|
RAF Rivet joint and the SU-27s
BREAKING: Defence Secretary Ben Wallace tells MPs that on September 29 an RAF RC-135 Rivet Joint spy plane was being shadowed by two Russian Su-27s in international airspace when one of the Su-27s "released a missle in the vicinity of the Rivet Joint".
Rivet Joint patrols were suspended, the Russians blamed a "technical malfunction" for the missile being released (?!). Patrols have restarted but the Rivet Joints are now escorted by fighter jets, MPs have been told….. |
Originally Posted by ChrisJ800
(Post 11315815)
To counter the drones with 40kg non armour piercin warheads that use GPS i propose chicken wire fencing around energy infrastrucure targets. When i drove around GCHQ in Cheltenham i am sure my car GPS was not working there so gps and glonass can be jammed.. This seems more cost effective than using high tech and expensive ordinance to take them out?
|
So either Russia are admitting that pilot training is poor enough that a missile was released accidentally, their maintenance is poor enough that the missile just fell off mid-flight, or they are lying. Which could it be . . .
|
Originally Posted by Ohrly
(Post 11316590)
So either Russia are admitting that pilot training is poor enough that a missile was released accidentally, their maintenance is poor enough that the missile just fell off mid-flight, or they are lying. Which could it be . . .
A Russian aircraft on Sept. 29 released a missile near a British aircraft patrolling in international airspace over the Black Sea, the Defence Secretary, has revealed. Ben Wallace told parliament Britain had suspended patrols following the incident involving an unarmed RAF RC-135W Rivet Joint spy plane, which was on a routine patrol when it was intercepted by two Russian SU 27 fighter aircraft. One of the Russian jets fired a missile from beyond the visual range of the RAF plane, Mr Wallace said. Mr Wallace said he wrote to his counterpart and the chief of defence staff in Moscow about what was a “potentially dangerous engagement” to express his concerns. On October 10 Moscow replied, stating that they had conducted an investigation and put the engagement down to a “technical malfunction”. Moscow acknowledged the incident took place in international airspace. Britain has now resumed patrols, which now have fighter aircraft escorts, he added. |
Sorry
Reported on LBC at about 1230 that during a Rivet Joint sortie recently, an Su27 went home with one less missile than it started with.
The Kremlin reports it was a 'malfunction'. Mods please merge if it's already been covered. |
Originally Posted by Ohrly
(Post 11316590)
So either Russia are admitting that pilot training is poor enough that a missile was released accidentally, their maintenance is poor enough that the missile just fell off mid-flight, or they are lying. Which could it be . . .
|
A Russian aircraft fired a missile `near` the Rivett Joint aircraft while in international waters.
Happened in September. Russia claims technical issue. |
Originally Posted by Ohrly
(Post 11316590)
So either Russia are admitting that pilot training is poor enough that a missile was released accidentally, their maintenance is poor enough that the missile just fell off mid-flight, or they are lying. Which could it be . . .
Jack |
Originally Posted by Ohrly
(Post 11316590)
So either Russia are admitting that pilot training is poor enough that a missile was released accidentally,,, .
|
Originally Posted by Ewan Whosearmy
(Post 11316623)
I'm sure there are ex-RAF guys who can
|
Fire for effect with a radar BVR missile from long range without a lock, or breaking lock, to force a “hostile “ to react and turn away.
The hostile has to honour the threat and break away. A very hard nosed warning. |
Potential track of the aircraft involved:
|
So either Russia are admitting that pilot training is poor enough that a missile was released accidentally, their maintenance is poor enough that the missile just fell off mid-flight, or they are lying. Which could it be . . . |
Presumably the Rivet Joint has the Tape of the incident ( that’s it’s job after all). Whether the incident was an accident or a warning to go away, should be fairly clear.
|
Originally Posted by Ewan Whosearmy
(Post 11316623)
I'm sure there are ex-RAF guys who can
Originally Posted by ORAC
(Post 11316649)
Fire for effect with a radar BVR missile from long range without a lock, or breaking lock, to force a “hostile “ to react and turn away.
Originally Posted by Ohrly
(Post 11316662)
Potential track of the aircraft involved: https://twitter.com/air_intel/status...59425006604288
Glad everyone got home. |
Originally Posted by KiloB
(Post 11316671)
Presumably the Rivet Joint has the Tape of the incident ( that’s it’s job after all). Whether the incident was an accident or a warning to go away, should be fairly clear.
|
If - a big IF but stick with me - it was a technical malfunction and not a 'signal' - they better hope it doesn't happen with a fighter escort present.
Pretty sure that having a hostile jet release a missile in the vicinity of friendly that you've been tasked to protect would prompt return fire. Things could rapidly get pretty nasty after that. |
Before the RJ had fighter support what would be it's reaction to a targeted missile? Presumably it has some form of air defence?
|
Originally Posted by uxb99
(Post 11316872)
Before the RJ had fighter support what would be it's reaction to a targeted missile? Presumably it has some form of air defence?
|
Originally Posted by tdracer
(Post 11316851)
If - a big IF but stick with me - it was a technical malfunction and not a 'signal' - they better hope it doesn't happen with a fighter escort present.
Pretty sure that having a hostile jet release a missile in the vicinity of friendly that you've been tasked to protect would prompt return fire. Things could rapidly get pretty nasty after that. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 13:47. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.