Russian Su-27s in another dangerous interecpt

a reply to: boomer135

So was that Chinese fighter that hit the EP-3. All it takes is one tiny mistake by either pilot.

We used to buzz Bears didn't we?

a reply to: cavtrooper7

There is a procedure to, and many years ago a treaty was signed on interceptions because both sides pushed things.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: boomer135

Yes, but with tankers, it's formation trained pilots, flying a planned mission. An intercept isn't planned, nor is it trained for like that. That's what makes it so dangerous. All it takes is for one pilot to react wrong, or make a wrong move, and a big mess occurs.

And how many "wrong moves" have happened with big messes?

Go on tell us now, don't be shy with the facts.
But then that might be harder then spewing propaganda.

Yes, only western and especially American pilots are trained. Russian pilots don't get trained, they just pick a jet they like and off they go, they learn on the job. With a bottle of vodka too, naturally.


Keep bleating on about how dangerous it is.
I'm sure the pilots of our own aircraft that are sent to spy on Russia, China and others are totally under the impression that their jobs are 110% totally safe. Nothing could go wrong could it, like that country you're sent to spy on sending up fighter jets to intercept your aircraft that's spying on them.

Of course, it's the evil Russians fault for not allowing you to spy on them.
How dare they send up their jets to intercept spy aircraft directed against them. Just who do they think they are?!!

You're just a western drone..nothing original to say, just repeat the same old propaganda.


And your comment regarding the photos.
I never said they were fake.
Photos could be from another place, with the exact nature of what those aircraft were doing being totally different to what's claimed.
Photos can also be faked, digitally. You can deny this all you want, just like people used to deny your phone can be used to track you, listen in on you and view what you're doing/where you are..but now it's suddenly a reality for everyone.
And no I'm not saying that any of that is the case with any photos of Russian jets intercepting western aircraft spying on Russia, just that anything is possible.

ps, I'm not saying what the Russian's do isn't dangerous.
But what exactly do you expect them to do when western governments send aircraft to spy on them? Give them directions via radio to the nearest sensitive military installations?

The same reasons our governments intercept Russian aircraft that start to get too close, is the same reasons they intercept our aircraft.

a reply to: mortex

You want to break down how many Allied planes have been shot down or damaged by the Russians? It's a HELL of a lot more than Russian planes being shot down by Allies.

I NEVER said that the Russian pilots weren't trained, now did I. So maybe instead of showing how "enlightened" you are, and talking about how everyone that doesn't go on about how great Russia is is a drone, you should READ what was said. American pilots fly with tankers ALL THE TIME. Russian pilots don't fly with them nearly as much, although that is changing. They also have different procedures for flying with their tankers.

I ALSO said that a wrong move by the pilots on EITHER SIDE OF THE INTERCEPT could cause an accident. I NEVER said that it would only be the Russian pilots fault.

Show me where I said the Russians were wrong to intercept the plane at all. Show me once where I even hinted that. I HAVE NO PROBLEM with them intercepting ANY plane that goes near their airspace. But I guess you think that since it's Russia they don't have to abide by the treaty they signed for this to prevent accidents. Russia can do no wrong, right? I mean it's RUSSIA for Christ's sake! They're GOD!

Give me a freaking break.

originally posted by: mortex
And how many "wrong moves" have happened with big messes?

Go on tell us now, don't be shy with the facts.
But then that might be harder then spewing propaganda.

*Yawn*

USN EP-3 collision with J-8
Norweigen P-3 collision with Su-27

Those are just the collisions. That's not counting the shootdowns, or the attempts to shootdown aircraft (both civil and military). Plus the ferret missions incurring damage, loss of life, or complete losses of planes and crew.

I didn't see anyone take issue with the interceptions -- only the dangerous manner in which they are being performed.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: mortex

You want to break down how many Allied planes have been shot down or damaged by the Russians? It's a HELL of a lot more than Russian planes being shot down by Allies.

I NEVER said that the Russian pilots weren't trained, now did I. So maybe instead of showing how "enlightened" you are, and talking about how everyone that doesn't go on about how great Russia is is a drone, you should READ what was said. American pilots fly with tankers ALL THE TIME. Russian pilots don't fly with them nearly as much, although that is changing. They also have different procedures for flying with their tankers.

I ALSO said that a wrong move by the pilots on EITHER SIDE OF THE INTERCEPT could cause an accident. I NEVER said that it would only be the Russian pilots fault.

Show me where I said the Russians were wrong to intercept the plane at all. Show me once where I even hinted that. I HAVE NO PROBLEM with them intercepting ANY plane that goes near their airspace. But I guess you think that since it's Russia they don't have to abide by the treaty they signed for this to prevent accidents. Russia can do no wrong, right? I mean it's RUSSIA for Christ's sake! They're GOD!

Give me a freaking break.

Well no, you never said that, but your post implied that western jets flying in formation close to each other, means they are trained to fly close by, while their Russian counterparts are not and therefore dangerous.

When did I go on about how great Russia is?

I don't believe in everything the media tells us. I also believe they don't always tell us all the facts.
Have you ever seen in our western media about how a western country's aircraft dangerously intercepted some other country's aircraft?
Will say, Norwegian media talk about say an American jet dangerously intercepting, say a Russian, or Chinese aircraft?
Of course not. Neither will Russian media shine such a spotlight on it's own.

It's called propaganda. It's an information war.
What Russian's think of America or the West, is irrelevant in the West. What Americans or Westerners think of the West is important in the West.

This whole Russia vs America thing is all a big show anyway.
How many country's were "outraged" over the MH17 incident? How many blamed Russia straight away without any proof, without an investigation being carried out?
Yet Putin is still attending the G20 in Australia next month. Why? Because the corporations have more say then me, you, our politicians who are their puppets.

Did you know that a group of 85 people control nearly 50% of the worlds wealth? I bet it would be pretty interesting to trace where their tentacles reach around the world.

a reply to: mortex

Because whether you admit it or not western pilots ARE better trained than Russian pilots. Even Russia says that. They get more flight time in a month than most Russian pilots get in a year, or at least until recently.

And no, you don't hear about western pilots, because 9.9 times out of ten they don't go screaming by at 50 feet off a wingtip.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: mortex

Because whether you admit it or not western pilots ARE better trained than Russian pilots. Even Russia says that. They get more flight time in a month than most Russian pilots get in a year, or at least until recently.

And no, you don't hear about western pilots, because 9.9 times out of ten they don't go screaming by at 50 feet off a wingtip.

US piolits probably have more flight hours than Russian pilots. But not all NATO nations have more hours than Russian pilots. In Norway Our fighter pilots hardly get to fly the hourse demended by NATO or the flight time demended by Our government. Usually flight time is given to the New educated pilots, even they strugle to have the hours demended.

This is mostly do to lack of flight technicians and F-16s that are in poor condition do to age.

I dont think flight hours will improve when we get the F-35. Because of the lack of technicians and the costss of keeping them maintained. Educating pilots and technicians for the F-35 is probably also going to cost more than it does for educating for the F-16.

a reply to: spy66

But even with the flight hours they have they train extensively in intercepting other aircraft, and the procedures for it. NATO has entire exercises dedicated to intercepting and identifying aircraft.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: spy66

But even with the flight hours they have they train extensively in intercepting other aircraft, and the procedures for it. NATO has entire exercises dedicated to intercepting and identifying aircraft.

It is true that we on almost daily bases intersept both sea and air from Russia. Intersepting is one thing improving on options if a interseptions dosent go as planned is different. These options have to be worked on and worked on, and that demands flight time and other reasources from the airforce.

Once a week we have exercises With Sweeden. One week its on Our turf the NeXT week it is on theirs. The Whole thing if there are no technical problems, last for about 75 minuts. The specter they practice are many. But you know how good you become if you practice many specters for one houre once a week. You dont become good on any of them. You just become known to the different aspects of the job.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: mortex

Because whether you admit it or not western pilots ARE better trained than Russian pilots. Even Russia says that. They get more flight time in a month than most Russian pilots get in a year, or at least until recently.

And no, you don't hear about western pilots, because 9.9 times out of ten they don't go screaming by at 50 feet off a wingtip.

Why wouldn't I admit that?
I'm not pro-Russian, anti-Western..although I have nothing against Russia in general. They haven't done anything to me, or a country I'm from or is of relevance to me in some way. All they are doing is reacting to a form of aggression from OUR side. Can't really blame them can we? Our side would do the same. Heck I can think of an example where this sort of stuff has been happening for years between two country's supposedly on the same side. Nobody bats an eye lid when one of those countries sends it's F16's flying through a live fire naval exercise though or causes mid air collisions resulting in deaths. You'd think NATO would slap that country down at least behind closed doors and pull them into line, but nup, geopolitics and all you see.

Question for you, not sure if it's been asked or answered, but these Russian pilots who come so dangerously close, are they doing this on orders from their commanders, or is it their own initiative to get that close and show the underside loaded with missiles?

a reply to: mortex

It is not often we hear of Russians being agressive when it comes to interseptions in the air. It does happen once now and then, Pilots do have amind of their own and sometimes they go a bit far. But i dont think its a Russian policy to be highly agressive.

a reply to: mortex

And no one HAS blamed them for intercepting them, although I'd hardly call flying outside their airspace monitoring signals aggression. It's HOW some of them go that people have issue with.

As to why, it's not clear if it's orders or the pilot although most put it on the pilot.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: mortex

And no one HAS blamed them for intercepting them, although I'd hardly call flying outside their airspace monitoring signals aggression. It's HOW some of them go that people have issue with.

As to why, it's not clear if it's orders or the pilot although most put it on the pilot.

Can you tell me the main differences in how Russia and America intercept aircraft?
Like what are the standard procedures they follow..

a reply to: mortex

Most of the time both Russian and American pilots intercept the same way, as agreed upon by a treaty signed in the 1970s.

In a normal intercept, two fighters are involved. One joins up, usually off the left wing, a couple hundred feet out. Close enough for a good look but far enough to keep the pilot from making a bad move.

They may slide underneath, examining antennas, etc, and may take pictures.

The other fighter hangs back in an overwatch position. As agreed they don't lock radar on, and in the case of the Russian bombers used, they point their tail guns up and away from the fighter.

They fly like that until out of the ADIZ, or beyond a certain point.

That's how both sides NORMALLY intercept.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
Most of the time both Russian and American pilots intercept the same way, as agreed upon by a treaty signed in the 1970s.

Treaties between the US and Russia have exactly what to do with something that occurs between Russia and Sweden?

No treaty with the US or NATO has any bearing on this.

As for following 'International Laws'...call me when the US is done paying decades old court orders to Canada...their supposed 'ally', before we start talking about how 'optional' it is between non-friendlies.

a reply to: peck420

It has to do with the question asked, if you actually read it.

And the US and international law has what to do with this or was that just your excuse to bash the US?

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: peck420
It has to do with the question asked, if you actually read it.

And the US and international law has what to do with this or was that just your excuse to bash the US?

Your answer had bumpkiss to do with the question asked. The question is how the US and Russia's intercept procedures differ.

You answered by stating how an intercept between the US and Russia takes place, per a treaty between the US and Russia.

That has zero bearing on how either country conducts an intercept with a country that they do not have a treaty with.

As for bashing the US, pfft, her hypocrisy speaks for itself.

a reply to: peck420

And treaty or not, the procedures are the same. The treaty merely formalized them at a time when planes were coming home with holes in them, or not coming back at all, from multiple countries. The SOP is the same regardless of who is being intercepted. It was built by both sides off that treaty.