Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Alert Over Russian Bombers  
User currently offlineSwiftski From Australia, joined Dec 2006, 2701 posts, RR: 2
Posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 5526 times:

Sky News:

US Alert Over Russian Bombers
Updated:22:56, Monday February 11, 2008

US fighter jets have been scrambled after two Russian bombers buzzed a US aircraft carrier in the Western Pacific.

The TU-95 Bear bombers flew over at an altitude of 2,000ft.

39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePJFlysFast From United States of America, joined May 2006, 463 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 5505 times:

Happens more than you think. We still check each other out.

User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 5479 times:



Quoting Swiftski (Thread starter):
US fighter jets have been scrambled after two Russian bombers buzzed a US aircraft carrier in the Western

I sure hope the fighters were scramble long before the two Russian bombers buzzed the carrier! After all they do have radar on the carriers that should be able to spot the bombers before they even get close.


User currently offlineSprout5199 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1855 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 5387 times:



Quoting 474218 (Reply 2):
sure hope the fighters were scramble long before the two Russian bombers buzzed the carrier! After all they do have radar on the carriers that should be able to spot the bombers before they even get close.

There should have been an Aegis cruiser/destroyer near by. They would have picked it up about 200 miles if it was at a decent height.

Dan in Jupiter


User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5383 times:



Quoting Sprout5199 (Reply 3):
There should have been an Aegis cruiser/destroyer near by. They would have picked it up about 200 miles if it was at a decent height.

My point exactly.


User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5356 times:



Quoting PJFlysFast (Reply 1):
Happens more than you think. We still check each other out.

Too bad the Russians are too poor to crew their own carrier so we could buzz them; I like what McCain says in trying to oust Russia from the G-8 - they are nor have they ever been an ally to the West.

Not terribly impressed with the Super Hornet (versus what the ol' GE Powered Tomcats could do) took off when the bombers were 500 miles out and didn't get to them until they were 50 miles out of the Nimitz - that kind of stuff wasn't even allowed in Top Gun!

Quote:

US Navy 'buzzed' by Russian bombers


US fighter planes intercepted two Russian bombers flying unusually close to an American aircraft carrier in the western Pacific during the weekend, it has emerged.

A US military official said that one Russian Tupolev 95 flew past the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz twice, at a low altitude of about 2,000 feet, while another bomber circled about 50 nautical miles away.

The incident on Saturday, which never escalated beyond the flyover, comes amid heightened tensions between the US and Russia over US plans for a missile defence system based in Poland and the Czech Republic.

Such Russian bomber flights were common during the Cold War, but this is the first time Russian Tupolevs have flown over or interacted with a US carrier since 2004.

The bombers were among four Russian Tupolev 95s launched from Ukrainka in the middle of the night, including one that Japanese officials say violated their country's airspace over an uninhabited island south of Tokyo.

US officials tracked and monitored the bombers as two flew south along the Japanese coast, and two others flew further east, coming closer to the Nimitz and the guided missile cruiser USS Princeton.

As the bombers got about 500 miles out from the US ships, four F/A-18 fighters were launched from the Nimitz, the official said.

The fighters intercepted the Russian bombers about 50 miles south of the Nimitz.

At least two US fighters trailed the bomber as it came in low over the Nimitz twice, while one or two of the other US fighters followed the second bomber as it circled.

The official said there were no verbal communications between the US and the Russians, and the Pentagon has not heard of any protests being filed by the United States. Historically, diplomatic protests were not filed in such incidents because they were so common during the Cold War era.

http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5hF5yBodhqh9P_F4ANpuHsafAHzhQ

Seems like they got the JASDF to respond, too...

Quote:
Russian bombers flew over US aircraft carrier: official


WASHINGTON (AFP) — A pair of Russian TU-95 Bear bombers overflew a US aircraft carrier in the western Pacific at an altitude of 2,000 feet (660 meters) over the weekend, prompting US fighter jets to scramble, a US defense official said Monday.

Four F-18 fighters jets intercepted the Russian bombers Saturday morning, but not before they had overflown the USS Nimitz, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Japanese F-15 fighters had earlier scrambled to intercept another pair of Bear bombers, and escorted them out of the area, said a US military official who asked not to be identified.

The Japanese government issued a strong protest with Moscow, but Russian officials denied their aircraft had crossed into Japanese airspace.

The second pair of bombers were flying south of Japan when they "essentially turned inbound toward the USS Nimitz, and USS Nimitz aircraft launched and intercepted the bombers," said the defense official.

The US F-18s escorted the bombers until they departed the area, the official said.

"There were no verbal communications between the Nimitz aircraft or the Russian aircraft," the official said.

The official said one of the Russian bombers flew directly over the US carrier at an altitude of 2,000 feet, while the second bomber flew at its side at the same altitude.

The incident comes at a time when Russia is reviving the long-range air patrols that were once a standard feature of the Cold War.

It was the second time since July 2004 that a Russian Bear bomber has overflown a US aircraft carrier.

That incident involved the USS Kitty Hawk in the Sea of Japan.

The Nimitz, which was on a routine patrol in the western Pacific at the time of the incident, was back Monday in port in Sasebo, Japan, the official said.

It was not immediately known whether the United States issued any protests with the Russians.

US Defense Secretary Robert Gates met with Russia's deputy premier the following day on the sidelines of an international security conference in Munich.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gThybp_Fcvg9QqECFfEoFOKqn8QA

Quote:
Japan says Russian plane violated airspace, Russia denies

MOSCOW, February 9 (RIA Novosti) - Japan's Defense Ministry said Saturday a Russian bomber briefly violated the country's airspace early in the morning, but Russia denied the reports, saying its Air Force flight was in line with international regulations.

The Japanese Foreign Ministry issued a protest to the Russian embassy in Tokyo over the alleged incident with a Tu-95 Bear strategic bomber taking place over the Sofugan pinnacle several hundred miles south of Tokyo which prompted 24 Japanese fighters, including F-15s, to take off.

But the Russian Air Force denied the reports. "Our strategic aviation aircraft did not violate Japan's airspace," deputy commander Lt. Gen. Igor Sadofyev said.

Earlier today, Colonel Alexander Drobyshevsky, an aide to the Air Force commander, said Russia's Tu-95 bombers successfully completed a more than 10-hour-long patrol flight over the Pacific.

"The strategic aviation flight was in line with the plan and in strict compliance with international regulations on the use of airspace over neutral waters, without violating the borders of other states," he said.

Russia and Japan have contested the ownership of the Kuril Islands for over 60 years, a dispute that has kept the two countries from signing a formal peace treaty after World War II.

http://www.air-attack.com/news/news_...olated-airspace-Russia-denies.html


User currently offlineFlyUSCG From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 656 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 5274 times:

The Russians are playing a dangerous game again. Only this time it's not the cold war (ie: no one fears them anymore). And if something happens and shots are fired, they are going to pay for their arrogance.


Go Trojans! Fight On!
User currently offlineBEG2IAH From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 973 posts, RR: 18
Reply 7, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 5272 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

And "highly respected" BBC has the following headline:
"Russian jets intercepted by US". No comment.

Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7240197.stm

BEG2IAH



FAA killed the purpose of my old signature: Use of approved electronic devices is now permitted.
User currently onlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8640 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 5192 times:

Dude, get a jet, guys, seriously.  Smile

They party like it's 1959. Castro could get down with that.. go bother him.

But I gotta say, that shows some balls. You have to have large balls to buzz a Nimitz class carrier group, I do not care what you are flying.


User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3397 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 5120 times:

Is Putin trying to make Russia appear more powerfull than they really are here. From what I understand thier airforce was cut to the bone during the years when their economy was in trouble and altough they have boosted spending recently they're starting from a pretty low base.

Currently they are no match for the US (although that may change in the future)


User currently offlineAGC525 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 989 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 5050 times:



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 5):
Not terribly impressed with the Super Hornet

Gee, it would have been nice to have a true fleet defender for instances like this. Perhaps with AWG-9 radar and a platform for the AIM-54.  Smile



American Aviation: From Kitty Hawk to the Moon in 66 years!
User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6484 posts, RR: 54
Reply 11, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4911 times:



Quoting Flighty (Reply 8):
But I gotta say, that shows some balls. You have to have large balls to buzz a Nimitz class carrier group...

I don't think any balls are needed here. Having a look from international air space on a ship in international water, all what is needed is a fifty years old four engined propeller plane which hasn't cracked apart yet. Maybe some inferiority complex helps as well.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineSprout5199 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1855 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 4908 times:



Quoting FlyUSCG (Reply 6):
The Russians are playing a dangerous game again.

Not real "dangerous". Just makes the higher ups worry. Its good training for the pilots and crews of the ships. Everyone is professional about these things.

Dan in Jupiter


User currently offlineChecksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1108 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4839 times:



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 5):
Not terribly impressed with the Super Hornet (versus what the ol' GE Powered Tomcats could do) took off when the bombers were 500 miles out and didn't get to them until they were 50 miles out of the Nimitz - that kind of stuff wasn't even allowed in Top Gun!

Think real hard about your comments...they launched, most likely into an established CAP zone (50 miles) around the carrier, and conducted the intercept when the aircraft reached that zone. The bomber was what...500 miles out? So around 1 hour give or take roughly 20 minutes depending on cruise speed. Yup...that makes sense. So what was the problem with the Super Hornet again???  box 


User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 4820 times:



Quoting Sprout5199 (Reply 12):
Not real "dangerous". Just makes the higher ups worry. Its good training for the pilots and crews of the ships. Everyone is professional about these things.

Dan in Jupiter

I understand the Russians are trying to get the western world to take them seriously again; to gain some credibility so far as their military capabilities are concerned. Getting back into the electronic and photo surveilance scene again would, at the least, make their air force more visible to potential opponents and would gain the attention of the world press. That's what they want ... to be seen and considered a viable military force. Seems to be working too.



Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6484 posts, RR: 54
Reply 15, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4741 times:



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 14):
I understand the Russians are trying to get the western world to take them seriously again; to gain some credibility so far as their military capabilities are concerned.

Yeah, you may be right. But to me it looks rather primitive. Like the intellectually inferior bully of an elementary school class.

But I think that it is mostly for internal use. Russia suffered a terrible downturn when the Soviet Union collapsed and Yeltsin let the oligarchs steal all values in the country. Social, intellectual and welfare is progressing at a slow rate, and to hide those incapabilities they have to make a show out of what they still can do. And that includes to fly around with some 2nd generation hardware of what the German Junckers technicians showed them 60 years ago.

Russia came out of communism in a totally different way compared to the rest of east- and central Europe. While central Europe expelled the communist regimes and elected capable people for governance, then the "old gang" in Russia just changed attitude to the better. But they kept more or less the same incapable people in power, and do it until this very day.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineFlybulldog From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 369 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4727 times:



Quote:
As the bombers got about 500 miles out from the US ships, four F/A-18 fighters were launched from the Nimitz, the official said.

The fighters intercepted the Russian bombers about 50 miles south of the Nimitz.

The fighters were launched when the bombers got 500 miles out but didn't intercept until 50 miles??????


User currently offlineCruiser From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1001 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4717 times:



Quoting Flybulldog (Reply 16):
The fighters were launched when the bombers got 500 miles out but didn't intercept until 50 miles??????

Was there a procedural reason for it taking them so long?



Leahy on Per Seat Costs: "Have you seen the B-2 fly-by at almost US$1bn a copy? It has only 2 seats!"
User currently offlineMCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4710 times:

Whatever their intentions, if they'd have been carrying AS ordnance the Nimitz could have been in real trouble. Whatever it really is, it has to be taken seriously. Even if they're not really trying to start something, it's always a bad idea to dismiss it as so.

Quoting Adm. Gary Roughead:
"You know, it's not prudent to fly over an aircraft carrier," he said at another point. "But our situational awareness is such that, as I said, we had good detection, followed them in, and, in my mind, it's not something to go to general quarters over."

I guess they really couldn't do much if they had Bugs on them. They could have been toast pretty fast if they even opened their bays. Any external AS load would probably at least get them locked up and possibly fired on.



Airliners.net Moderator Team
User currently offlineHighlander0 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2007, 165 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4634 times:



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 5):
Too bad the Russians are too poor to crew their own carrier so we could buzz them

Too poor?!
#1 link to PpRUNE forum (with video).
#2 with a fair bit of info (pg 4, last photo!!).

(sorry, but I remembered reading it on there first)

A NOTAM was enforced for the exercise out in the Atlantic. The carrier group also led to helicopter ops being stopped and disrupted.


User currently offlineCsturdiv From Australia, joined Aug 2005, 1491 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4613 times:

I wonder if the pictures from the Foxnews.com article are from the actual event?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,330362,00.html



An American expat living and working in Australia
User currently offlineDragon6172 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 1203 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4606 times:



Quoting Csturdiv (Reply 20):
I wonder if the pictures from the Foxnews.com article are from the actual event?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,....html

That picture just get timed perfectly or do the Ruskies shut engines down on long range cruise flights? (#4 engine)



Phrogs Phorever
User currently offlineAirRyan From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2532 posts, RR: 5
Reply 22, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4574 times:



Quoting AGC525 (Reply 10):
Gee, it would have been nice to have a true fleet defender for instances like this. Perhaps with AWG-9 radar and a platform for the AIM-54.

AMRAAM+ and AESA radar are just fine, but a GE Tomcat's extra thrust, less drag, and higher top end would have been nice.

Quoting Checksixx (Reply 13):
Quoting AirRyan (Reply 5):
Not terribly impressed with the Super Hornet (versus what the ol' GE Powered Tomcats could do) took off when the bombers were 500 miles out and didn't get to them until they were 50 miles out of the Nimitz - that kind of stuff wasn't even allowed in Top Gun!

Think real hard about your comments...they launched, most likely into an established CAP zone (50 miles) around the carrier, and conducted the intercept when the aircraft reached that zone. The bomber was what...500 miles out? So around 1 hour give or take roughly 20 minutes depending on cruise speed. Yup...that makes sense. So what was the problem with the Super Hornet again???

Letting an unintentioned Russian bomber get within 100nm of your CVN sounds unwise, let alone 50nm.



User currently offlineBladeLWS From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 403 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4480 times:



Quoting AirRyan (Reply 22):
Letting an unintentioned Russian bomber get within 100nm of your CVN sounds unwise, let alone 50nm.

If they made a wrong move the cruisers and destroyers would of taken them out with Standard missiles before they could blink an eye.


User currently offlineRC135U From United States of America, joined May 2005, 293 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4428 times:



Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 15):
And that includes to fly around with some 2nd generation hardware of what the German Junckers technicians showed them 60 years ago.

Actually the Tu-95 and the B-52 have a common ancestor - the B-29. The Russians were able to reverse engineer the B-29 design using several of the bombers which landed in Soviet territory after raids on Japan, and the Tu-95 is a descendant of that aircraft. Also, if memory serves, I think there were some new-build Tu-95s produced perhaps 20 years ago.


25 Sovietjet : Russia has about 60 Tu-95MS bombers. These are 80s production airframes so not too old. Add in the Tu-160s and Tu-22Ms and the bomber force isn't exac
26 Flighty : !! Whatever. Although, it does make sense that we are talking about young military men, much in common on both sides, just checking each other's EQP
27 CO777ER : Heck, at 2000ft. msl, they could of used the Phalanx(CWIS).
28 Checksixx : Well we are not in a state of war with them, we are in international waters (they in international airspace)...being monitored by fighters...what wou
29 Post contains links Prebennorholm : "Ancestor", yes. And sure the B-29 was reverse engineered as the Tu-4. But there was hardly any design features or technology carried over from B-29
30 Post contains images BladeLWS : True, but the .50 cal close in defense weapons would be been more sporting.
31 AirRyan : Oh I'd have followed the ROE's just as well but would have Lt. Wong-Way'd their asses had they so much as opened their bomb doors. I'd like to think
32 Sprout5199 : That is taking the next step. Locking on is like pointing a gun at a cop. You don't lock on unless there is a definite threat. A Bear approaching fro
33 Celestar : Wanting to clarify a few points as I am confused? Did anyone know if the Tu95 actually fly past the US carrier? Or is it flying low and near-by ? I wo
34 Ptrjong : Why? It's completely legal to do so in international waters. Peter
35 Stickers : Well, it must have been a nice sight and sound anyway. Well done to all concerned for following procedures and remaining professional. I imagine such
36 DL767captain : Would this be considered an "act of aggression"? it seems like seeing bombers coming in and telling them to turn away and when they don't listen they
37 Sovietjet : No, why would it be. They technically have no right to tell it to "turn away". It's international airspace, if the Tu-95 chooses to fly right over th
38 Lumberton : But the TU-142s are.
39 Ptrjong : Don't you 'buzz' at 200 ft, rather than 2,000 ft? And are we quite sure a US P-3 would never overfly a Russian naval squadron in mid-ocean like this?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic US Alert Over Russian Bombers
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...
US 101 Over My House posted Sun Aug 19 2007 20:09:17 by StrandedInBGM
Fighter Planes Intercept Russian Bombers posted Sun Oct 1 2006 00:16:08 by Clickhappy
American And Soviet (Russian) Bombers posted Fri Jul 14 2006 23:50:11 by AislepathLight
Article: "New Dawn For Russian Bombers" posted Mon Jul 3 2006 21:25:52 by Lumberton
Russian Spyplane Flights Over US posted Thu Feb 23 2006 21:28:55 by Flyf15
US Military In Dogfight Over Drones posted Mon Aug 20 2007 03:48:02 by Halls120
France Pressures US Over Satellite Data posted Mon Jun 11 2007 02:33:56 by Connies4ever
May 9, 07: Meteorite Over US West Coast posted Thu May 10 2007 08:32:18 by Tomcat
Showdown Brewing Over US Export The F-22 Sales... posted Sun Jul 23 2006 07:09:05 by AirRyan
Britain In Battle With US Over Fighter Plane posted Tue Dec 20 2005 12:53:58 by Keesje
American And Soviet (Russian) Bombers posted Fri Jul 14 2006 23:50:11 by AislepathLight
Article: "New Dawn For Russian Bombers" posted Mon Jul 3 2006 21:25:52 by Lumberton
Russian Spyplane Flights Over US posted Thu Feb 23 2006 21:28:55 by Flyf15
Possible US Military A340 Flying Over & Around EFD posted Mon Dec 20 2010 16:35:15 by indcwby
US Auditer; Mil. Programs Over Budget And Late... posted Mon Mar 30 2009 22:50:01 by JoeCanuck
Russian Blackjack Bombers In Venezuela posted Thu Sep 11 2008 00:20:58 by Yanqui67

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format