Baltic 'incident'

[air pig]

If this is true then it must have been a bit of a tense time.

Russia jets make 'simulated attack' on US warship in 'aggressive' Baltic incident (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/13/russia-jets-make-simulated-attack-passes-of-us-warship-in-most-a/)

also just been on SkyNews as well.

[Background Noise]

Didn't we used to do the same to them?

And the picture is an SU-25, not a 24.

[BA Bluntie]

Is this perhaps the same incident that was reported in April 2014 in the Black Sea and involving DG75??

The picture in the article is actually of a French La Fayette FFG so is the whole story just regurgitation ??

Bluntie

[hoss183]

Nope it appears to be new news
Russian warplanes 'aggressively' pass US missile destroyer - BBC News (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36039703)

[air pig]

Hoss 183,

This from a UK newspaper.

Russia jets make 'simulated attack' on US warship in 'aggressive' Baltic incident (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/13/russia-jets-make-simulated-attack-passes-of-us-warship-in-most-a/)

[Timelord]

We did indeed do it to them regularly in the heyday of the Buccaneer force and they didn't seem to object too much. Sometimes they locked us up with weapons systems and then we usually took the hint. Can't really complain about this.

[MSOCS]

And the picture is an SU-25, not a 24.

Looks like a SU-24 to me....not a Frogfoot by any stretch.

I don't think the crew look tense at all. Clearly, unarmed (relatively) ac who were not coming at the ship at the sort of attack speeds you'd expect.

Looks like a bit of a wazzex to me. Ruffle a few feathers then the Russian agencies will monitor the reactions and comms traffic, plus the wider public reaction. Ascertain the ROE. "How far can we push them"

They wouldn't have done it to Turkey as they know how those react already!

[Background Noise]

Looks like a SU-24 to me....not a Frogfoot by any stretch.

Yup, it is now, but very definitely a Frogfoot earlier.

I seem to remember doing it from Gib, and there being a helicopter flight with hi-res videos (in its day) taking close up shots of passing ships. And it doesn't look much like a simulated attack, just a beat up.

[MSOCS]

Sorry Background Noise. I guess someone as equally astute as your good self pointed out their glaring error and they changed the picture.

[Background Noise]

Still appears in a google search although the site has been updated. I wouldn't think a frogfoot wazzex would be as impressive as a Fencer though!

Just to show I'm not going doolally:

http://i64.tinypic.com/9rofif.jpg

[BEagle]

Nevertheless, it's rather more restrained than the behaviour of a certain idiot 35 Sqn Vulcan captain who decided to self-authorise to 'Locate and identify enemy shipping' back in the late '70s, when off to take some photos of a Russian warship (I think it was a Krivak)....

His singlehanded declaration of war against the Sovietski Soyuz was solved by ripping up the original auth sheets, re-writing them after he landed, plus a no coffee, no biscuits debrief with the grown-ups after they'd seen the overflight photos....:eek:

[PersonFromPorlock]

Meh. Back in the day, this was good clean fun and everybody played.

[tartare]

So would said US ship have painted incoming Ivan fast movers with radar?
Or would that have been viewed as even further provocation?
Surely if even you're exercising, and a `hostile' fast jet approaches at high speed, low level, you'd get a little twitchy?

[retrosgone]

The problem with the "beat-up" is that there are set rules governing number of passes, distance and minimum altitudes for these situations. As far as I know, they were agreed 40 years ago and haven't changed since. In the case of this event, you can clearly see that those stand-off minima and direction of approach were completely ignored, and neither were the Russians monitoring Guard as they are obliged to do.

As a former MPA pilot, used to gathering int on non NATO warships on a daily basis, you would be in for a proper bollocking if you decided to carry out several passes of that nature. I imagine the Russian crews have probably been giving their boss a darned good listening to back at base, while the official line from the Kremlin remains that it was all perfectly legal.

[Background Noise]

How do we know they were not monitoring guard?

[MSOCS]

I imagine the Russian crews have probably been giving their boss a darned good listening to back at base, while the official line from the Kremlin remains that it was all perfectly legal.

...and precisely as directed by Komrade Putin!

[A_Van]

Now imagine a Russian destroyer 40 miles of Newport or San Diego, "full of" cruise missiles. US airplanes would be permanently circling around it like flies and threatening it much harder than those Su-24s with no weapons, and that would be understandable.


So, what's the buzz? Stuff for scared housewives to talk about.....

[MSOCS]

and threatening it much harder than those Su-24s with no weapons, and that would be understandable.

Clearly your opinion Komrade A_Van. Speculation and personal prediction without evidence is a fallacy of argument. "Well, you'd do it, I'm sure of it!", is no basis to justify anything.

The truth of the matter is, as always, that our media and politicians will make of it what they like in order to justify whatever narrative they wish to pursue. It was belligerent provocation and many of us military types are wryly smiling because we all know it was a harmless beat up.

That said, if they had been gunned down, I'd be the first to say 'serves them right!' It would certainly have sent a stark message and baselined the rules of play up in the Baltic, whatever they seem to be....

[Pontius Navigator]

Tartare, the USN locked anything up. One sortie we found what looked like a group; I switched the radar to sector scan and then fiddled it to provide a near lock up signal.

They had been monitoring but immediately we locked they lit us up good and proper.

Different aircraft, one of our crews flew on top a Krivak and took some good shots down the funnel; rather more than the permitted 3 passes.

[Lonewolf_50]

Meh. Back in the day, this was good clean fun and everybody played. Yeah, playing tag was part of the fun of being deployed. Why have the world's spokesmen turned into so many wet blankets?

[1771 DELETE]

400 foot, 1/4 mile, 3 passes

[PersonFromPorlock]

I may be being a bit Pollyanna-ish, but I don't look for much aggression from Putin outside of a little feel-good rah-rah stuff for the Russian public - like buzzing the US Navy. The thought of China eyeing Siberia is bound to depress his willingness to get too involved in hostilities elsewhere.

Russia's current population is only 143.5 million, a far cry from the old Soviet Union's. It's still a bear, but no longer a grizzly.

[Wageslave]

It's still a bear, but no longer a grizzly.

Right. A bear that's has several of its fingers and toes lopped off and is bitterly, festering sore about it's publicly reduced stature.
The critical thing is this wounded, vengeful cripple retains its teeth but not all its former sanity or sound judgement.

I'd call it a very dangerous bear indeed while that testosterone-challenged thug in the Kremlin remains in charge.

[HAS59]

Hmm, all that ‘400 foot, 1/4 mile, 3 passes’ stuff and the oddly named ‘Run of Three’ was an agreement between some of NATO and the Navy of the Soviet Union to avoid unnecessary hassle to the ships of both navies.
It was only a ‘rule’ in 18 Group, no one else bothered, 1 Group, 38 Group, RAFG etc had never heard of it and we just did what we liked, within reason. The Russians certainly never stuck to it, ‘lifting a wing to clear a mast’ happened a lot back then.
As for the Kriegsmarine F-104 guys in the Baltic – anything was fair game for a high speed pass. The Danish Draakens were just as robust and they got close enough for some very good photos.
This is just another video straight to internet ‘oh look at that!’ moment.

[finfly1]

The ship, by some reports, was 70 miles from Russia. I am somewhat reluctant to type "top speed of Russian fighter jets" into a popular search engine, but my guess is that it is a very few minutes flying time from the shoreline to the US warship.

The US is now also flying the flag in the China Sea, and one might expect that things there might get a little more tense than this episode if they come that close to mainland China.

Nobody in the media reports I saw questioned why the sailors were on deck with their cell phone cameras rather than at General Quarters...

[tartare]

Yes - good point finfly1.
Not too much panic in evidence...

[DroneDog]

http://www.arrse.co.uk/community/attachments/america-jpg.241423/

[John Eacott]

Hmm, all that ‘400 foot, 1/4 mile, 3 passes’ stuff and the oddly named ‘Run of Three’ was an agreement between some of NATO and the Navy of the Soviet Union to avoid unnecessary hassle to the ships of both navies.
It was only a ‘rule’ in 18 Group, no one else bothered, 1 Group, 38 Group, RAFG etc had never heard of it and we just did what we liked, within reason. The Russians certainly never stuck to it, ‘lifting a wing to clear a mast’ happened a lot back then.
As for the Kriegsmarine F-104 guys in the Baltic – anything was fair game for a high speed pass. The Danish Draakens were just as robust and they got close enough for some very good photos.
This is just another video straight to internet ‘oh look at that!’ moment.

All good crab stuff, but off the carriers we'd get nosebleeds if we had to climb to 400ft.

Good old terminology was a 'lowsee' and 50' would be considered average. I have some old photos somewhere of the usual sight of a couple of Buccs passing at my level whilst in a 40' hover whilst on CASEX.

[Pontius Navigator]

400 feet/quarter mile was as much for best camera angle. IIRC crossing stern or bow was 600 feet.

Then there was the SAR case where an MPA orbiting a ship and flying off meant follow me. Fly too many passes and you might have them following you.

Game wise I recall trying to make the 3 passes on the Shetland Tug. After the first pass down the starboard side we set up for the next pass, she turned and we got the starboard side again. This went on for a good 30 minutes as we never got the 2nd and 3rd passes :)

We could see the captain on the bridge, white lumpy shirt, as she grinned at us.

[scr1]

WOW DroneDog That is some ship managed to get across Newfoundland,the UK and Denmark:E:E:E

[Heathrow Harry]

there's a secret canal...........

[GlobalNav]

Dronedog neglected to plot everything: the locations of Russian naval vessels in the western Atlantic and eastern Pacific, the many friends of the USA also bordering on the Baltic.... nor mark the international waters in which the freedom of navigation is to be assured, and regularly exercised by US naval vessels and military aircraft as well.

Nice penmanship though.

[A_Van]

GlobalNav,


Would be interesting to learn about "Russian naval vessels in the western Atlantic" as Russia has no naval bases in that part of the world. Again, have you seen any of them 40 miles off Virginia Beach (the distance this destroyer approached the Russian military base)?

If you meant subs, then this is irrelevant since they can't be challenged in that way and so far Pentagon did not find this issue as critical:

Russian subs near US coast pose no threat: Pentagon | Alternet (http://www.alternet.org/rss/breaking_news/78858/russian_subs_near_us_coast_pose_no_threat%3A_pentagon)

[GlobalNav]

A_Van

I didn't mean to imply that Russian subs pose a threat or not. I don't personally patrol the ocean off the coast of Virgina Beach, and the US Navy does not report that information to me, but Russian naval vessels are not unknown near many of the US Naval ports, particularly those hosting the submarine forces. And, they are free to be there in international waters, and I doubt they get such hostile treatment there from the US Navy, either. I likewise have no doubt they are closely watched.

I agree though, it would be interesting to know more about the Russian naval activity.

I gathered that DroneDog's graphic was intended to imply that the US Navy has no justifiable business in the Baltic, and I respectfully disagree. We have allies there, we have an interest in exercising the rights of international passage and by the way pose absolutely no threat to the Russians, militarily or otherwise, while doing so.

I'll let the Navy speak to the hazards posed by Russian air activity in such close proximity to a moving naval vessel. But the US naval presence was peaceful, nonthreatening, legal, routine and totally safe. Whatever the Russian aircraft were doing there and why, they did increase the level of hazard and raise the tension for no good reason.

[DroneDog]

I wish I could take credit for the sketch but I lifted it off the internet, its circulating widely.
Can you imagine the US response or even the UK if the situation was reversed.

[Pontius Navigator]

Globalnav, no secret as the Soviets knew, but once we (the RN) marked a Soviet AGI with a replenishment oiler, Olwen made a much better marker than a frigate.

[A_Van]

GlobalNav,


On the whole I respectfully agree with what you wrote in the latter post. See no reason to play such childish tricks, especially now when the tension raised. Instead, we all have to try to cool the situation down. But again, if the US knew that Russia used to overreact (at least as the States take it) like it happended before in Black Sea, why to challenge/tease them? Maybe indeed the ship was making a fully peaceful and routine tour around the Baltic, but it by definition carries plenty of weapons, e.g. incomparable with any bomber (that indeed may fly empty).


And still the point is unanswered about a hypothetically reversed situation...

[GlobalNav]

A_Van

The air activity was rather childish and unprofessional and I have no evidence one way or the other about "reversed situations". I rather suspect there have been some, though, over the years based on comments from others here with apparently more direct experience.

I don't think the US naval activity in the Baltic or in the Black Sea is "teasing". It is legal exercise of international navigation rights. Exercise which, in my opinion, by its routine nature actually reduces the novelty and tension that rare events might engender.

I don't think the hazard comes merely from the weapons carried. I'm sure the US ship was very well-armed and ready for many kinds of contingencies. But it wasn't as threatening and possibly careless as a needlessly close pass by a fast jet.

[TEEEJ]

A_Van,

In recent years the Russian Navy intelligence collection vessels have been operating off the east coast of the US (Florida and Georgia). During 2012 one AGI was granted safe harbour due to weather.

Meanwhile, the officials also said that a Russian electronic intelligence-gathering vessel was granted safe harbor in the commercial port of Jacksonville, Fla., within listening range of Kings Bay.

The Russian AGI ship, or Auxiliary-General Intelligence, was allowed to stay in the port to avoid the superstorm that battered the U.S. East Coast last week. A Jacksonville Port Authority spokeswoman had no immediate comment on the Russian AGI at the port.

Russian attack sub detected near East Coast (http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russian-subs-skirt-coast/)

The intelligence collection ship, Viktor Leonov, has been closely watched by U.S. Navy ships and aircraft for the past several days near Jacksonville, Fla., close to the Naval Submarine Base at Kings Bay, Ga. The ship also conducted operations there in April.....

This week, the Leonov was spotted anchored about 22 miles off the Florida coast, southeast of Kings Bay.

Russian Intel Ship Spying on US Missile Submarines - Washington Free Beacon (http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russian-intel-ship-spying-on-us-missile-submarines/)

Pentagon acknowledges reports of Russian ship off Georgia coast (http://legacy.firstcoastnews.com/story/news/local/military/2015/09/03/pentagon-russua/71669450/)

[Pontius Navigator]

I note that a Helix circled the ship 7 times. On one Op a P3 sat on the Kiev for a number of hours calling in activity on deck. We sat about 80 miles off monitoring her flight ops.

Eventually they were sufficiently pee'd off that they sent a Forger to push us away. We then had an F4 sent out to cover us.

All SOP.

[Heathrow Harry]

I really can't understand the fuss about this - it's what people do when there isn't a war on - all sides

[TheWestCoast]

I'm a little surprised Donald Trump hasn't made some statement about how the Russians would have been shot down if he were President.

[Kubarque]

John Kerry has said it for Trump

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-could-shot-down-russian-jet-buzzed-destroyer-101637773.html

Within US rules of engagement to have shot these boys down. Vincennes rules?

[BEagle]

What a warmongering idiot 'Lurch' Kerry is....

US isn't going to be intimidated on the high seas? Well, Mr World Policeman, suggest you ***k off out of the Baltic and go home.

I've had first hand experience of intimidating RT calls from 'Red Crown' whilst transiting in controlled airspace between Saudi Arabia and Egypt. "Clear to proceed", indeed....

The Vincennes incident was nothing short of criminal. Capt Rogers should have been court martialled for his reckless actions; instead the incident has never been fully explained and Rogers was actually decorated....

[West Coast]

Why should they F off Beag's? Because you say so?

[BEagle]

No, because of the sort of utterances made by John 'Lurch' Kerry....

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a341/nw969/costume-lurch-addams_zpscoessba0.jpg (http://s14.photobucket.com/user/nw969/media/costume-lurch-addams_zpscoessba0.jpg.html)

If his comments represent US policy, then it simply isn't safe for the USN to poke its nose into the Baltic.

[ORAC]

Russian Jet Threatens U.S. Recon Aircraft (http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russian-jet-threatened-u-s-recon-aircraft/)

A Russian fighter jet flew dangerously close to a U.S. RC-135 reconnaissance aircraft on Thursday in the latest military provocation by Moscow over the Baltic Sea, the U.S. European Command said Saturday.

“On April 14, a U.S. Air Force RC-135 aircraft flying a routine route in international airspace over the Baltic Sea was intercepted by a Russian Su-27 in an unsafe and unprofessional manner,” said Navy Capt. Danny Hernandez. “This intercept comes shortly after the unsafe Russian encounters with USS Donald Cook,” he added. “There have been repeated incidents over the last year where Russian military aircraft have come close enough to other air and sea traffic to raise serious safety concerns, and we are very concerned with any such behavior.”

Hernandez said the U.S. aircraft, a militarized Boeing 707 jet, was operating in international airspace “and at no time crossed into Russian territory.” “This unsafe and unprofessional air intercept has the potential to cause serious harm and injury to all aircrews involved,” he said. “More importantly, the unsafe and unprofessional actions of a single pilot have the potential to unnecessarily escalate tensions between countries.”

According to Hernandez, the Su-27 carried out “erratic and aggressive maneuvers” by approaching the RC-135 at a high rate of speed from the side.The Russian jet “then proceeded to perform an aggressive maneuver that posed a threat to the safety of the U.S. aircrew in the RC-135U,” the spokesman said.“More specifically, the SU-27 closed within 50 feet of the wing-tip of the RC-135 and conducted a barrel roll starting from the left side of the aircraft, going over the top of the aircraft and ended up to the right of the aircraft,” he said............

[Basil]

I've had first hand experience of intimidating RT calls
UW: "Aircraft approaching US warship, identify yourself!"
Bas: "TriStar . . . at etc etc. Could it be us?"
UW: "Ah, we thing it's a helicopter."

[Pontius Navigator]

We know the US carries a big stick, why do they no longer speak softly?

[glad rag]

Why should they F off Beag's? Because you say so?
So what's your take on the Vincennes incident then?

Hint. Don't call it an accident.

[West Coast]

My take?

A major cock up. No less, no more. The command element of the ship should have been held accountable and USN procedures examined in depth.

The shootdown has nothing to do with beagle's anti US rant however. Don't find ways to connect the dots between a statement from Kerry now, Beagle's often trotted out, decades old whine ago about being challenged and the suggestion that freedom of navigation rights should be stuffed and the ship should return to US waters. You'll be as crazy as him if you do.

[finfly1]

"flying a routine route in international airspace" sounds a bit like gummintspeak to me.

How close to the 'edge' of this international airspace were they?

Did they "accidentally" push it a bit and cut a corner?

Was the plane in fact spying on Russia?

Did we learn nothing from the incident in April 2001 when China captured one and her crew intact?

etc

[Focks 2]

I'm sure the Russians 'train to fight' like everyone else. I would think that not only do they have the right to run their manoeuvrers against the ship, but are in fact duty bound to get their training value from the opportunity presented. If they didn't, they would be incompetent surely? A bit of an airshow at the end of the sortie enjoyed by all by the looks of it. Can't be much fun looking at empty blue horizons day after day.

Apparently, John Kerry has said that "under the rules of engagement that could have been a shoot-down..."

So erm, just what are the ROE in international waters these days?

Well, as the US militarily encircles Russia and China (https://consortiumnews.com/2016/03/22/start-of-a-new-world-war) in preparation for regime change in those countries, we can expect more so called 'Russian aggression' and 'unsafe' operations. I suppose slaughtering millions of innocent lives around the world over the last century can be considered safe?

MSOCS, you must be bloody joking?? (https://consortiumnews.com/2016/04/09/why-were-never-told-why-were-attacked)

Yes I will rant and post links. As should everyone else. I am not anti-American, but I am anti-American regime. Washington will end up destroying this world.

[Basil]

I'm sure the Russians 'train to fight' like everyone else. I would think that not only do they have the right to run their manoeuvrers against the ship
I'd guess that the manoeuvre was not flown as an attack profile because the sensible response would have been to defend the ship.

I'm sure all those chaps and chapesses on both sides know what they're doing ;)

[West Coast]

I'm sure the Russians 'train to fight' like everyone else. I would think that not only do they have the right to run their manoeuvrers against the ship, but are in fact duty bound to get their training value from the opportunity presented. If they didn't, they would be incompetent surely? A bit of an airshow at the end of the sortie enjoyed by all by the looks of it. Can't be much fun looking at empty blue horizons day after day.

If duty bound as you suggest to train as you fight (I don't disagree) then I doubt the 135 crew would ever have seen the Russian aircraft. In war they'd have dispatched the aircraft quickly, not taking time to increase their own risk.


Just the same for a run in at a ship with extensive AD capabilities.

[MSOCS]

Well, Secretary Kerry clearly hadn't canvassed the opinion or mood of the ship's crew before jumping up and down with indignation. Most of those sailors were smiling and -as has already been pointed out - filming it with their iPhones etc.

Raid inbound; hands to battle stations; brace for impact?!! Nope, more like hands to Facebook.

There's a lot of context missing in both of these occurrences.

[Navaleye]

I can only talk about the Donald Cook incident. Standard practice would the the standard "Unknown aircraft bearing xyx etc etc" warning. Second pass both 909s locked on. These were so poweful they could set offf the pyros in the cockpit at over a mile. Third pass same as above with 2 white birds on the rails.

[triskele]

Thanks Basil:
UW: "Aircraft approaching US warship, identify yourself!"
Bas: "TriStar . . . at etc etc. Could it be us?"
UW: "Ah, we thing it's a helicopter."

Warm up to Gulf 1, heard on the open net...'British military helo...circling 1 nautical mile astern...please do not repeat that last manoevre..'

[Boy_From_Brazil]

I wonder if the result would have been the same if the ship was using an autonomous weapon system.

[Heathrow Harry]

I think you mean AUTOMATIC.....................

[sitigeltfel]

Nope, autonomous...

https://www.law.upenn.edu/institutes/cerl/conferences/ethicsofweapons/

[Boy_From_Brazil]

HH,

No, I meant Autonomous Weapon System (AWS). A lot more complex than say, an automatic rifle!

http://www.reachingcriticalwill.org/resources/fact-sheets/critical-issues/7972-fully-autonomous-weapons

Suggest you check before you contradict.