Non Squawking Russian Bomber Fly Around UK Airspace..
 

Sounds hairy...Transponders turned off.

Russian ambassador summoned to explain bombers over English channel | World news | The Guardian

Next time (and there will be a next time) force it to land in the UK and strip it to it's stringers for intel.

What's the big deal?

We are back to playing tag like we used to during the Cold War. Day in and day out, we played "tag, you're it" with our Russian counterparts.

Why is such a big deal being made of this? :confused:

BBC refers to disruption to UK aviation.

BBC News - Russian military jets 'disrupted UK aviation'

Looks like they did a complete circuit of the UK and Ireland.

Elections coming..
 

David must appear to be defending the women and children of the UK!

Because it's more than just a game of "tag."

Russian plane has near-miss with passenger aircraft over Sweden | World news | The Guardian

Do we wait until there's an actual incident?

How about what happened over Hainan Province - where a PRC J8II collided with an EP-3E Aries, forcing it to land in China?

The Russian downing of KAL 007? MH 17?

What's good for the goose . . . .

It isn't just the Russians who do this. The US military is equally good at operating under "Due Regard" - outside 12nm territorial waters.

Not much new here other than the Russians have restarted doing something they did regularly a few years back.

And about once or twice a year for the last few. Nothing illegal under international law - but could easily develop into a flight safety hazard. In my experience they used to drop to levels where it was not an issue when relatively close, that said 243.0 and 121.5 were never more than a single switch selection away.


And the escorting NATO aircraft are squawking.......

Point taken, :ok: but that's always been part of the game of tag: if you f$#%!! it up it can kill you. The Chinese, during that event, more or less announced that they now wished to play with the varsity. Not apples to apples, that was a shoot down. Not apples to apples, that was a shoot down, and it wasn't (as far as I can tell) the Russians. I think that's how Putin would phrase it. :p
Our folks conduct Freedom of Navigation ops all over the world to make the point of the International "Freedom of the Seas" bit. That led to, among other things, some interesting sport in the med with Qadaffi on more than one occasion in which shots were fired.
I was involved in numerous "Freedom of Navigation" ops while in the Navy It is part of the political game, a game which has been deadly serious for a very, very long time. Predates human flight.

The Russians are well within their rights to assert the "international" nature of the sea and the airspace above it. Folks in the US and UK and Sweden are certainly wise to play tag and keep tabs on who is out there.

Airline companies who fly over zones of conflict are likewise aware of the risks of so doing, and make choices accordingly.

Yeah - some examples not "apples to apples" - but KAL 007 falls within the pattern of aircraft cat and mouse - at least that's how Russia saw it.

MH 17 - yeah - agreed - but it does show how mistakes happen and things escalate.

Personally - I think Russia is trying to force an "incident" so Putin can make hay of it. We'll see.

The Scandinavian Airlines flight from Denmark to Sweden can hardly be said to be in a conflict zone - but I do get what you say.

Point(s) taken.

My crystal ball is a bit murky these days, and Vlad likes to willy wave. You may be dead right.

So long as people are aware, and remain alert to hazards, the risks can be reduced/mitigated.

How does one force it to land?


Mickjoebill

Except of course, UK airspace is not a zone of conflict.


Mickjoebill: I'm unsure. But flights have been forced to land before. I'm guessing locking onto it with your weapons and vectoring it to where you want it to go might serve a purpose.

Lonewolf Playing tag out over the North Sea is one thing. Flying through the airspace over the Channel (which is quite busy as regards, commercial traffic) is another.

How do you force it to land?
 

You do no such thing.

Equip the interceptors with a bottle of Wodka on each station.

The bomber will follow you automatically.

After such a long trip they must be low on alcohol level.

LOL.

Out of interest, could you clarify why the "North Sea" is fine, yet "the Channel" is not?

In some ways, the North Sea presents a bigger hazard :eek:

NoD

Russia indicated that increased NATO aircraft have been flying close to Russian borders. No comment from NATO.............. as I would expect.

As for shooting down Airlines somehow RoboCruisers shooting down of an Iran Air Airbus gets forgotten.

Indeed. Would never dream of flying in one of Her Majesty's secret aeroplanes across the Mediterranean, at night, no lights, cross the airways at intermediate levels, silent ... no sir, it would never happen. :suspect:

In the future, please pay attention to the conversation before posting. That point about dangerous airspace was related to the non-apples-to-apples line I responded to in re Malaysia airlines being shot down / Ukraine.

As to forcing the Russian plane to land, had it violated the airspace or not? Flying "close to UK airspace" is not a violation, it is at most a provocation. (And it is licit). Having the transponders off ... I'll agree that this is bad form.

Your chair borne ranger "force them to land" ploy will not fit with policy, nor with the general use of international airspace.

When I lived in Virginia while serving in the USN, in the 80's, the Air National Guard, and sometimes our active Air Force and Navy jets, would scramble on the weekends for non squawkers over international waters. Heh, one of our squadron helicopters was once scrambled upon by ANG F-16's off of the California Coast a decade later, while doing regular exercises with the ship, thanks to a FUBAR regarding Mode 4, which day, which way, and the ANG deciding to take a look.

No.
Big.
Deal.

Looks like the Typhoons did something similar, check out a non squawker.

Good job gents! :ok:

Why is this headline news, during the 70's and 80's it was the norm during the cold war. The big difference now is, the russians are still using the now museum piece the Bear while the western world has moved on slightly to the Typhoon.

The Aegis Cruiser's (USS Vincennes) shoot down of Iran Air Flight 655 can, I think, rightly be compared to the shoot down of MH17.

I would hope and expect that NATO countries regularly keep an eye on our arms-length neighbors. That said - I don't know that NATO aircraft flying near Russia have jeopardized commercial aviation - do you know of any such claims / reports?

The Bull-in-the-China-Shop approach apparently being employed by Russia, I think, provides more opportunity for the china to get broken.

You can all sleep easy in your beds knowing the RAF is now a shadow of it's former Cold War self, apparently there are as many as SIX pilots being trained, ab initio, per annum and RAF stations are being closed and sold off for peanuts to whomsoever has the readies.

And there are plans to sell off the Strategic Supply and Pipeline network which apparently is already being "tapped" by our Eastern European immigrant entrepreneurs for free fuel supplies flogged to anyone with a white van and plastic containers.

And Vlad the Putin is causing a lot of folks to think maybe the Cold War isn't over after all.

But the boy Cameron will make sure we're ok, so don't let any of this rant worry you and cause sleepless moments? :rolleyes:

The bear is indeed antiquated, still bloody impressive performance from a prop though. "Hear and Avoid" is probably more useful than "See and Avoid" with them I'm told.

The Blackjacks, when the Russians save up enough money to fly them, are a different proposition altogether.

I've had the Bears pop up in my airspace before. Didn't cause too much hassle, just had to give some traffic information. I believe a couple of Typhoons went up to say hello that time too, off the West Coast of Ireland.

First time I was involved in intercepting a Bear (tanking a couple of F4s) was almost 43 years ago according to my logbook. Still that was in the far less crowded skies North of the Shetlands. Nipping through the 20 mile wide Straits of Dover is somewhat different. Did the French join in the game? I cant imagine they wouldn't.

The Russians are certainly getting their moneysworth out of these airframes (as are the US out of the B52s), although no doubt they have been extensively modded.

(Just read they didnt get up as far as Dover, but still, it's a new route for them as far as I know)

Indeed.

The Bear seemed like an antique when they came over to Fairford for RIAT.....and here we are 20 years on, and they are both still in use.

http://www.flankers-site.co.uk/tu-95_files/tu-95_37.jpg

BBC Radio Five Live news have just repeated 'Russian fighter jets' :ugh:

The double standard amazes me.

So the Russians shot down a commercial airplane that invaded their airspace during an high tension period and did not respond to calls and that's outrageous.

The Americans shot down a commercial Iranian plane while it was over Iranian airspace and that's a non even (no one event mentions it), yeah right...

Although the Kal 007 was a sad event, the shoot down was justified.

Iran Air Flight 655 was completely unjustified.

LW 50

Does it elevate above no biggie if they hit?

"N U T S" :ugh:

NUTS? Why NUTS?

KAL 007: Airplane invades Soviet airspace during an all time high tension during the cold war without warning, airplane does not answer to radio calls. Airplane does not react to tracers fired, airplane is shot down...
After 9/11 the US would have shot down an airplane for FAR LESS.

Iran Air Flight 655: US warship invades Iranian waters and shots down an airplane that was correctly identified, while it was OVER Iranian airspace... not even an apology... Yeah right (and NO ONE discuss this one, only KAL 007).

Of course KAL007 was a sad event, no one is disputing that, but from a purely military viewpoint, yes, it was justified.

Regards.

@lonewolf

"Not apples to apples, that was a shoot down, and it wasn't (as far as I can tell) the Russians."

Oh, please. There is no difference between Russians and Ukraine "separatists" .

I'll make it simple for you Toaster.

KAL007 shoot down was a deliberate act since the interceptor pilot could see a B747 in civilian markings with running and cabin lights on. How he could fail to see the jet was full of people is not known. Maybe the Russians just didn't care. In a legal sense it was cold blooded murder.

The Iran Air 655 shoot down was an accident and the cruiser crew thought they were shooting at an F-14 not an A300. A lot of stupidity happened during this incident but it can only be considered manslaughter.

A book about KAL007 suggested that KAL pilots were getting bonuses for saving gas. So they cut a corner off the route. We don't know how many times that was done.

A 747 can zip across Kamchatka and Sakhalin in next to no time.

The Russians may not have been ready to intercept over Kamchatka, but once alerted they were likely waiting for KAL007 when it got to Sakhalin.

Correct me if I am wrong by my understanding of those two incidents are:

KL007 was squawking and running with her lights on. After the fall of the wall, the FDR and CVR were finally handed over. It was proven that their deviation was a navigation fault. The pilot had forgotten to switch the INS to NAV. Instead, it continued to follow the magnetic heading. This made it cut into Russian space.
That night, the Russians had been hunting for a US Spy plane that was running in the dark somewhere in the same area. It was intermittently picked up on radar. When the KAL007 flight was picked up on radar, a fighter was sent to intercept it.
The pilot has admitted, in front of a camera, he identified it as the Korean 747, he knew it was a civilian plane. He knew he'd be killing civilians. He never once tried to identify himself to the crew. He just fired at it once ordered to. He also said he would do it again tomorrow if tasked to!

As for the Iran Air A300. If I recall correctly, it was following a completely different departure pattern than all other commercial flights that day. It was not squawking either. It was flying directly toward the US Cruiser which had already been harassed by Iranian F14s earlier in the day. It was also in international waters and sent out several warning, including on civilian frequencies.

Both shoot downs should not have happened. However, they are in different categories.

KAL007 was cold blooded murder.
Iran Air 655 was accidental (Albeit a bit of a setup I feel. It was running without transponder and not listening to radio calls in a WELL KNOWN conflict zone).

Russian Hotels
 

No big deal , Putin searching for some U.K. sea side hotels to purchase.

Iran Air 655 was squawking correctly and following its normal commercial air transport route.

The Vincennes should never have been where it was; it was commanded by a gung-ho 'shoot first' captain eager for combat who didn't actually follow the correct RoE.

One of the most disgraceful acts of US aggression ever. The original inquiry was a total whitewash, but the Navy's attempts to cover up the truth were eventually revealed.....

KAL 007 "cold blooded murder..?? The Russian pilot was scrambled to intercept what they believed was a four engined boeing (RC135) on a spying mission near a key Soviet base during a period of high tension. He saw a four engined Boeing. He couldn't possibly have read any markings. A planned level change was interpreted as evasive action and his warning shots were probably not seen. The result was sickening but the way the worlds military's are behaving now towards civil aviation, one wonders how long before the next tragedy

PS +1 to above post. Vincennes had been nicknamed "robocruiser" by other USN units prior to the tragedy and ignored orders to leave the area some hours previously. Didn't stop the skipper making Admiral though!

BEags.
Yes, that's my understanding of it, too.

The interesting bit is that the crew of the Vincennes were, at the time, awarded decorations for it and are still entitled to wear them.

Indeed, Stanwell. The captain should have been court-martialled rather than decorated.

Those who choose to believe otherwise should read SEA OF LIES - USS Vincennes shootdown of Iran Air Flight 655 on July 3, 1988 ......

News reports here in Ireland are suggesting the Bears were intercepted to the west of Ireland by RAF Typhoons and followed from there.

No indication of at what range or whether the RAF jets transited Irish airspace and if so at what speed.

On RTÉ radio this morning an "expert" claimed the VVS aircraft crossed the transatlantic routes without ATC contact and without active transponders while the RAF planes had transponders on at all times.

JAS