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 planes again fly over U.S. Navy ships

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by aorAki
This occurred in international waters, there's no real reason for them not to do it, particularly when it is closer to Russia, and China, than the land o' apple pie and greed


I'll warrant that Obama has bigger Cojones than you.


There is no reason to make a personal attack on me or my giant Cojones.


1) During the Reagan administration, we were in the Cold War; therefore, cannot make an analogy to today.

2) I'm no expert on Naval activity; however, there has been a lot in the news lately about foreign nations making aggresive manuvers in relation to our Navy. Seems unusual to me as I can't remember reading about this kind of stuff with this kind of frequency in recent memory.

3) I think that Biden was right, and that Barak is being challenged and tested to see how he reacts. I think that there are always ways for the Military to engage someone in a way that will tell them that this is unacceptable and should not continue in a suttle way.

4) My Land of Apple Pie and greed is better than your country, and I can say that without even knowing where your from because there is no better place to live that the USA!




posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by HugmyRek
Could as well have been the US flying Russian built aircraft in pursuit of a media campaign-or China flying them for that matter-to stir things up between the two of them.

I just can't buy things at face value. What does Russia have to say?


And you don't think Russia would call shenanigans in that case?

So far as those shocked and awed that we didn't start ww4 it goes to show the might the navy that they were so confidant. A lesser force may have shot at the Russians for fear. The Russians paid us a compliment seenig as they knew that our sailors are to proffesional to start a war neither nation wants or needs. So I say thanks for the props commrades


I think this is my first post in over a year and my first post using an iPhone (so forgive my poor spelling I javefat thumbs and this thing is bitch for me use) Good to back, ATS

[edit on 19-3-2009 by cavscout]



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Just a question for those who think that the new administration is being testsed.

What was the US meant to do in International waters?
No one owns the waters giving us the name international waters, meaning anyone can fly, sail or swim there.

Was the US meant to shoot at the jets and cause an international event?
How would it be explained?
A jet was flying over international waters and we shot it because international waters belong to..........?



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   
I dont think that this is all about the international water. What this is about is Russia playing games with the US fleet by doing fly bys over the ships taunting our military. How big is the Ocean? And they had to fly DIRECTLY over our fleet, only 500 feet above? That to me is taunting. Its not a crime, but its the same as a playground bully trying to pick on other kids by flexing his muscles.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 10:34 PM
link   
reply to post by munkey66
 


Your statement is a little niave. If you were walking on a public street and I was walking on that same street, would it be okay for me to walk right up to you an get in your personal space?

Don't I have just as much right to stand on the same peice of sidewalk as you? What if I pushed you so that I could stand exactly where you are while there is plenty of space elsewhere?



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 10:34 PM
link   
Maybe they felt left out? Maybe we should invite them to the war training exercise next time.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   
reply to post by finemanm
 


It stopped making the news years ago. Then it stopped happening because of other events going on, and our relations. But it happened during the first Bush administration, the Clinton administration, the second Bush administration, and now. After the Kittyhawk flyover in 2004, they stopped going over carriers until Nimitz last year. The press is making a big issues of these since they haven't been happening nearly as much as they did during the cold war.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Common Good
 


No, it's called reconnaissance. Just like when the Soviets used to sail "fishing trawlers" loaded down with ELINT gear around out battle groups. Just like when the US used to fly right along their borders with RC-135s loaded down with ELINT gear. Of course they're going to fly directly over the battle group. How else are they going to get pictures and signals? If the Russians has carriers like the US does, then the US would be doing the EXACT same thing.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 10:47 PM
link   
Like they dont already know what we have in the waters

Hey I got an Idea, lets just send all of our fighter jets where all their ships are, and fly by them all day long, Im sure they wont mind since it is international waters, and we are just doing "recon". naw, they wouldnt mind at all.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Common Good
Like they dont already know what we have in the waters


It's part reconnaissance and part show. Sure they know what we have but nothing can compensate for eyes and ears over a target.


Originally posted by Common Good
Hey I got an Idea, lets just send all of our fighter jets where all their ships are...


Fighter jets are not aircraft designed with reconnaissance as a primary missions, so that would be inappropriate and could be misinterpreted. We flew, and still fly RC-135s during Russian ballistic missiles tests, send subs to monitor their war games etc., it's not "taunting". You can't take it on personal terms, it's just two militaries observing each other in a semi open way.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Common Good
 


Hmm, let's see here.... Do you SERIOUSLY think that over the life of a US carrier NOTHING changes? There are no new radar systems, or air defense systems, or communications systems, or any changes to our defense policies? Do you have any idea how long a Nimitz class ship is in inventory?

The USS Stennis that hit the water in 1995 has a LOT of different systems than the John C Stennis that they just overflew. Sure, they know the names of all our ships, and they have a good idea where they are at any given time. What they don't know is what's changed.

The Aegis radar system has had multiple software upgrades since that program started. As well as hardware changes. How do you think they find out when it happens? We don't send them a letter saying "Hey, we just changed our systems. Here are some specs on the new stuff."


Do you really think that we don't have AWACS, and RC-135s, and U-2s, and Global Hawks, and submarines all over the place when there's a Russian exercise going on? Of course we do.

[edit on 3/19/2009 by Zaphod58]



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 11:24 PM
link   
reply to post by finemanm
 


Who is to say my statement is a little niave?
I didn't know that ships could fly

Since when did the US navy have an exclusion zone in international waters?

What would the reaction be if Russia had a sub sitting on the bottom and a US war ship went over the top?

Using your same analogy.
If you drove your ferrari up to a set of traffic lights, does that mean that pedestrians are not allowed to look at or walk passed the car?
Being on a public street means that everyone can look, they may not be allowed to touch, but they can sure look as close as they want.

If you don't want something looked at, keep it at home, very simple rule.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Common Good
 


Hmm, let's see here.... Do you SERIOUSLY think that over the life of a US carrier NOTHING changes? There are no new radar systems, or air defense systems, or communications systems, or any changes to our defense policies? Do you have any idea how long a Nimitz class ship is in inventory?

The USS Stennis that hit the water in 1995 has a LOT of different systems than the John C Stennis that they just overflew. Sure, they know the names of all our ships, and they have a good idea where they are at any given time. What they don't know is what's changed.

The Aegis radar system has had multiple software upgrades since that program started. As well as hardware changes. How do you think they find out when it happens? We don't send them a letter saying "Hey, we just changed our systems. Here are some specs on the new stuff."


Do you really think that we don't have AWACS, and RC-135s, and U-2s, and Global Hawks, and submarines all over the place when there's a Russian exercise going on? Of course we do.

[edit on 3/19/2009 by Zaphod58]



You want me to answer all those questions? Or are you just trying to show me how intelligent you are with all of those questions? Those were well thought out, and I am sure you know your ships and your jets. Good stuff, Im glad you do. I can appreciate that.
With that said, I still dont agree with what they did, and the games that they are playing. Hey, you said it, everything is fine here, nothing to see here, lets all just keep moving along. No threat at all. This stuff has been going on for a long time, we are just playing tag in the ocean.
I dont buy it, and the way I see everyone acting up right now, I dont think they are considering any of this a game. Hey its International water, everyone is open to do whatever they want, no consequences. I just hope that one day, the next time they fly them 'recon jets' over our fleets, that they dont accidentally drop something on em. Just my opinion though, Im not a Navy or air force guy, Im not sure how you all do it, and Im sure you have it handled. I will know who to talk to if something did happen while we just stood by and watched it happen.
Like I said, Im a nobody in this field, I just find it weird and out of base.

EDIT- If this stuff happens all the time, then why is it breaking news?

[edit on 19-3-2009 by Common Good]



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Common Good
 


It's not a game, it's serious. But as Westpoint said, the people involved are professionals and they have an unwritten set of rules that they go by when this happens. This is a non-story blown out of proportion by the media.

If you look up the last couple of years, the Russians have been improving their military capabilities, so they have to train. That's the other aspect to this. The Russians have to fly long distance flights, to get training in overwater navigation, inflight refueling etc.

From 2007 until June 2008 there were 18 TU-95 flights along the 12 mile exclusion zone around Alaska. Since June 2008, there have been many more.


"Two Tu-95MS strategic bombers took off from an airbase in eastern Russia on Tuesday and successfully carried out a patrol mission over the neutral waters of the Arctic Ocean and near Alaska," Lt. Col. Vladimir Drik told RIA Novosti.

The spokesman said that during the 10-hour mission, the crews practiced instrumental flight maneuvers in arctic climate conditions.

"On route, the bombers were accompanied for 10 minutes by four USAF F-15 Eagle fighters," Drik added.

Russia resumed regular strategic bomber patrol flights over the Pacific, Atlantic, and Arctic oceans in August 2007, following an order signed by then-president Vladimir Putin.

All flights by Russian aircraft are performed in strict compliance with international law on the use of airspace over neutral waters, without violating the borders of other states.

en.rian.ru...

There really is nothing to see here.

The reason that it's such a big deal in the media is because as I said in a previous post, the Russians stopped these missions for several years. They started flying them again in 2007, after only flying a handful of them. Prior to that they were never in the news because they happened so often.

[edit on 3/19/2009 by Zaphod58]



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 11:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


okay, so are there any rules about doing these types of things while others nations are on-going in war games?
more.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 11:44 PM
link   
reply to post by munkey66
 


I give you a star for an elequent retort! However, I still disagree with you. Its pretty clear that the Russian are playing a pretty agressive game here. Fly over, fine, but completely ignoring the US pilots attempts to communicate? That just sounds like something that could be misinterprated for a very aggressive act towards a military vessel.

Durring the Cuban Missile Crisis, we came really close to WWIII merely because the proximaty of the Russian Warships and planes to ours. Where you play these games and leave very little room for error, you run the risk that an accident or mistake could cause a major overreaction who knows what else.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 11:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Common Good
 


They actually happen MORE during exercises. Because that's then the other side turns on the gear you're trying to find out about. They'll have fire control radars up and running, comm systems going full bore, possibly jamming systems up and running etc.

The only real rules is that if there is an active operation going on, like they're doing air combat maneuvering, you stay outside the exercise area. Before the exercise goes on a NOTAM (NOtice To AirMen) is posted showing the restricted areas that you have to stay out of. Planes like the US RC-135 will fly right up to the edge of the exercise area and try to get as much information as they can, without going into the exercise area.



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 11:50 PM
link   
reply to post by finemanm
 


They may not have been talking on the radio, but they WERE complying with the "rules". I would be more worried if they ignored the F-18s and didn't communicate on radio, or a couple of other things. It is unusual to NOT talk on radio, but as long as they're complying with what the interceptors are up to, and don't try to push them off, and obey the other informal rules of the game, there isn't much chance for a shooting match to occur.

[edit on 3/19/2009 by Zaphod58]



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


What about the lack of communication between the aircraft and the carriers?
Is that explainable?



posted on Mar, 19 2009 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Common Good
 


It is very unusual, but I'm willing to bet that there was visual communication going on. I would be more worried if the IL-38s tried to push the F-18s around, and were carrying missiles. The Bears would be flying with tail guns up and being kept away from the interceptors to show non-hostile intent.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join