RAF ready to shoot down Russian aircraft over Syria

a reply to: Shamrock6

Yeah I already addressed that, since the circumstances have changed, A2A weapons are now being carried.

RAF have not been give a green light to shoot down anything Russian in Syria airspace unless under attack themselves..aka hostlie. Stupid tabloids like the Daily Star just like to put a different slant on things, now it's The Sunday Times being vague. Reuters are taking a different tack,

www.reuters.com...

a reply to: Death_Kron

You posted as I was typing my comment. Wasn't trying to pile on, as I hadn't seen your comment about having it click for you.

Basic point is to keep clear lines of communications including telling before hand which area or squares on the map grid will certain air force will be flying etc.

Regarding locking on the radar, that should be avoided as IS or AQ and other rebels do not have any air force hence the other plane is atleast neutral meaning leave them alone.

There must be lots of air to air combat protocols like step 1-2-3 etc. Hence a hotline between war rooms etc. can come real handy in avoiding any mishap.

Because of having ground intel through the Syrian Army, the Russians are able to do a better job at bombing the jihadists. The western powers should NOT initiate any moves that would unnecessarily create tensions and deviate focus of destroying jihadist elements on the ground.

a reply to: victor7

You mean things like locking on to Turkish fighters near the border, in Turkish airspace?

Yeah, the West is escalating things alright.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I do not know how this locking and target painting of airplanes works.

But Russian pilots doing so even from Syrian airspace let alone inside the Turkish borders..........is not right a demeanor and it should not happen again.

ISIS and others do not have airforce so skies are not cluttered with the enemy a/c. Even verbal talk can keeps lots of unneeded events from happening.

Evil is on the ground and that's where the focus should be.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: victor7

You mean things like locking on to Turkish fighters near the border, in Turkish airspace?

Yeah, the West is escalating things alright.

Agreed, BUT

Russia was invited their by the legitimate government of Syria, whereas the USA led coalition that includes the likes of France, the UK and even Australia until just recently have no such authority from the govt.

Therefore they are technically invading forces.

I am a huge fan of the idea of the US coalition working on the Iraqi side of the problem and Russia working on the Syrian side. That way everyone gets their bit of dirt to play with their war toys on and the common enemy (ISIS) can be quashed in a more organised fashion without this need for hostility between two sides who actually have the same goal.

I mean staring WW3 over the who gets to fight the same enemy? Has the world gone completely mad?

Avoiding Crisis: US Aircraft Ordered to Make Way for Russian Jets in Syria


In the wake of US-Russian discussions on preventing accidental collisions between each others' aircraft while operating in the sky over Syria, the American side issued a special rule, prohibiting US jets from closely approaching Russian planes.

sputniknews.com...

It seems British are stuck-up but American are more level headed and practical. More so, when results are showing that Russian strikes have been more effective due to co-ordination with Syrian forces on ground.

Talk is cheap, and we know they dont have the stupidity to shoot down the Russians, if they do how will they deal with the repercussions?

If Russia sinks thier navy and flattens thier air fields and power stations they will be in a world of hurt begging for the USA and NATO to save thier arses.

No they cant seriously be thinking about going to war with Russia.

originally posted by: markosity1973

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: victor7

You mean things like locking on to Turkish fighters near the border, in Turkish airspace?

Yeah, the West is escalating things alright.

Agreed, BUT

Russia was invited their by the legitimate government of Syria, whereas the USA led coalition that includes the likes of France, the UK and even Australia until just recently have no such authority from the govt.

Therefore they are technically invading forces.

I am a huge fan of the idea of the US coalition working on the Iraqi side of the problem and Russia working on the Syrian side. That way everyone gets their bit of dirt to play with their war toys on and the common enemy (ISIS) can be quashed in a more organised fashion without this need for hostility between two sides who actually have the same goal.

I mean staring WW3 over the who gets to fight the same enemy? Has the world gone completely mad?

The UK are in Iraq by invitation, they have no mandate to bomb Syria.

originally posted by: victor7
Avoiding Crisis: US Aircraft Ordered to Make Way for Russian Jets in Syria


In the wake of US-Russian discussions on preventing accidental collisions between each others' aircraft while operating in the sky over Syria, the American side issued a special rule, prohibiting US jets from closely approaching Russian planes.

sputniknews.com...

It seems British are stuck-up but American are more level headed and practical. More so, when results are showing that Russian strikes have been more effective due to co-ordination with Syrian forces on ground.

Stuck up? We aren't flying in Syria, get your facts straight before calling us stuck up.

originally posted by: Forensick

The UK are in Iraq by invitation, they have no mandate to bomb Syria.

Then there should be no need for the two to have hostility toward one another should they remain in Iraq. Everything goes according to my idea then.

I still don't understand all this chest beating over Russia going into Syria. You'd think that as an intelligent and civilised world, we'd applaud some help in beating terrorist and roll out the welcome mat for them then talk strategy to get the common enemy on the run.

Maybe I'm the crazy one for thinking logic and common sense applies here

Moscow demands explanation after RAF reportedly 'ready to shoot down' Russian planes 'over Iraq'

Sergey Lavrov’s office issued an official request to the British Foreign Office, demanding explanations. The diplomatic note was delivered by Russian Ambassador to the UK Aleksandr Yakovenko.

“We are concerned by media reports as far as they refer to senior members of the Cabinet. We urgently requested the UK Foreign Office's clarifications. At the same time, the hypothesis itself of a potential conflict between British and Russian aircraft in the skies over Iraq is incomprehensible. As is known, the Russian jets are not involved in attacks on ISIL targets on (Iraqi) territory,” the Russian ambassador told RIA Novosti.

are the Russian planes carrying a2a missiles? if not then surely they just get together and agree that neither will pack any of that stuff and thus more bombs can be carried by both sides

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Not really sure what the big deal is? RAF believes there's a chance Russian aircraft may engage RAF aircraft, so they give RAF aircraft a means to respond to that.

The way the headline makes it sound, it's as if RAF has told their pilots to go hunt bogeys.

No air to air threat = no air to air armament. Air to air threat appears, regardless of the actual chance of it happening = air to air armament being added to packages.

Pretty simple, since the alternative is "RAF Tornado shot down, had no means to defend itself" as a headline.

This here absolutely sums up the whole thing.
It is a change in practice because there has been a change in situation. The media love to scare the public, don't they?

They are authorised to fire IF fired upon.

Tbh i think Putin has gone in a done whats needed.

Obama is like, "no dont kill those terrorists, just kill these ones" and David "The Coward" Cameron is an idiot.

Putin will wipe them all out and hopefully free Palestine

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Death_Kron

You posted as I was typing my comment. Wasn't trying to pile on, as I hadn't seen your comment about having it click for you.

No worries, made the fundamental mistake of not really thinking before I posted

Its a storm in a teacup.

As zaph said its just standard procedure. Long as Russia dont shot at us we wont shot at them.

The UK trust me wont be picking a fight with Russia lol I mean what are we meant to invade them with? We only have 80,000 ground troops

U.S. delivers 50 tons of ammunition to Syria rebel groups

U.S. military cargo planes gave 50 tons of ammunition to rebel groups overnight in northern Syria, using an air drop of 112 pallets as the first step in the Obama Administration's urgent effort to find new ways to support those groups.

www.cnn.com...

originally posted by: clearmind
So as ive read these west propaganda pieces...the west is always the first to say " we will protect ourselves by engaging russian aircraft" .....the only time i hear russia say that if after thr west says/ makes the threat. Isnt the bad guys that always threaten first?! Putin has playef his hand with masterfull presicion...obama should just give up now

give it a rest....did it ever occur to you, that Putin is the one that is being played?.....