Russian incursions Finland
 

Apparently Finland is getting pretty peeved at the number of serious incursions. I hear that their Hornets are doing QRA sorties almost daily. Don't know how true but I have this from Finnish sources. Anyone know what is going on?

There's more here:

The Aviationist » Finland steps up air defense following airspace incursions by Russian planes

and here

Finland?s Fighter Jets on Alert as Russia Violates Airspace - Bloomberg

and here

Finland responds to airspace incidents | Barentsobserver

I wonder who will get tired of Russian aircraft illegally entering foreign airspace first?

Surely flying your military aircraft in to foreign airspace without authorisation could be construed as an act of war?

How would the rules of engagement work? Is a Q-pilot allowed to fire upon a foreign military aircraft that has illegally entered the airspace of that country after a set amount of time in that airspace?

Does Putin have regular medical checks? He seems to have lost his marbles ... unless the reckons NATO and the US don't have the appetite or capability to do anything other than bark.

They have the capability but they don't have the will or the balls.

He has read them both very well. They just don't know it.

Show you mean it
 

Let the intruder get as far as he wants then shoot him down before a tx can be made!You will soon know their intentions.

It's a violation of International Law, but doesn't in itself give grounds for engagement. There has to be a threat to national security or committing a hostile act. I suspect the consequences of shooting down a Russian aircraft might outweigh the immediate sense of achievement.

It looks like someone is being deliberately provocative in order to flex their muscles. A response might be just the thing that Vlad's looking for.

Would airspace intruders be routinely 'locked-up' (I don't know the proper phrase), indicating to the intruder that he was a click away from a nasty shock? Or would that be construed as an act of war? I can't possibly see how it would, but this is 'the West'!

CG

A cockpit "fanfare" of alerts of illumination by either SAM or AAM would tend to focus the mind ... but at the same time advertises capabilities, frequencies, response times. Which could well be the object of the exercise ;)

Locking up is not really an indication of intent. Apart from anything else, it's the best way to get accurate information about a "target" (radar target) for a lot of older radars. But it does send a message. And MPN is absolutely right about capability.

Well Gary Powers flew into Russian (USSR) airspace and we know what happened to him. Then there was the 747 (Korean Airlines?) that genuinely strayed off course and was shot down. So my point is that Russia does not hesitate to react and thus would have absolutely no come back if one of her aircraft aircraft violated sovereign airspace once too often and paid the price.

But Russia will continue to do so until someone stands up to her.

You'd have thought that even our friends in the east would have worked out that annoying all your neighbours at the same time was not necessarily a great idea.

Unless the aim is to drive Finland into forging closer links with NATO this seems a pretty stupid thing to be doing.

No comeback? Maybe no morally, but do you really want to commit an illegal act on the basis that they did it to Gary 54 years ago?

You know more about RoE than me Courtney so I accept what you say, but would it actually be 'illegal' to shoot down a foreign military aircraft that had entered your sovereign airspace with perceived hostile intentions (as opposed to UK QRA interceptions of Bears etc that take place in international airspace)?

Just another attempted distraction by a crowd (not just Mr P. himself) who are rapidly running out of ideas.

This would have all the makings of a good stage show if it wasn't so potentially serious.

We are not amused.

Generally speaking, Mel, yes, it would be illegal. The RoE (based in international law, but not the same thing as international law) have to account for aircraft that are diverting with an emergency, unintentionally off course, defecting or even on an approved mission (possibly unknown to the mil in attendance). For the same reason (as an example) an aircraft dropping parachutists may not meet RoE as enemy soldiers as it could be a crew bailing out. Tricky things, RoE.

Time for a strongly-worded letter to the Times, Stanwell.

I've often thought (and nearly wrote my Staff College Paper on the subject) that in International diplomacy, Russia/USSR plays chess, while the US plays poker.

Discuss. ;)

What does the UK play? Solitaire?

Just a thought......
 

Did those darn Ruskies violate Finnish territorial airspace or just fly in their FIR unannounced ? Big difference between the two.

Gosh, shocking if they really did intrude territorial airspace. We would never do that sort of thing.

Would we ? :hmm:

CM, at the risk of being 'moded', just with itself.