Sparrow is an anti air missile. It's not a ground attack missile. It's warhead is too small to be effective against ground targets.
The Sparrow missile is an anti-air missile. It is not effective against anything other than missiles and aircraft, so we would not be firing Sparrows at Syria. It would not be employed against any surface targets.
What is your point, anon?
Don't know the best connection. Just knew it wasn't the Sparrow missile or any variant of it. (The RIM 7H an anon cited in another post hasn't been in production for over 20 years.)
Regardless of its capabilities….(it is radar guided and a smart missile) ….The Sparrow missile would not be used on any surface target. It is an anti air missile in ANY of its variants. It is only good for anti-air, NOT surface targets, so it would not have been used in Syria.
Also, there is no longer any variant of the RIM7 in the US inventory.
Apparently you are not familiar with missiles.
Missiles are developed for targets. Some take out other missiles or aircraft (anti-air missiles) and others take out surface targets (ground targets). The sparrow is designed for AIR targets. It's warhead is too small to be effective on ground/surface targets.
By the way, the actual missiles are not red. That is a pic of a prototype.
Where are you going with this? There appears to be a jump in direction.
Why would Russia use US missiles? Why wouldn't Russia use Russian (trusted) missiles?
Where are you getting Hellfire from?
Hellfire is a completely different missile system. Wasn't this a discussion about "sparrow red" in a post and deciphering that?
Drones take out ground targets.
Sparrow takes out air targets (missiles or aircraft.)
Um…yeah.
What is your point? Where are you going with this?
The point of this discussion was that an anon suggested sparrow red referred to a sparrow missile and Syria.
I pointed out that would not have been a sparrow missile.
So a discussion about precision is not relevant to the issue.