It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russian bombers flew undetected across Arctic - AF commander

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Oh this better be some propaganda crapp, because what the heck are paying all them taxes for then?

22/ 04/ 2006


MOSCOW, April 22 (RIA Novosti) - Russian military planes flew undetected through the U.S. zone of the Arctic Ocean to Canada during recent military exercises, a senior Air Force commander said Saturday

The commander of the country's long-range strategic bombers, Lieutenant General Igor Khvorov, said the U.S. Air Force is now investigating why its military was unable to detect the Russian bombers.


en.rian.ru...

Guys, please contribute if anybody finds anything aboyt the USAF investigation.

If it will to AFOSI again, we'll never hear a damn thing about it.




posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 09:02 PM
link   
It was probably a fluke.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Interesting... not that long ago this would have been a hugh international incident and not gone unnoticed. But since the USSR was disbanded it appears that many fences have fallen. All the same somebody should have picked up the Ruskies and escorted them to their destination in a friendly but concerned manner.



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 12:10 AM
link   
would not be surprised, its just takes just one 2 get threw and if the RUSSIANs have revised their strategy then yes.

as for a TU-160
its very capable of doing so even for its size its radar cross section is smaller than that of the B-1B(and thats saying something because the B-1Bs cross section is very small too)



as for a TU-95MS(BEAR-H) not really
it has a "very very slim chance" of being able to break threw the US defensive net, it would have 2 require lots of MG on the flight path, ECM jamming and someone sleeping at their post it would seem to break threw, then there really a cause 4 alarm


as for a TU-22M3 no, way too far out would be pick up eventually



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 08:59 AM
link   
I am curious to know just how the Russians were able to determine that their supposed incursion into our northern hemisphere went "undetected".

Are they making that asssumption based upon a lack of response? Because no fighteres were scrambled to intercept them? Or was it because they have someone planted in NORAD who was personally oversaw the decision making process when the aircraft were first detected?

Sometimes, for very good reasons, incursions by foreign aircraft are met with a lessened response. It may be that there is interest in the intentions of the aircraft. Or, there may be an opportunity to collect intel on the aircraft itself and the C3I infrastructure supporting the mission. There are lots of reasons.....



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 09:12 AM
link   
Sounds like a load of bollocks, one tiny statement from a Russian general, BAH, I think is more like a prpoganda exercise for teh Russian people to make the Russian military seem less impotent.
Ifits is true, then the Russians won't have any objections if US B-1, B-2 and B-52 bombers encroach on their airspace.



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 11:56 AM
link   
It's all over the web by now.

Does not make sense. If they are BSing, all USAF has to do is disprove it with radar data and it'll make the Russians look like complete fools.

If USAF tries to shrug it of, somethings not right.

As it always been done, when ANY foreign craft gets ANY WARE close to violating our air space, it is kindly escorted by our birds, just to make sure that there will be no misunderstanding.

A whole lot of Bear pictures were taken on such "moon walks".

I'll wait for USAF response, and especially about that investigation, who's conducting it, and what they'll come up with.



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 12:12 PM
link   
I agree with the iskander. If it was bs the US would do everything to disprove it .


[edit on 24-4-2006 by Russian Boy]



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 12:14 PM
link   
Maybe it was plasma stealth but i doubt it. Theres no way it would stay on while making turns and would make quite a communications interference. The best explanation would be terrain masking. besides its over the Aartic ocean i dont think there are any air defenses over there. If it got into canada undetected then its the canadian's problems. It wouldve been different if it flew into the continental US.

[edit on 24-4-2006 by urmomma158]



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 12:22 PM
link   
I don't find it particularly surprising or hard to believe.

Fact is the US military is geared for offensive operations in other people's countries (preferably those with third-rate militaries and first rate oil reserves), not the defense of the US proper, and has been since WW2.

Not that there is much point in investing a great deal in defending against the Russians. Fact is, if the Russians want to nuke us, we're toast. We can console ourselves with the fact that if they do, they'll be toast too...



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 01:16 PM
link   
The Russians have certainly talked about bolt-on plasma stealth from some aircraft, though not this one IIRC. Plasma stealth can cut radar return by about two orders of magnitude (not awesome, but useful) - and turning is not a problem! - though I suspect a combination of techniques may have been used.

The response will be interesting.



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 01:25 PM
link   
hmmmmmm, there seems to be another thread on this topic as well. Perhaps a system could be developed by ATS mods to help eliminate or consolidate similar threads.

Anyway, to reply to this thread, all that I can say is that our "friends" the Russians are certainly trying to tell us something. Perhaps it is time to re-evaluate our relationship with the Russians and to consider why Putin would allow a deliberate incursion into U.S. airspace.

When this sort of thing happened during the "Cold War", the Russians would say that it was an accident or there was a navigational malfunction. This time they admitted to deliberately entering American air space. All in all, this is quite provocative and a rather disturbing development. It will be interesting to see how this incident unfolds.



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 01:37 PM
link   
I'm curious to know just what exactly the "U.S. zone of the Arctic Ocean" is, and why the heck would we be interested in expending a lot of time, money, fuel & resources to intercept Russian aircraft that chose to fly through that area in the first place? It doesn't sound like Canadian or US airspace to me.........



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 04:50 PM
link   
This is nothing new, and as I said earlier this time I would like to see how the current administration is going to respond to it.

I have a hunch that Russians are stepping up their flights as a response to us muscling in on Eastern Europe. Georgia, Ukraine, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Belarus, and other ex-Soviet republics.

Bush administration has been aggressively pushing for dismantlement of Russian EWR systems in ex-Soviet republics, the ones the Russians have been "leasing" data from since the collapse of the USSR.

It got to the point when just by paying of the right people the installations were shut down completely and demolished, so Putin was forced to allocate emergency funds to build a whole new EWR system in St. Petersberg on double time.

So even now Russians got a giant gaping hole in their air defense, and since now they're forced to pay through the nose for rebuilding their EWR systems on Russian soil, I would not be at all surprised if they are poking fingers at the diminishing Norad capability in order to force us into upgrading our systems.

Here's the a link to NATO air space buzzing in 1999

www.cbsnews.com...

This one was in Alaska/Canada from December 2000

news.bbc.co.uk...



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pyros
I'm curious to know just what exactly the "U.S. zone of the Arctic Ocean" is, and why the heck would we be interested in expending a lot of time, money, fuel & resources to intercept Russian aircraft that chose to fly through that area in the first place? It doesn't sound like Canadian or US airspace to me.........


Reason being is that going over the Arctic is a considerable short cut when flying from Russia to the US.

Also, it's not "the Canadians" problem, as it is within the sphere of NORAD's control, which, of course, the Canadians are involved in.

The last thing you want to do is ignore the Arctic circle and blame the Canadians, as it is a convenient back door.



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 07:00 PM
link   
well im certain that there are barely any sam sites there anyways why would you want to defend that area and who knows what would happen if we shot it down.not to mention long wave radars are ineffective at low altitudes esecially under terrain masking and if the Ac is using ECM. I mean with ECM and terrain masking we can penetrate some extent of someones airspace with a B-1.

heres a scenario Patriot man#1: Check out the bomber lets shoot it down!
Patriot man#2: OK

Kaboom next thing you know its war with russia fllowed bya nuclear holocaust and WW3 that's the last thing we need.


[edit on 24-4-2006 by urmomma158]

[edit on 24-4-2006 by urmomma158]



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 07:06 PM
link   
This is a classic case of do not believe everything you read in the media.





seekerof



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by urmomma158
well im certain that there are barely any sam sites there anyways why would you want to defend that area and who knows what would happen if we shot it down.


You'd want (and do) defend that area for the reasons I stated above. Try reading the thread before posting. It's a shortcut for Russian bombers and has been since the 50's. As for "shooting" it down, why would you? Do what you always do and send up a few birds to take a look, then politley tell them to sling their hook. It's happened many times before.

Agree with Seeker though, would have though NORAD would have that area pretty well covered and I would be surprised if the US had no idea about the incursion. The silence over it, as some of you had mentioned, could be a strategic misinfo decision.

Imagine if your "competition" announced it had penertrated your airspace undetected and believed it wholeheartedly. Makes sense to let them believe it in my book.

Then, if anything untoward happens in the future and they think to themselves "Hey, we can bomb the US via the Arctic now, they don't watch it anymore", you can really surprise them when you take out there entire incoming wave of bombers.



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Very interesting Stumason this is a very logical explantion. You make a very good point we should make our enemies think we cant defend our airspace. next time someone tries to sneak in...........its going to get shot out of the air! Anyway there have been plenty of times when the Us flew into russian airspace although detected not scratched one bit at the height of the cold war. respect the almighty SR 71!!!!!


This ac nver fails to amaze me!



posted on Apr, 24 2006 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by urmomma158
Very interesting Stumason this is a very logical explantion. You make a very good point we should make our enemies think we cant defend our airspace. next time someone tries to sneak in...........its going to get shot out of the air! Anyway there have been plenty of times when the Us flew into russian airspace although detected not scratched one bit at the height of the cold war. respect the almighty SR 71!!!!!


This ac nver fails to amaze me!

The SR-71 never truely flew over Soviet airspace(in regards to deep mainland Russia) because at the time the Soviets did in fact have SAMs that could shoot it down.

The SR-71 DID fly over Soviet provinces that bordered the USSR, but never deeply mainland. Always skimming the border squeezing as many photos as possible.

Shattered OUT...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join