Air Force confirms Russian jets circled US territory of Guam.

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 18 2013 @ 02:30 AM
link   
reply to post by CarbonBase
 


I'm well aware how the Cold War went. After Powers was shot down in 1960 overflights stopped. Even in the Bering Sea. They fly close to the US, without entering territorial airspace, and we do the same to them. Again, prove they were armed with nukes, and prove they overfly or overflew the US, and they did it without us knowing it while armed with nukes..




posted on Feb, 18 2013 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Helious
 



The odds are that they were Tu-95MR, known as the Bear E, or Tu-95RTs, known as the Bear D. The MR was modified for photo recon, and the other for SIGINT. They were out there because the Air Force recently announced that for the first time since the crash in 2008, a pair of B-2 bombers were deploying to Anderson AB, I'm willing to bet.


All those earlier Tu-95 Bear variants such as Bear D and Bear E have long since gone. Just Tu-95MS Bear H and Tu-142M MR Bear F and Bear J. There is probably a limited electronic package on the Tu-95MS Bear H for basic SIGINT/ELINT as the crews operate on these out of area flights?

Even the old Tu-95 variants used for crew training were scrapped in the early 1990s. Some of these were Bear As and Es.


BEAR T - TU-95U -- About a dozen surviving 'Bear-As' were converted to Tu-95U configuration, with sealed bomb bays and a broad red band painted around the rear fuselage. Under the START I agreement, the Parties agreed that all airplanes formerly known to the United States of America as Bear E and now known as Bear T, which are designated by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as Tu-95U, were to be considered to be training heavy bombers. Most served with the Long-Range Aviation training center at Ryazan, and most were withdrawn from use during 1991 and 1992


www.fas.org...

Spot on with your earlier post on carriage of nuclear weapons on such flights. No side wants to go back to the days of strategic bombers having accidents. It would take a much higher alert posture for such flights to be carrying live nuke air launched cruise missiles.

One good thing that has developed out of the treaty confidence building measures such as New START is a bomber exchange programme. Hopefully it will result in regular exchange visits?

Plans for 2013


Russian strategic bombers to visit U.S. Two Russian Tupolev Tu-95MS strategic bombers will fly to the Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana, United States, in 2013 under an agreement reached during a recent visit of senior officers from the Russian Long-Range Air Force to the United States, Long-Range Air Force commander Lt. Gen. Anatoly Zhikharev said on Tuesday. Zhikharev made the announcement at a news conference. "There will also be a return visit in 2013 - two American [Boeing] B-52 strategic bombers will land at our air force base in Engels, Saratov region, in 2013," he said. U.S. officers are due to pay an inspection visit to the Russian base next week, he added.


rbth.ru...


Team members evaluated the suitability of the airfield at Engels Air Base for B-52H operations. The outing also established initial relationships for a long range aviation bomber exchange program between the U.S. and Russia.


www.af.mil...



posted on Feb, 18 2013 @ 05:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Helious
 


Russia is in the process of rebuilding their military, and relearning how to operate at long distances from Russian soil. They lost that ability in the 90s, and they're trying to get it back now. So we're seeing more instances of them operating in places they used to operate in the past again. Nothing new for those of us that followed this sort of thing in the past, and nothing really ominous about it, unless someone gets itchy, which is highly doubtful, considering it didn't happen at the height of tensions between the West and the Soviet Union.


Very true. Also though, we must add to the pot that "High Command" do not mind this sort of incursion into Air Space. For example, in the UK it is viewed as a good way of testing our defences and the reaction times of our RADAR operators, response rates of Fighter crews (for the fly past to wave them away), etc.

Just because we do not widely hear about it, i would be very surprised if all "Major" nations do not engage in this type of activity.



posted on Feb, 18 2013 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Flavian

Very true. Also though, we must add to the pot that "High Command" do not mind this sort of incursion into Air Space. For example, in the UK it is viewed as a good way of testing our defences and the reaction times of our RADAR operators, response rates of Fighter crews (for the fly past to wave them away), etc.



They aren't intruding in our (UK) air space either. This myth is simply journalists and some politicians not comprehending the difference between an identification zone in international airspace and sovereign airspace within a national limit. For example the UK's 12 nautical mile limit. It has been explained and briefed repeatedly by the Ministry of Defence but it simply doesn't sink in. It continually results in the media reporting that 'Russian bombers are in UK airspace' or similar type over dramatic headlines. Rather than repeat myself see following posts.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The same happens in Canada with their air defence zones. See 16 page report and interview in the Canadian Parliament with input from Canadian Military.

openparliament.ca...



posted on Feb, 18 2013 @ 08:16 AM
link   
reply to post by tommyjo
 


Fair point and one i will concede gracefully.



posted on Feb, 18 2013 @ 08:34 AM
link   
reply to post by charlyv
 


how about we take up the lost cause of the Nimrod MRA4.....and have it developed to our own specifications. It looks and sounds like an awesome aircraft.


en.wikipedia.org...

edit on 18-2-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2013 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by tommyjo
All those earlier Tu-95 Bear variants such as Bear D and Bear E have long since gone. Just Tu-95MS Bear H and Tu-142M MR Bear F and Bear J. There is probably a limited electronic package on the Tu-95MS Bear H for basic SIGINT/ELINT as the crews operate on these out of area flights?

Even the old Tu-95 variants used for crew training were scrapped in the early 1990s. Some of these were Bear As and Es.


BEAR T - TU-95U -- About a dozen surviving 'Bear-As' were converted to Tu-95U configuration, with sealed bomb bays and a broad red band painted around the rear fuselage. Under the START I agreement, the Parties agreed that all airplanes formerly known to the United States of America as Bear E and now known as Bear T, which are designated by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as Tu-95U, were to be considered to be training heavy bombers. Most served with the Long-Range Aviation training center at Ryazan, and most were withdrawn from use during 1991 and 1992


www.fas.org...



Thanks for that. I haven't kept up with the Russian Air Force's older aircraft as much as I should have. I remember back in the day the ELINT Bears were always buzzing around carriers, and along the ADIZ up around Alaska.
edit on 2/18/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join