pillboxes. 3. US practiced excelent demolition practices in 2003. Fewer than 200 salvaged and most of them were in for maintenance at Taji - thus not field demo'd. 81 KRG T55, 76 IA T54/55/59, and ~43 T72 returned to active service since 2004.

Maybe is just me being a westerner but I just don't understand it. I mean, ok I can understand the use of arbitrary numbers to make your military look good but saying that the Iranians or the Kurds practically stole your tanks? That's not even good propaganda, you're just asking for a fight now so why bother? Do they think that their people are stupid or ignorant to whats going on in their government? Are those statements made to make the people happy about their military or angry towards the... instigators(?)? And even from a strictly military perspective, saying that you own and (possibly) operate tanks which are basically Chinese copies of a 50 year old soviet design is just asinine and everybody knows it and knows that whatever tanks the Iraqis once had anyway were in a word, crap. /rant. ///Ok, now that that is over I was looking up some additional info on the Hawk and it turns out the latest versions of the missile (Hawk XXI series) are indeed ABM capable. Apparently they use a lot of the subsystems from the Patriot, which makes sense as well as subsystems developed in partnership with Norway that also help developed their new AMRAAM based SAM; NASAMS. The more I look at it, the better an option it becomes for Iraq to implement. Lets hope there is some truth to those rumors!

in my view Iraq really needs an ABM type system rather than a simple SAM, since the main threat from Iran are hundreds of short and medium range ballistic missiles.

the only systems able to intercept iranian missiles are the US PAC3 and the russian S400 systems. The US still has 3 or 4 PAC3 sites in Iraq, I wonder if they will become "trainers" in Iraq after 2012? Or if Iraq plans to buy PAC3 or S400s? Otherwise Iraq is completely unprotected from the main Iranian threat.

Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Israel, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are all patriot operators. Saudi is buying S400s last time I heard, and UAE is also interested in THAAD. That shows where the main threat lies...

Hi DJ First thanks for letting hang to dry in the august update; I’m the one who kept on telling you that the KRG tanks report is not confirmed and shouldn’t be taken into consideration. Because it’s a news report not the actual report. In terms of the Hawk System, that’s a rumor going around because of PM Maliki’s comment that Iraq is looking for an air defense system, and Iraq buying the Mobile AN TPS 77 Radar. But it’s not confirmed. PS ( SEC Gates dropped the SLAMRAM system for the US army the only system left is the Advanced HAWK system and Patriot) TO TW I don’t know what report you and DJ read; that talked about Iranians steeling Iraqi tanks, first it could be some news report from a doggy source in which case it’s stupid. But let me tell you what Iraqi’s are saying, they are wondering where did the Iraqi army equipment go? Because we’re talking about equipment belonging to at least 15 Div- armor and all, people are wondering; from all that equipment only a handful of tanks and some artillery survived, it doesn’t make sense even to some politicians. The reason people want the rubbish equipment is because Iraq doesn’t have enough resources to pay for everything Iraq needs. In some estimates; for Iraq to get a complete military it would need a least ten years and at least 80-100Billion dollars. If you count; air defense, aircraft (100) , tanks , artillery, communications , logistics , attack helo, support and logistics.

To sheytanelkebir S 400, Pac 3. Won’t help Iraq one bit against Iran, you forget that six provinces are on the Iraq Iran Border, the( fajer 5) is capable of hitting all of the towns and cities in its rang and the PAC 3 can’t do anything against a GRAD style attack, look at Hezbollah and Israel , look at North Korea and South Korea. That is what Iraq is facing not a gulf war style war but like the Iraq Iran War , in the first days of the war Iraq Penetrated the Iranian lines and held it for two years to prevent Iran from using its rockets, and the use of the Air force that’s how you stop it. The only places Iraq could use a Pac system is Baghdad, Basra and the ports are completely vulnerable to attack.

Jack: Even you are exagerating - there were 25 divs in the 2003 IA/RG but, only 10 repeat 10 heavy Divs in the IA/RG in 2003. 4x Mech: 1st, 5th, 51st, and Adnan. 6x Armor: 3rd, 6th, 10th, Hammurabi, Medina, and Al Nida. At max strength that is 200 tanks per mech and 300 per armor. NONE OF THESE DIVISIONS WERE ANYWHERE NEAR MAX STRENGTH. The infantry divs were at about 40-50% TO/E. The heavies were 70% at best. Their equipment is in those scrapyards. The US does not leave functional equipment lying around for enemy insurgents to use. We blow it. That is why our infantry know how to use thermit and C4 so well. The estimates of tanks in the 2003 IA/RG combined range from 1,500-2,300. All of the divisional artillery was at 50 percent or less. Remember 1991? The year the IA was reduced from 4th largest to one of the smallest armies in the world? The US concentrated on FA and armor. We made sure that it would never be operational again... /// SSMs are a terror weapon. Too inacurate to be useful militarily unless you put a nuke warhead on them. Iraq survived the 80s missile war without an ABM capability - Just as London survived the blitz - it is just fashionable to have one now...

Reality 101: 1990 tanks: ~5,500. 2002 tanks: 1,500-2,300. Salvaged tanks returned to operations since 2003: ~43 T72, ~76 T54/55, and 81 T55 [KRG]. About 10 percent - thermite welds breach-blocks into metal blocks real well. Howitzers were targeted even harder than tanks in 1991 and 2003. Plus most of the FA was worn out from the Iran-Iraq War. Iraqi Air defense was hammered even harder. 1991 thru 2003 - for 12 years the IqAF and AD were hammered. I deployed there enough times in the 90s. /// For that matter, look at the IqN. 5 PBs out of 140 vessels survived...

I've been seeing these claims for several weeks now. They're not based on reality. The majority of the IA's old equipment is unsalvagable scrap in the boneyards.... /// "After 2003, they captured the former Iraqi army tanks. About 4,000 tanks left by the former Iraqi army in the streets and cities disappeared, and our investigations indicate that the Kurds have most of them and Iran got the rest," he said. http://news.yahoo.com/analysis-kurds-serve-warning-u-withdrawal-nears-143214281.html

Jack: If you do not want to be quoted as a source - then provide links to the actual source. Since I could not find a source to confirm your coments - you became the single unconfirmed source in both cases. I seem to remember asking for links and comments are on the record...

Hi DJ This is not the first time I have given Info without sources, I was the first on the net to say that the M1A1 will go to the ninth and you wrote an entire report about the issue, I was the first to talk about the big deal with US; that turned out to be the m113 deal that no one talked about for a long time, the Serbian arms deal was the same ( all of these topics where mentioned on Iraqi TV programs like (huma al iraq) and interviews with the DM. NOTHING WAS WRITTEN until days or months later .

Most was speculation; the Iraqi DM said the tanks were going to an armored DIV but didn’t say which, I made the Link , the other big deal-M113- you made the link with your sources , and the same is going on now with air defense issue; the Iraqi PM said we are going to get an Air defense System but did not say which one, People( Iraqi Commentators ) are saying HAWK ; why because Iraq Has not bought anything Russian yet except helo’s and only through the US, and since an air defense system needs a lot of training and the Iraqi GOV is worried about corruption; the US is the best source. No one thinks that the US is going to sell Patriots to Iraq, so the best system would be HAWK.

Jack: As you said, before there were other sources. This time - in both cases - you were the only one saying it. I-Hawk makes sense. The IMoD report claiming the KRG has 350 tanks doesn't. What does make sense is that 350 more tanks are needed to fill out 5th and 7th Mech Divs...

I confirm JW claim about AD .. as i heard it from PM almaleki .

I'm doing some re-thinking about 10th Div spliting and forming another Div. What if the extra Support Bde is a Corps-level asset standing up? 10th relocate to Memona and a Corps stand up at Ali Base? This sounds more like that... http://www.usf-iraq.com/news/headlines/iraqi-army-tours-adders-supply-support-activity-facility Also, the movements between Besmaya and Taji could be relocating to make room for Corps' Troops at Taji....