TU-95 Intercept
Rolling shutter.
Some cameras don't address all the pixels at once, reading them out sequentially, usually top to bottom. This is most clearly visible on things like in webcams, cellphones, stills cameras that also shoot video, and the like, but also some higher end and broadcast cameras to a lesser extent.
This is a particularly lovely diagrammatic demonstration of why it happens:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17PSgsRlO9Q
Many broadcast and other higher-end cameras don't do it quite as badly as that, but things like cellphones often do, especially at high shutter speeds (where fast moving objects aren't blurred, which can mask the effect). It can cause other problems with brief or fast-moving phenomena, such as "flash banding" caused by muzzle flashes from weapons fire or xenon strobes that are visible for only part of the frame, as here, with photographic flashguns.
Objects moving horizontally can end up looking like this:
P
Some cameras don't address all the pixels at once, reading them out sequentially, usually top to bottom. This is most clearly visible on things like in webcams, cellphones, stills cameras that also shoot video, and the like, but also some higher end and broadcast cameras to a lesser extent.
This is a particularly lovely diagrammatic demonstration of why it happens:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17PSgsRlO9Q
Many broadcast and other higher-end cameras don't do it quite as badly as that, but things like cellphones often do, especially at high shutter speeds (where fast moving objects aren't blurred, which can mask the effect). It can cause other problems with brief or fast-moving phenomena, such as "flash banding" caused by muzzle flashes from weapons fire or xenon strobes that are visible for only part of the frame, as here, with photographic flashguns.
Objects moving horizontally can end up looking like this:
P
Have you forgotten Bluff Cove et al so soon?
Smokescreen or a probe?
From Air Vice Marshal Dennis Allison:
and from Dr Alexander Yakovenko, Ambassador of the Russian Federation:
Is the real problem just bad journalism?
. . . the Defence Secretary’s recent statements about interception of Russian bombers and “a clear and present danger” to the Baltic states are questionable.
First, why draw attention to the activity of Russian aircraft in international airspace around the United Kingdom (and over the Baltic Sea) when such flights have been going on without incident for over 40 years?
Secondly, the two Baltic States with a significant Russian-speaking population are protected by Nato. President Vladimir Putin will not start the Third World War unless the leaders of these two states follow the example of the Ukrainian president and decide to subdue their Russian-speaking subjects with artillery, tanks and aircraft.
First, why draw attention to the activity of Russian aircraft in international airspace around the United Kingdom (and over the Baltic Sea) when such flights have been going on without incident for over 40 years?
Secondly, the two Baltic States with a significant Russian-speaking population are protected by Nato. President Vladimir Putin will not start the Third World War unless the leaders of these two states follow the example of the Ukrainian president and decide to subdue their Russian-speaking subjects with artillery, tanks and aircraft.
. . . Russian planes do regularly fly to remote geographical areas and will continue to do so. This is required for personnel training and to verify aircraft capabilities. All flights are carried out in strict accordance with international regulations.
Flights of Russian military aircraft are often accompanied by jets from Nato countries and their partners. This is ordinary practice, and the level of public attention on the latest incidents in the vicinity of British airspace is overblown.
Military activity by Nato aircraft at Russian borders is far more intense, having doubled since early 2014 and reaching 3,000 sorties that year.
By way of comparison, Russian reconnaissance aircraft carried out just over 200 sorties over the Baltic Sea area from March to December 2014, compared to 125 over the same period in 2013.
The growing disparity between the actual situation and the official rhetoric of some Western leaders is not helpful for restoring trust, which is probably the main victim of the current crisis in relations between Russia and the West.
Flights of Russian military aircraft are often accompanied by jets from Nato countries and their partners. This is ordinary practice, and the level of public attention on the latest incidents in the vicinity of British airspace is overblown.
Military activity by Nato aircraft at Russian borders is far more intense, having doubled since early 2014 and reaching 3,000 sorties that year.
By way of comparison, Russian reconnaissance aircraft carried out just over 200 sorties over the Baltic Sea area from March to December 2014, compared to 125 over the same period in 2013.
The growing disparity between the actual situation and the official rhetoric of some Western leaders is not helpful for restoring trust, which is probably the main victim of the current crisis in relations between Russia and the West.
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 26th Feb 2015 at 18:15. Reason: mixed up quotes
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Swimmin' with bowlegged women
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Norway to restructure military in response to Russian 'aggression' | World news | The Guardian
The Norwegians have also observed that there have been bigger and more diverse groups of Russian planes flying by, including more heavy bombers, like the Tu-95 ‘Bear’, the Tu-160 ‘Blackjack, and the Tu-22 ‘Backfire’. On occasion those bombers have extended their training runs along the western coast of Norway and over then either the Atlantic or the North Sea.
The woman in Cornwall that claims she saw a Tu-95 at low level on the 18th February is still not happy! 
Did Russian bombers fly over the Plymouth area? | Plymouth Herald
It gets worse! Have a look at the comments section? Another witness has popped up. This time the Bear was being escorted by two Typhoons south of Newquay Golf Club!
The claims of these people were outside of the actual QRA scramble and intercept. Classic case of people misidentifying the mil traffic in the region and jumping to the wrong conclusions after the Tu-95 news broke.
But Sue, 45, of Bodmin, Cornwall, has now expressed her anger at David Cameron's denial that the aircraft ever flew over British soil and is adamant about what she saw. She said: "I am 100 per cent sure of what it was and I would stake my life on it. "I live in Cornwall and we see a lot of military aircraft around. But this was like nothing I had seen before. "It is bizarre to hear the government publicly denying something that I witnessed with my very own eyes. "I know David Cameron is lying. I saw the Russian bombers not only on UK airspace - but flying in-land. "They were flying really low through the St Mawgan valley and around Cornwall. I am angry the government is denying this. I saw the damn things myself.
"I am not an imaginative person in that way. I know what I saw - and I saw the Russian bombers flying over UK soil." Sue said she had her driving lesson between 12.30 and 2pm and saw it on several occasions. She said: "They were very distinctive. It was clearly not a commercial aeroplane or any kind of military aircraft we have seen around here before. "But this morning when we saw it on the news both Claire (driving instructor) and myself instantly recognised it. "The valley is a couple of miles inland at least. Considering UK airspace is 20 miles out to sea I have no doubt about what I am saying." Sue's driving instructor Claire Brazil, from St Austell, Cornwall, said: "I am not an expert but they did look out of the ordinary for Cornish airspace. We leant up to have a look, they were definitely inland, not over the coast."
"I am not an imaginative person in that way. I know what I saw - and I saw the Russian bombers flying over UK soil." Sue said she had her driving lesson between 12.30 and 2pm and saw it on several occasions. She said: "They were very distinctive. It was clearly not a commercial aeroplane or any kind of military aircraft we have seen around here before. "But this morning when we saw it on the news both Claire (driving instructor) and myself instantly recognised it. "The valley is a couple of miles inland at least. Considering UK airspace is 20 miles out to sea I have no doubt about what I am saying." Sue's driving instructor Claire Brazil, from St Austell, Cornwall, said: "I am not an expert but they did look out of the ordinary for Cornish airspace. We leant up to have a look, they were definitely inland, not over the coast."
It gets worse! Have a look at the comments section? Another witness has popped up. This time the Bear was being escorted by two Typhoons south of Newquay Golf Club!
Chipgolfer | February 20 2015, 8:11PM
Cameron is lying- the 'bear' definitely flew over Cornwall, not at low level though as reported. Myself and approx 50 others witnessed an incredibly loud aircraft being so closely escorted by two jets that at first we thought it was a refuelling exercise. We were at Newquay Golf Club at approx 10.50am when a thunderous roar started. Not uncommon as fairly close to what was RAF St. Mawgan but on looking up and to the south, we saw the silver jet at quite a height( I'd say around 15000-18000 feet with two typhoons literally within touching distance.
Cameron is lying- the 'bear' definitely flew over Cornwall, not at low level though as reported. Myself and approx 50 others witnessed an incredibly loud aircraft being so closely escorted by two jets that at first we thought it was a refuelling exercise. We were at Newquay Golf Club at approx 10.50am when a thunderous roar started. Not uncommon as fairly close to what was RAF St. Mawgan but on looking up and to the south, we saw the silver jet at quite a height( I'd say around 15000-18000 feet with two typhoons literally within touching distance.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TU 95 in British Airspace
The claims of these people were outside of the actual QRA scramble and intercept. Classic case of people misidentifying the mil traffic in the region and jumping to the wrong conclusions after the Tu-95 news broke.
Using terms like "British Airspace" is unhelpful.
Have the Bears flown within the UK FIR? Certainly, there is nothing to stop them doing so, and they have been doing that for 40+ years.
Have they penetrated UK Territorial Airspace? Not as far as we know, unless you know something different.
Have the Bears flown within the UK FIR? Certainly, there is nothing to stop them doing so, and they have been doing that for 40+ years.
Have they penetrated UK Territorial Airspace? Not as far as we know, unless you know something different.
Dikastes,
That would have resulted in a diplomatic incident and the Russian Ambassador would certainly have been summoned.
RAF jets scrambled after Russian bombers spotted off coast of Cornwall - Home News - UK - The Independent
That would have resulted in a diplomatic incident and the Russian Ambassador would certainly have been summoned.
RAF jets were scrambled to escort Russian bombers spotted off the coast of Cornwall, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has confirmed.
The two Russian bear bombers were flying in international airspace close to the UK on Wednesday afternoon, an MoD spokesman said.
Typhoon jets from RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire escorted the Russian aircraft out of the UK "area of interest". They did not cross into British sovereign airspace ....
"RAF Quick Reaction Alert Typhoon fighter aircraft were launched yesterday after Russian aircraft were identified flying close to UK airspace," an MoD spokesman said.
"The Russian planes were escorted by the RAF until they were out of the UK area of interest. At no time did the Russian military aircraft cross into UK sovereign airspace."
The two Russian bear bombers were flying in international airspace close to the UK on Wednesday afternoon, an MoD spokesman said.
Typhoon jets from RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire escorted the Russian aircraft out of the UK "area of interest". They did not cross into British sovereign airspace ....
"RAF Quick Reaction Alert Typhoon fighter aircraft were launched yesterday after Russian aircraft were identified flying close to UK airspace," an MoD spokesman said.
"The Russian planes were escorted by the RAF until they were out of the UK area of interest. At no time did the Russian military aircraft cross into UK sovereign airspace."
The following image taken 3rd March 2015 apparently at Engels. Nice new air launched cruise missile racks!
Large image at following Russian website link.
? russianplanes.net ? ???? ???????
From
? russianplanes.net ? ???? ???????
Large image at following Russian website link.
? russianplanes.net ? ???? ???????
From
? russianplanes.net ? ???? ???????
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Just over the road from Bicester airfield
Age: 80
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
Cruise missile racks ?
The cruise missile racks look superimposed on to the photo to me, just a thought, they don't look uniformly spaced either or do I need new glasses ???? PH.
Three different levels of JPEG compression in that image. So bits have been added. Clever attempt to hide
it by making it look like a screen shot. Close, but no cigar.
it by making it look like a screen shot. Close, but no cigar.
Zetec2,
They do look strange, but is that not due to the light and shape? Racks loaded. Image from a few years ago.
They do look strange, but is that not due to the light and shape? Racks loaded. Image from a few years ago.
Last edited by TEEEJ; 5th Mar 2015 at 00:04. Reason: Additional images added
FIR and sovereign ('national') air space
I'm no expert in this area at all but there a number of countries that claim, unilaterally, that their FIR equates to sovereign airspace. This is based on the proximate International law relating to Continental Shelves and the upwards projection thereof.
Accordingly, the two countries that I am referring to (and anyone in NATO can probably work out which two) frequently have armed stand-offs when military aircraft from their neighbours get airborne and nudge the FIR boundaries. It has led to accidents in the past, especially when the aircraft are supporting surface units exercising their right of innocent passage through particular straits. I foolishly mentioned in discussion with the locals that an FIR boundary wasn't a national boundary; the resultant discussion was rather unpleasant and eventually turned into an anti 'English' rant based on mid 19th century annotations on Admiralty Charts, which have been used to justify each other's national positions.
I walked away, shaking my head and murmuring 'Hmmm, that went well, then...'
Accordingly, the two countries that I am referring to (and anyone in NATO can probably work out which two) frequently have armed stand-offs when military aircraft from their neighbours get airborne and nudge the FIR boundaries. It has led to accidents in the past, especially when the aircraft are supporting surface units exercising their right of innocent passage through particular straits. I foolishly mentioned in discussion with the locals that an FIR boundary wasn't a national boundary; the resultant discussion was rather unpleasant and eventually turned into an anti 'English' rant based on mid 19th century annotations on Admiralty Charts, which have been used to justify each other's national positions.
I walked away, shaking my head and murmuring 'Hmmm, that went well, then...'
I worked with those two countries as well, somewhere in NATO's Southern Region.