Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Russia Starting New Patrols With "old" Aircraft.  
User currently offlineReadytotaxi From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 3281 posts, RR: 2
Posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 5000 times:

BBC News states that Russia has again started long range patrols with bombers that a US state dept said had been mothballed, when did this things last fly then?

In Washington, a state department spokesman, Sean McCormack, said Russia's decision was "interesting".

"If Russia feels as though they want to take some of these old aircraft out of mothballs and get them flying again, that's their decision," he told reporters.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6950986.stm


you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineWvsuperhornet From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 517 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4827 times:

When they start making their flights with new aircraft then I will start to worry.

User currently offlineNbgskygod From United States of America, joined May 2004, 819 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 4801 times:

I feel that a lot of this stems from Russia's need to reestablish the credibility dominance of their military. IMHO there has been a perception in the rest of the world that the Russian military is a corrupt, broken machine that cannot be fixed. A lot of the rhetoric spoken by Putin and others has shown the intention of bringing Russia back as a world superpower. By once again flying their bombers on patrols they are able to "show the flag" in places that haven't seen it in a long time. Since Russia has begun large scale oil refinement they can afford to start playing some of the old games with the West. I remember when Putin was first elected, some of his rhetoric had eluded to reestablishing a neo-Russian empire to once again be a world superpower. Only time will tell what will actually happen. In light of recent talks about a new missile defense system (the Bush-Putin talks sounded a awful lot like Reagan-Gorbachov over STI) It's not surprising bombers are now back on patrol.


"I use multi-billion dollar military satellite systems to find tupperware in the woods."
User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4721 times:

Quoting Nbgskygod (Reply 2):
I feel that a lot of this stems from Russia's need to reestablish the credibility dominance of their military. IMHO there has been a perception in the rest of the world that the Russian military is a corrupt, broken machine that cannot be fixed. A lot of the rhetoric spoken by Putin and others has shown the intention of bringing Russia back as a world superpower. By once again flying their bombers on patrols they are able to "show the flag" in places that haven't seen it in a long time.

I have to wonder if some of that oil money is going to be going into a whole new series of new airplanes, bombers among them, or if the money will go into refurbishing what useful equipment remains in the Russian Air Force.

You'd think, after the Cold War experience, that major nations would take a whole new look at what it means to be a super power. But that calls for some good old fashioned common sense. If the Russians are determined to be a military super power again, are we looking at seeing "Cold War, The Sequel" in the not too distant future?



Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlineVenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1443 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4706 times:

Does this meen we will have to reopen the NATO base in Keflavik and permently place AWACS and Fighters on a permenant basis, that also means a air/sea rescue unit. SAC will be back.


I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently offlineUsnseallt82 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 4891 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4704 times:

Quoting Readytotaxi (Thread starter):
Russia Starting New Patrols With "old" Aircraft.

Not really anything new, just more concentrated now than it has been before. However...

Quoting Wvsuperhornet (Reply 1):
When they start making their flights with new aircraft then I will start to worry.

I'd have to agree with this as well. If they want to start using their old stockpiled aircraft again, that's their decision. There's not much of a threat there that we don't already have measures in place to counter. Its when they start using new aircraft or start deploying new technology that will perk our ears...

But like I've said before, there is definitely a few eyes open a little wider in Washington about Russia these days compared to recent years.



Crye me a river
User currently offlineDeskflier From Sweden, joined Jan 2007, 537 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 4599 times:

Quoting Nbgskygod (Reply 2):
a perception in the rest of the world that the Russian military is a corrupt, broken machine

This has often been true, throughout history, but Mother Russia has always recovered.
In the 13th century, the Golden Horde Mongols occupied most of central Russia. The Russians came back and finally under Ivan the Terrible (d. 1584) could start the colonisation of traditionally Mongol and Turkmen Central-Asian territories.
When Ivan died, Russia fell into the Great Disorder, which didn't really was organised until Peter the Great came into power 1696. (Officially the Disorder ended with the rise of the Romanovs 1613.) Peters victory against Swedish king Karl XII made Russia a superpower for the first time, a status Russia would have more or less until the revolution.
After the Civil War in the 1920s Russia, now the Soviet Union, was a crippled nation. They couldn't even feed their children, let alone wield any military power. When he introduced the First Five-Year-Plan, Stalin said:"- Russia has always been lagging 150 years behind the West. We must catch up within 15 years, or we will perish." His prophecy almost came true, WW2 almost wiped out Russia, but the Russians (I'm deliberately using the term Russia rather than the Soviet Union, since even Stalin called this war Patriotic) built up the Red Army to first expel the Nazis from Russian, Ukrainian, and Belorussian soil, and finally beat the Nazis at their home turf. That was the beginning of Russia´s second run as a superpower.
I just hope that it won't take another all-consuming war to ensure the Russian political and military elite that they are back on (or near) the top.



How can anyone not fly, when we live at a time when we can fly?
User currently offlineF27Friendship From Netherlands, joined Jul 2007, 1125 posts, RR: 5
Reply 7, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4559 times:

Quoting Deskflier (Reply 6):
(I'm deliberately using the term Russia rather than the Soviet Union, since even Stalin called this war Patriotic)

well, you might not want to do that, since the majority of the 30 million soviets that were killed were actually Ukrainian


User currently offlineTheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2039 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (7 years 1 month 2 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 4549 times:

I think its safe to say that Putin is just testing the water to see how far NATO will let him screw around. He seems to be doing that a lot lately, especially with the arctic dispute. If he means business, we will know it by the sound of afterburners.

Quoting Wvsuperhornet (Reply 1):

Agreed. NATO has the upper hand, and he knows it. As it stands, its safe enough to let him keep the ball in his court.



No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
User currently offlinePelican From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 2531 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 4475 times:

Don't forget they have elections soon. So the government has to demonstrate its success, which means to show a strong Russian military once again.

pelican


User currently offlineTu204 From Russia, joined Mar 2006, 1230 posts, RR: 18
Reply 10, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 4405 times:

Quoting Readytotaxi (Thread starter):
BBC News states that Russia has again started long range patrols with bombers that a US state dept said had been mothballed, when did this things last fly then?

In Washington, a state department spokesman, Sean McCormack, said Russia's decision was "interesting".

"If Russia feels as though they want to take some of these old aircraft out of mothballs and get them flying again, that's their decision," he told reporters.

I feel this is a pretty uneducated statement. The United States still uses its B-52's, many of which are older than our Tu-95's - that are currently under modernisation. Does this spokesman think that only brand new aircraft should be used by the world's airforces to makes them effective? As long as aircraft do the job that they are assigned, they are fulfilling their mission. Thats it.
By the way, these aircraft were not mothballed, the Strategic Aviation was only used during drills or "War Games". Now they are going to be constantly used.

Quoting TheCol (Reply 8):
I think its safe to say that Putin is just testing the water to see how far NATO will let him screw around.

How far NATO will let him screw around? I was not aware that we needed NATO approval for our internal affairs.



I do not dream about movie stars, they must dream about me for I am real and they are not. - Alexander Popov
User currently offlinePelican From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 2531 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 4395 times:

Quoting Tu204 (Reply 10):

How far NATO will let him screw around? I was not aware that we needed NATO approval for our internal affairs.

Operating in or close to NATO controlled airspace with long range weapon carrying bombers is no internal affair.

Quoting Tu204 (Reply 10):
I feel this is a pretty uneducated statement. The United States still uses its B-52's, many of which are older than our Tu-95's - that are currently under modernisation.

That statement made me wondering, too. The Tu 160 are undergoing modernisation, too. But then there are only a few around.

pelican


User currently offlineBladeLWS From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 403 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4373 times:

Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 4):
Does this meen we will have to reopen the NATO base in Keflavik and permently place AWACS and Fighters on a permenant basis, that also means a air/sea rescue unit. SAC will be back.

In light of this I'm sure it's being considered...


User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4359 times:

Quoting Pelican (Reply 9):
Don't forget they have elections soon. So the government has to demonstrate its success, which means to show a strong Russian military once again

Not if Putin can help it and change the current laws to allow him to continue to serve.


User currently offlineTheCol From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2039 posts, RR: 6
Reply 14, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4331 times:

Quoting Tu204 (Reply 10):
How far NATO will let him screw around? I was not aware that we needed NATO approval for our internal affairs.

If Putin wanted to keep it internal, he wouldn't have authorized the use of long range nuclear bombers to intentionally skim NATO controlled airspace. He also wouldn't have supported the recent and otherwise pointless flag planting in a highly disputed region. Obviously, he wants to draw some attention from us.



No matter how random things may appear, there's always a plan.
User currently onlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8568 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 4271 times:

This is all a choreographed distraction by Putin. He makes pointless rants about the USA, Europe and so on.

Really, Putin is trying to distract from all the highly advanced weapons Russia is building for China and selling to them. China needs military technology to eventually defeat the USA in a war over Taiwan. With the right gear, it is actually possible for China to sink entire USA Nimitz carrier groups, provided they have the right Russian technology. Then, Taiwan is theirs.

Taiwan is the real flashpoint, not Europe. Putin is working with Hu Jintao. They just met this week. In fact, they claim they were talking about trans-border issues in the Russian Far East and fruit and food trade with Northeast China! Rubbish. They are working on military deals. The fact they say nothing about this means they are up to something. Russia has some highly advanced weapons -- their nuke subs, spacecraft, ICBMs and Tu-160 Blackjacks for example. Gee, do ya think China wants these things... yes of course they do. By 2025, China (by then the world's wealthiest country) could use Russian technology to deploy forces almost as strong as the USA. Then, no more mr. nice guy.

When you talk about long term military trends, this is the only one that matters. Not Russia... That 50-year adventure already happened. It's time for the next Cold War, starting soon.


User currently offlineF27Friendship From Netherlands, joined Jul 2007, 1125 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 4244 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 15):
Really, Putin is trying to distract from all the highly advanced weapons Russia is building for China and selling to them. China needs military technology to eventually defeat the USA in a war over Taiwan. With the right gear, it is actually possible for China to sink entire USA Nimitz carrier groups, provided they have the right Russian technology. Then, Taiwan is theirs.

Taiwan is the real flashpoint, not Europe. Putin is working with Hu Jintao. They just met this week. In fact, they claim they were talking about trans-border issues in the Russian Far East and fruit and food trade with Northeast China! Rubbish. They are working on military deals. The fact they say nothing about this means they are up to something. Russia has some highly advanced weapons -- their nuke subs, spacecraft, ICBMs and Tu-160 Blackjacks for example. Gee, do ya think China wants these things... yes of course they do. By 2025, China (by then the world's wealthiest country) could use Russian technology to deploy forces almost as strong as the USA. Then, no more mr. nice guy.

When you talk about long term military trends, this is the only one that matters. Not Russia... That 50-year adventure already happened. It's time for the next Cold War, starting soon.

First of all, I hope you are not someone high placed in the admistration of your country. Your thinking strikes me as 'dangerous'.

Secondly, it is very unlikely that Taiwan will become a warzone. They have not proclaimed independance and both economies are very woven into each other. Taiwan will most probably re-unite with China in the next decades on similar terms as Hong Kong and Macau.


User currently offlineF27Friendship From Netherlands, joined Jul 2007, 1125 posts, RR: 5
Reply 17, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 4241 times:

Just to add something more,

China's economy is still smaller than for example Germany. It will take some time before they become the richest country on the planet..


User currently offlinePelican From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 2531 posts, RR: 8
Reply 18, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 4219 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 15):
They are working on military deals. The fact they say nothing about this means they are up to something. Russia has some highly advanced weapons -- their nuke subs, spacecraft, ICBMs and Tu-160 Blackjacks for example.

I'm quite sure they're working on military deals. But the Russians have seldom sold their highest developed stuff. In most cases they sell downgraded exports variants. The Russians are not that stupid to feed the ever growing Chinese dragon in their backyard with the newest technology. Don't forget the - for the moment solved - border conflict between both countries.

pelican


User currently offlineMoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3966 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 6 days ago) and read 4197 times:

Quoting Pelican (Reply 18):

I'm quite sure they're working on military deals. But the Russians have seldom sold their highest developed stuff. In most cases they sell downgraded exports variants. The Russians are not that stupid to feed the ever growing Chinese dragon in their backyard with the newest technology. Don't forget the - for the moment solved - border conflict between both countries.

A prime example of that is the NK-321 turbofans fitted to the Tu-160 and the Tu-144, which Russia has refused to export on several occasions.


User currently onlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8568 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 4153 times:

I applaud both sides for their good conduct. I do not see anything "wrong" with Russia selling weapons to China.

But, in 2025 China will indeed be the world's wealthiest country. Just for their own security if nothing else, China will need advanced Russian (and American-design) weapons.

Unlike the USA, Russia really needs Chinese money. Oil money is great, but Russia is still cash poor. The other factor here is American spying. China gets a lot of secrets from its spy network, the world's largest. They know all about American weapons, and a lot of the newest American weapons scare the bejeesus out of them. Drone planes with hellfire missiles, 747-based ICBM lasers, you name it. I'd be worried sick America was going to mess me up.

I don't advocate doing anything to stop and/or threaten China. Their threats over the Taiwan democracy are ultimately not world war-worthy threats. I too believe it will be done peacefully in many years. Both sides are long term thinkers, thank god.

That does not mean China is not planning to win a regional war vs the USA in the Taiwan Strait. They absolutely are. And, they have nearly unlimited cash and manpower to pursue this goal. So, we will be seeing some very advanced weapons in China. Will they have the Tu-160, not very soon. But by 2025, I believe China will have a hell of an airforce. All they need to do is understand the USAs weapons well enough to destroy them. Hence all the spying. They are being very quiet about their military growth, but it is happening. For Russia, (more than anyone), this is a sea change. Either they cooperate or they become rivals with China. Better to cooperate, and get some cash in the process.


User currently offlineF27Friendship From Netherlands, joined Jul 2007, 1125 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4004 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 20):
But, in 2025 China will indeed be the world's wealthiest country.

You base this on what exactly?

Quoting Flighty (Reply 20):
Unlike the USA, Russia really needs Chinese money. Oil money is great, but Russia is still cash poor. The other factor here is American spying. China gets a lot of secrets from its spy network, the world's largest. They know all about American weapons, and a lot of the newest American weapons scare the bejeesus out of them. Drone planes with hellfire missiles, 747-based ICBM lasers, you name it. I'd be worried sick America was going to mess me up.

I agree, they are logically afraid and want to modernize their mililtary to match the perceived threat.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 20):
don't advocate doing anything to stop and/or threaten China. Their threats over the Taiwan democracy are ultimately not world war-worthy threats. I too believe it will be done peacefully in many years. Both sides are long term thinkers, thank god.

Thanks for clearing that up. I appreciate it.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 20):
That does not mean China is not planning to win a regional war vs the USA in the Taiwan Strait. They absolutely are. And, they have nearly unlimited cash and manpower to pursue this goal. So, we will be seeing some very advanced weapons in China. Will they have the Tu-160, not very soon. But by 2025, I believe China will have a hell of an airforce. All they need to do is understand the USAs weapons well enough to destroy them. Hence all the spying. They are being very quiet about their military growth, but it is happening. For Russia, (more than anyone), this is a sea change. Either they cooperate or they become rivals with China. Better to cooperate, and get some cash in the process.

I agree with you they probably have a scenario lieing around somewhere which is about a possible conflict over Taiwan. Nevertheless I think you extremely over-estimate their capabilities and their future capabilities. They haven;'t been directly involved in any major conflict, except maybe Korea somehow, but there is no way they will suddenly become the worlds largest economic power in 20 years, AND get the best equipped and trained fighting force in place. This would take at least another world war, to mess up the current balance of power and at least half a century


User currently offlineRwessel From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 2353 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3954 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting F27Friendship (Reply 21):
Quoting Flighty (Reply 20):
But, in 2025 China will indeed be the world's wealthiest country.

You base this on what exactly?

That's a common mid-range estimate for growth of China's GDP in PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) terms. It requires about more 75% growth in the Chinese economy relative to the U.S. over the next couple of decades, which works out to an annual rate of 3-3.5% more than that of the U.S., which is rather less than has been happening over the last decade (where the ratio has been closer to 6% per annum), but a significant slowdown in China's growth is likely given that their economy seems rather overheated after years of breakneck growth.

That still leaves the PPP GDP per head at a quarter that of the U.S., but since China has four times the population...

In currency (market exchange) terms, China's GDP would still be about a fifth or a sixth that of the U.S. at that point.

IMO, the two numbers have different uses (a resident of a country buys groceries in PPP terms, a manufacturer imports parts in market exchange terms), and practical GDP reality lies somewhere between the PPP and market numbers.


User currently offlineReadytotaxi From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2006, 3281 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 3790 times:

Quoting Tu204 (Reply 10):

Do you think that this is a good thing to restart these flights, what message does it send?Just a thought.



you don't get a second chance to make a first impression!
User currently offlineKFLLCFII From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3303 posts, RR: 30
Reply 24, posted (7 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3755 times:

Maybe this wasn't the best idea...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Michael Vaeremans
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gerhard Plomitzer




"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
25 Post contains images KELPkid : Those are all the older (G and earlier) models...besides, we've already partially deployed their replacements: B-1B's and B-2's. At some point, even
26 Prebennorholm : Unlimited manpower, yes. Unlimited cash, no. The Chinese cashpile is to a very large extent invested in US industry and bonds. China has more or less
27 MD90fan : Exactly, and in this instance the Tu-95's 4 turboprops makes it more appropriate for loitering over bases gathering intel, conducting recce, etc. Yes
28 Post contains images F27Friendship : This is what I think will happen. They can;t keep up this pace and stay healty
29 Rwessel : I agree, but the "2025" estimate already assumes a slowdown to a more moderate level of growth, from (approximately) USA+6% to USA+3%. That works out
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Russia Starting New Patrols With "old" Aircraft.
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Time To Split Off The First "A" In Nasa? posted Fri Feb 2 2007 21:46:42 by N328KF
"New" C-5's posted Tue Apr 17 2007 06:18:16 by Tb727
"new" C130 For The Belgium Airforce posted Tue Apr 10 2007 19:47:35 by HeliflyerPDC
First New IAF "Air Force One" posted Thu Nov 30 2006 23:26:51 by DEVILFISH
Reuters: New US F-35 Fighter Dubbed "Lightning II" posted Fri Jul 7 2006 21:02:21 by N328KF
Article: "New Dawn For Russian Bombers" posted Mon Jul 3 2006 21:25:52 by Lumberton
UFO's Could Be U.S. "Aurora" Aircraft -- BBC posted Wed Jun 21 2006 02:20:18 by AerospaceFan
Blue Angels With New Aircraft? posted Fri May 26 2006 00:13:30 by PhatAlbert
Generals Aircraft In "Die Hard 2" posted Thu May 18 2006 04:18:33 by CF188A
When Will Germany Get A New "AF 1"? posted Thu Apr 20 2006 01:24:31 by TommyBP251b

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format