Murphy's Law: Libya And The Missing Missiles

Archives

June 9, 2011: Russian intelligence officials believe that ten Strela-2M (SA-7B) shoulder fired anti-aircraft missiles were stolen from Libyan military bases two months ago. The Russians have supplied serial numbers and warned counter-terrorism officials worldwide to be vigilant. The exact number of Strela 2Ms Russia sold to Libya has not been made public (estimates vary from hundreds to thousands). Nor is it known how many of these missiles Libya still had when the rebellion broke out earlier this year. Many Sa-7Bs were seized by the rebels, and some were used against Kadaffi's aircraft. But as early as April it was reported that some had been taken by criminals or Islamic radicals, and moved out of the country.

Many of these missiles, especially older ones, are no longer useable. Kaddafi has been buying and warehousing stuff like this since the 1970s (when the price of oil skyrocketed and all the oil countries suddenly had a lot more money to play with.) Any of these missiles that are more than 15 years old are most likely not operational. The batteries die after a few years, and after a decade the electronics are no longer reliable. After about fifteen years the rocket motor is no longer reliable, nor are the explosives in the warhead. At that point, the SA-7 is more dangerous to whoever is using it, than it is to any potential target. You can refurbish older missiles with new parts. But if you can get spares, you can get new missiles. In any event, the Russians are very careful about who they sell this stuff to.

The real danger is from newly manufactured SA-7s, or clones made by Iran, China, Pakistan and North Korea. These terrorists can get these on the black market, as well as directly from Iran. Not as capable as more modern designs (like the U.S. Stinger), there are still lots of SA-7s available with good batteries. Several were fired in Iraq in the last six years, although without bringing down anything. In Afghanistan, there are lots of small aircraft and helicopters flying around that are very vulnerable to an old-tech missile like the SA-7. During the 1980s, the Afghans got their hands on lots of SA-7s, fired over 500 of them, and brought down 47 aircraft and helicopters, and damaged 18 others. During the Vietnam war, 528 SA-7s were fired, bringing down 45 aircraft and helicopters, and damaging six others.

These missiles were originally intended for use against jet fighters operating low over the battlefield, but the reality turned out to be different. The most likely targets encountered were helicopters, or propeller driven transports. These aircraft proved to be just the sort of thing 9 kg (20 pound) missiles, with 1.1.4 kg (2-3) pound warheads, could destroy. Against jet fighters with powerful engines, the missiles caused some damage to the tailpipe, but usually failed to bring down the jet. This was first noted during the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, where the Egyptians fired hundreds of SA-7s at Israeli A-4 light bombers. Most of the A-4s, with their 11,187 pounds of thrust engines, survived the encounter. Larger jets, like the F-4 and it's 17,000 pound thrust engines, were even more difficult to bring down. Smaller commercial jets, like the 737 or DC-9 (each using two 14,000 pounds of thrust engines) have proved vulnerable. But a 757 has much larger engines with 43,000 pounds of thrust, and the 747 is 63,000. Moreover, the rear end of jet engines are built to take a lot of punishment from all that hot exhaust spewing out. Put a bird into the front of the engine and you can do some real damage. But these older missiles home in on heat, and all of that is at the rear end of the engine. Since the 1970s, about 40 commercial aircraft have been brought down by SA-7s, killing over 500 people. Newer models of these missiles will go after any part of the aircraft it is closest to.

Russia no longer makes the SA-7, but does manufacture more modern versions, closer to the Stinger in capabilities. Many countries, with poor inventory control (like Egypt and Pakistan) still make versions of the SA-7. There are still tens of thousands of recently manufactured SA-7s out there, as well as many of the more modern versions (like the SA-18). These are the missiles you have to worry about. Many SA-7s have been found in Iraq and Afghanistan, and some SA-18s have shown up in Iraq.

Experience has shown that for every ten SA-7s fired, you are likely to bring down a smaller aircraft or helicopter. An SA-18 is about twice as effective. These missiles are designed to be used by untrained troops, and take some rough handling in the field. One thing that discourages their use, aside from the fact that most will not bring something down, is the fact that they do not have a long range (about four kilometers), and leave a distinctive smoke and flame trail that shows nearby troops or police where the missiles were fired from. These angles should not be underestimated, for they appear to be a major impediment to more widespread use of the missiles.

Most NATO helicopters and aircraft are equipped with missile detection and protection (lasers or flares) systems. Twenty-five year old Stingers, even if they were still in working order, would be no more effective than some of the more modern Russian type missiles on the black market.

 

 


Article Archive

Murphy's Law: Current 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 


X

ad
0
20

Help Keep Us Soaring

We need your help! Our subscription base has slowly been dwindling. We need your help in reversing that trend. We would like to add 20 new subscribers this month.

Each month we count on your subscriptions or contributions. You can support us in the following ways:

  1. Make sure you spread the word about us. Two ways to do that are to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
  2. Subscribe to our daily newsletter. We’ll send the news to your email box, and you don’t have to come to the site unless you want to read columns or see photos.
  3. You can contribute to the health of StrategyPage. A contribution is not a donation that you can deduct at tax time, but a form of crowdfunding. We store none of your information when you contribute..
Subscribe   Contribute   Close