|
|
I wonder if Pravda is reporting the U-2 and WB-57 flights from UK?:suspect:
I also feel a bit sorry for the Bear mates, just when they'd got their piles under control... |
Possibly a combination of having the renewed $ resources to fund such activity (via global emand for gas/oil), chance of getting Russian polictial/military presence back onto the world stage and a bit of friendly willy-waving or perhaps it's all in anticipation of a the eventual meltdown in strategic oil/gas resources in the ME and the need for pre-emptive asset protection.
|
More pertinent is that, when the Russians withdrew from the CFE treaty, they could be considered within their rights, as the other European nations hadn't ratified it (*because the Russians had failed to adhere to it's conditions in Georgia etc).
But in restarting these flights the Russians are abrogating a nuclear arms treaty they signed with both the UK and USA. In effect, all previous nuclear treaties, such as START I, II etc, can be considered as no more than useless pieces of paper. Grauniad: ..........Last night analysts described Russia's move as a "grave development". They said Mr Putin appeared to have unilaterally abrogated an agreement with the US and Britain signed in 1991 not to engage in long-range nuclear bomber flights. Russia's then president, Boris Yeltsin, and the former Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, signed the agreement with the then US president George Bush senior. Under it all sides agreed to reduce their strategic rocket forces and to stop long-range bomber flights. "This is a very grave development that threatens the US with nuclear weapons. It means that Russian bombers will be ready to attack the US at a moment's notice just like in the cold war," said Pavel Felgenhauer, a leading Moscow-based defence analyst. Mr Felgenhauer said the bombers would be deployed in positions north of Britain over the North Pole, from where they would be able to fly across the Pacific or Atlantic to attack US targets. He also said there was a real risk that bombers equipped with nuclear warheads might crash. "These flights are very dangerous. The planes are old and the maintenance is patchy. Crews are not always as best prepared as in the cold war. A crash with nuclear weapons is very possible," he warned....... |
Are the Tu-95s still flying on to Cuba after the GIUK gap?
|
More to the point, did anyone get the door numbers? ;)
|
Ontariotech:
And, what happens to the Open Skies Treaty? Or is that going into the bin? STH |
Grauniad: ..........Last night analysts described Russia's move as a "grave development". They said Mr Putin appeared to have unilaterally abrogated an agreement with the US and Britain signed in 1991 not to engage in long-range nuclear bomber flights. Russia's then president, Boris Yeltsin, and the former Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, signed the agreement with the then US president George Bush senior. Under it all sides agreed to reduce their strategic rocket forces and to stop long-range bomber flights. "This is a very grave development that threatens the US with nuclear weapons. It means that Russian bombers will be ready to attack the US at a moment's notice just like in the cold war," said Pavel Felgenhauer, a leading Moscow-based defence analyst. Mr Felgenhauer said the bombers would be deployed in positions north of Britain over the North Pole, from where they would be able to fly across the Pacific or Atlantic to attack US targets. He also said there was a real risk that bombers equipped with nuclear warheads might crash. "These flights are very dangerous. The planes are old and the maintenance is patchy. Crews are not always as best prepared as in the cold war. A crash with nuclear weapons is very possible," he warned....... Or is that just a meeejia scare story? |
If a Russian bomber were armed with nukes and were to crash, and these facts became known to the rest of the world I would have thought the political fallout would be such that even the Kremlin would wish to avoid it!?
Take the risk - or not carry the weapons in times of relative peace? Still, what do I know about strategy/politics!! |
The duty operations officer at CAOC3 Col. Jan Ove Rygg said the following to a online newspaper over here today:
Rough translation ....a large number of aircraft has flown north of the Finmark coast, continuing south and west in international airspace. Some aircraft has pushed as far south as off the coast of Ireland. Other aircraft are exercising of the coast of Lofoten and Vesteraalen....... ..we can see that the force has elements of strategic bombers, tankers, fighter aircraft and airborne command centers quite like NATO AWACS aircraft. We can see that the force is showing the ability to perform complicated and expensive air operations. In dialog with the JAOC at the Joint Operational HQ at Stavanger we have had access to more QRA aircraft from Bodø than those usually available to NATO. The cooperation with JAOC, the 132 Airwing at Bodø and the CRCs at Soerreisa and Maageroe has been excellent.... http://vol.no/Nyhetsbilder/images/20...332_skvadr.jpg Picture taken early yesterday According to the paper Nordlys, no Russian aircraft was reported off the coast today saturday. They published this image: http://multimedia.api.no/www.siste.n...9_1395173m.jpg |
The "Peace Dividend" is over...standby for a 27% increase in defence spending to match the Russians (Yeah, right!). This article does make interesting reading though.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../wputin119.xml Top quotes: Intelligence sources say Washington and London have been taken aback by just how seriously Russia has viewed the perceived slight and admit that in concentrating so heavily on Iraq and al-Qaeda, they took their eyes off the ball A source close to the US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, who cut her teeth in government as a Kremlinologist in the Eighties, said that Middle East issues had diverted her attention from a more rigorous engagement with Moscow. "She wants to spend more time on Russia but that hasn't always been possible. She said to me that she regrets the fact that she has not done enough on what is, after all, her major area of expertise." The latest developments have exacerbated an already tense situation. Russia has responded angrily to US plans to station an anti-missile system in the Czech republic and Poland by threatening to site its own missiles in Kaliningrad to counter the threat. Earlier this summer Mr Putin upped the ante by threatening to target US strategic nuclear sites in Europe. Tensions with Britain over the murder of former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko have prompted tit-for-tat expulsions of diplomats, while on Friday the BBC's World Service was thrown off Russian FM radio. But perhaps the only positive that Britain can draw from Russia's military resurgence is that its new Typhoon fighter aircraft, purchased at about £20 billion to counter a Cold War threat, might finally have found a worthy adversary. Russian defence spending rose by 22 per cent and 27 per cent in the past two years and could be up as much as 30 per cent this year. In February, Sergei Ivanov, then defence secretary and now one of the front-runners to replace Mr Putin next year, announced a £100 billion programme of expenditure. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/grap...utin119big.gif I guess the PR08 will have to be re-done now then??? LJ |
Bear activity
As Mr P has decided to resume sightseeing flights I was just wondering what sort of altitude do they operate at and how do they keep clear of civvy traffic?
|
Bear activity As Mr P has decided to resume sightseeing flights I was just wondering what sort of altitude do they operate at and how do they keep clear of civvy traffic? Must be interesting when they get as far south as into the more densely used NAT routes off Ireland and Scotland. No transponder on the Russians, so no TCAS When they are within range of the radars of the AW chain here in Norway, the CRCs alerts the ACCs when they see the Russians in the general vicinity of civilian traffic. Actually, back in the bad old days when we had only 4nm territorial waters here, several approach units had Russian aircraft mixed into their radar pattern. (Inside class D TMA) Still, when they are that close, F-16s are in attendance! Otherwise it's happy go lucky I'm afraid. Still, NATO aircraft flying in controlled airspace (Outside 12nm) in similar fashion is not that uncommon either, but at least they use transponders more of the time. |
Did the person who did the graphic for the Torygraph bother to check whether the MiG-23 is still in use with Mr Putin's air force?:\
|
"Russian aircraft mixed into their radar pattern"
I should hope the controllers added the bear in to the traffic count for the day. Have to justify pay raises any way you can. |
Bears operate around FL360. When they came down the North Sea and/or around Ireland they'd just fly straight through the airways/air routes. I've had them miss airliners by a few hundred feet.
I can vividly recall one gaggle of 2 x Bear B, Q1 & Q2, Tansor, the Ramstein Battle Flight and the Danes heading down the North Sea towards a 747 on one of the upper air routes and calling the LATCC controller to let him know the Bears were at the same level on a collision course. "Who', he asked indignantly, "is controlling them?' "I'm not sure", I replied, "But try Moscow"...... |
In the 'bad old days' (deja vue?) the Badgers came down below 1000' off the Firth of Forth. I don't think they were speaking to 'Scottish' or Edinburgh approach..
|
Typhoons intercept Bears (Telegraph)
|
M609, I am just back from Norway and saddened to hear about the norwegian socialist party preventing the military from operating with a free hand in Afghanistan. I spent some time in Norway on detachment and always rated the Norwegians highly. I think the socialists are doing real harm to the international perception of the Norwegian contribution to NATO. Presumably they are happy to accept the support of NATO for the northern flank. Wondered what you think. Also hope that someone is hitting them where it hurts politically. Afg is on a knife edge just now.
|
It looks like Canada will not be at the sharp end in Afghanistan post 2009. Harper talked to Bush yesterday at the Three Fiascos summit and the Americans have been made aware (summit speak, obviously nothing the US didn't already know) that parliamentary approval for another extension is unlikely to be forthcoming, with the New Democrats wanting to talk to the Taliban and pull all troops out immediately and the BQ and the Liberals (the latter having committed the CF to Kandahar) wanting them out in 2009.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:23. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.