Russia jets make 'simulated attack' on US warship in 'aggressive' Baltic incident

[notquiteright]

Because something has the range does not mean they need to use that range, some of my rifles will shoot out to 300yds plus very accurately, does not mean I shoot at those distances on a regular basis, nothing stopping them from using them up close and personal like. Seems we have come full circle, have had mu say, want to trust Putin and the Russians, go for it, I will never trust them completely and for good reasons.

Most my rifles shoot out to 600 yards very accurately. The difference between a grunt laying in wait to take the other guy out is a well trained grunt knows how to conceal himself. Take the shot when best, and NOT take the shot when events turn the scenario against you. many bad guys have passed right by grunts who decided the numbers or tactical situation was working against them.

Now out on the ocean/sea/ large lake that ability is rather limited...

The target sees you coming (the destroyer's commander says 100 NM) and has very good defensive firepower- missiles and CWIS. The Falklands showed the ability of stand-off missiles against naval targets- and the advisability to strike from a distance (the Argies fired using radar returns to avoid entering the defensive umbrella)

No one has said trust the Russians completely.... eace

 

[Cryptic]

It is very clear it was the Chinese pilot who instigated the event.

Like his Russian counterpart, he took the intimidation one step too far by even flying within the wingspan of the turbo prop. Unlike the Russians, however, the Chinese pilot miscalculated and is now somewhere at the bottom of the South China Sea.

Something that seems to be missing in this, (and I could be wrong), but if a real
attack run happened, wouldn't the plane be out of visual distance from the ship?

You are right.

The danger is not that the plane was making an attack, the danger is that the Russian pilot, like the Chinese pilot buzzing a turbo prop, might miscalculate. Modern warships are not armoured and a heavy fight bomber accidently hitting a destroyer is going to kill dozens or more US sailors- and one or two Russian pilots.

The U.S. captain can lawfully use lethal force to defend his ship from threats. "Threats" can mean a stand off missile attack by an aircraft or an aircraft attempting to buzz with in 75 feet of his ship.

 

[Fledermaus]

Something that seems to be missing in this, (and I could be wrong), but if a real
attack run happened, wouldn't the plane be out of visual distance from the ship?
Many of our ships have systems capable of shooting down incoming missiles,
a jet coming close would not stand a chance.

Standoff range for SU24 weapons is about 60 miles.

Definitely over the horizon.

 

[longview]

Standoff range for SU24 weapons is about 60 miles.

Definitely over the horizon.

That is what I was thinking, so the text of a simulated attack is just BS.

 

[Cryptic]

That is what I was thinking, so the text of a simulated attack is just BS.

No, it is not. The plane was simulating a certain kind of attack (straffing run). The fact that this form of attack is unlikely to be used is not that relevent.

What is relevant is that the plane was attempting to buzz with in 75 feet and thus still poses a threat. Likewise, I would be a threat if I attempted a high speed buzz with in 75 centimeters of someone using my car. The fact that the other person knows I am not attempting to truly attack him is only relevant to a point.

 

[Fledermaus]

No, it is not. The plane was simulating a certain kind of attack (straffing run). The fact that this form of attack is unlikely to be used is not that relevent.

What is relevant is that the plane was attempting to buzz with in 75 feet and thus still poses a threat. Likewise, I would be a threat if I attempted a high speed buzz with in 75 centimeters of someone using my car. The fact that the other person knows I am not attempting to truly attack him is only relevant to a point.

Strafing runs do not normally run parallel to the ship and at 75 feet.

Gsh 23 is good for 1-3 Km agaist area ground targets. Aimed fire on ground targets 1.2-1.6 Km .

 

[Fledermaus]

That is what I was thinking, so the text of a simulated attack is just BS.

Pilot was hot dogging big time.

 

[fmw]

Our 'weakness' that has pushed the former USSR off of thousands of miles of shoreline along the Baltic Sea. Our 'weakness' that pushed Nato to the very borders of Mother Russia. Has tanks in Latvia, major ground exersizes in Poland (13000+ troops) our navy playing in 'their' Sea...

Even mice bite when backed into a corner and Putin ain't much for squeaking... eace

Putting troops and ships in various locations is easy. It is harder to fight back at aggressive action. Peace to you as well.

 

[fmw]

Actually it's because the USSR/Russia has 1,000's of ICBM's and Subs with nuclear missiles. Thankful the people in the White House know that buzzing a ship now and then isn't worth starting WW 3.

In real life destroying all life on earth because both sides like tweaking the other guy's nose once in a while is MUCH smarter then acting like an irresponsible tough guy. At time the tough guy act in the real world has dire, DIRE consequences.

Apocalypse over the shooting down of an aggressive aircraft? Chill out. What it would do is stop the Russians from buzzing our ships.

 

[longview]

No, it is not. The plane was simulating a certain kind of attack (straffing run). The fact that this form of attack is unlikely to be used is not that relevent.

What is relevant is that the plane was attempting to buzz with in 75 feet and thus still poses a threat. Likewise, I would be a threat if I attempted a high speed buzz with in 75 centimeters of someone using my car. The fact that the other person knows I am not attempting to truly attack him is only relevant to a point.

Sorry, the SU-24 is almost 75 feet long, that jet is not the length of the fuselage away from the ship, but much further.

 

[notquiteright]

Putting troops and ships in various locations is easy. It is harder to fight back at aggressive action. Peace to you as well.

Then you think it was 'easy' for the Russians to take the Crimea back? they after all 'just put troops in various locations'... :roll:

I'd opine from the Russian POV our stationing troops, tanks, aircraft and ships on their doorstep is pretty aggressive....

So what would you have had BushII do about South Ossetia???

About the enclave at Kaliningrad???

What show of force would you have had BushII do??? eace

 

[Cryptic]

Strafing runs do not normally run parallel to the ship and at 75 feet.

Gsh 23 is good for 1-3 Km agaist area ground targets. Aimed fire on ground targets 1.2-1.6 Km .

Good point. I think he made two passes with in a thousand feet (arguably simulated straffing runs?). Then, the Polish helicopter was pulled in. After the helicopter was on the deck, the Russian pilot pulled the "ultimate buzz" which could kill dozens of crewmen if he miscalculated.

 

[Cryptic]

Sorry, the SU-24 is almost 75 feet long, that jet is not the length of the fuselage away from the ship, but much further.

I"ll take the apparent word of the US Capitain regarding the distance. Even if it were say, 150 feet, the US captain does not have to tolerate that risk to his crew and can order the plane be brought down. 1000 foot passes designed to interrupt the helicopter excercise are another matter.

 

[Fledermaus]

Good point. I think he made two passes with in a thousand feet (arguably simulated straffing runs?). Then, the Polish helicopter was pulled in. After the helicopter was on the deck, the Russian pilot pulled the "ultimate buzz" which could kill dozens of crewmen if he miscalculated.

That sounds closer to a "Simulated attack" than the hot dogging he did at 30-75 feet.

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

Apocalypse over the shooting down of an aggressive aircraft? Chill out. What it would do is stop the Russians from buzzing our ships.

Thank God you, or no one like you is POTUS.

They don't kill our pilots and sailors when we play our games, and we don't kill theirs.

 

[eohrnberger]

I guess this is what happens when POTUS projects nothing but weakness in the international sphere.

Kerry: Shooting down Russia jets 'would have been justified'

Too little, too late. And very reminiscent of Obama's Syrian red line that came to nothing but an empty threat.

I can see Putin just laughing his ass off in the Kremlin, and congratulating himself at out maneuvering and embarrassing Obama yet again.

 

[DA60]

Thank God you, or no one like you is POTUS.

They don't kill our pilots and sailors when we play our games, and we don't kill theirs.

Agreed.

These things go on ALL OF THE TIME...by both sides. Have for decades.

Now this one time everyone freaks out.

:roll:


And I will say again, the U.S. warship was (apparently) only 70 miles from Russian territory. But it was many thousands of miles from U.S. territory.
I am not saying the American ship did anything wrong, but if the roles were reversed, and a Russian destroyer was cruising 70 miles off of Hawaii, would not the American public demand that the Russian ship be 'scared' off by various means...including buzzing the ship?

I don't blame the Russian pilots for what they did - considering how close the U.S. warship was to Russian territory.
Though maybe flying about 100 feet higher might have been a bit wiser...but overall, I have no problem with their actions.

 

[Deuce]

But they fly by over 2 dozen times, they must have just been waving Hello. My Comprehension Skills are working just fine, and I can see that you consider yourself a Master Debater.

No. Your comprehension skills aren't, because I clearly said there was zero reason to come that close for an attack, and you responded as if you thought that meant no reason to close at all.

They got that close to dick around with a US destroyer. That's it. That's the whole reason. It wasn't a simulated attack because it didn't remotely resemble an attack,

 

[RetiredUSN]

I"ll take the apparent word of the US Capitain regarding the distance. Even if it were say, 150 feet, the US captain does not have to tolerate that risk to his crew and can order the plane be brought down. 1000 foot passes designed to interrupt the helicopter excercise are another matter.

That captain would be relieved of his command in 4 hours.

 

[RetiredUSN]

I almost piss myself reading all these war hawk posts, knowing that 90% of the folks making them, have never been at sea on a Navy ship and being routinely buzzed by pilots.

The USA and Soviet submarines are the real sport. They did some crazy **** to each other with far greater consequences.

 

[Deuce]

I almost piss myself reading all these war hawk posts, knowing that 90% of the folks making them, have never been at sea on a Navy ship and being routinely buzzed by pilots.

The USA and Soviet submarines are the real sport. They did some crazy **** to each other with far greater consequences.

No man the US military should totally murder people for being annoying.

 

[Thoreau72]

Something that seems to be missing in this, (and I could be wrong), but if a real
attack run happened, wouldn't the plane be out of visual distance from the ship?
Many of our ships have systems capable of shooting down incoming missiles,
a jet coming close would not stand a chance.

I also suspect something is missing.

About a year ago or less, the Donald Cook was in the Black Sea and had another encounter with Russian aircraft. It was reported that the Russians spoofed and defeated, disabled, the Aegis fire control system. It was reported, not by western media, that the Cook then exited the Black Sea. As I understand it, the Aegis system likes to have more than one boat nearby, and for whatever reason the Cook was there alone.

If that story was true, is it possible that the electronic spoofing by the Russians was also in play in this event?

 

[longview]

I also suspect something is missing.

About a year ago or less, the Donald Cook was in the Black Sea and had another encounter with Russian aircraft. It was reported that the Russians spoofed and defeated, disabled, the Aegis fire control system. It was reported, not by western media, that the Cook then exited the Black Sea. As I understand it, the Aegis system likes to have more than one boat nearby, and for whatever reason the Cook was there alone.

If that story was true, is it possible that the electronic spoofing by the Russians was also in play in this event?

That could be worse than a simulated attack!

 

[Thoreau72]

That could be worse than a simulated attack!

More like a demonstration of their electronic prowess.

My take is the Russians do NOT want a war. If they did, Russia would have attacked Turkey for shooting down its airplane in Syria some months back.

Boys will be boys, and my old retired military pilot friends all used to get a big kick out of intercepting Russian aircraft.

I guess the Russians think that if NATO can place tanks and troops on their borders, they can at least show their stuff, one ship at a time.

 

[Deuce]

I also suspect something is missing.

About a year ago or less, the Donald Cook was in the Black Sea and had another encounter with Russian aircraft. It was reported that the Russians spoofed and defeated, disabled, the Aegis fire control system. It was reported, not by western media, that the Cook then exited the Black Sea. As I understand it, the Aegis system likes to have more than one boat nearby, and for whatever reason the Cook was there alone.

If that story was true, is it possible that the electronic spoofing by the Russians was also in play in this event?

So, you're suggesting that Russia just up and exposed its ability to utterly defeat a key air defense system of the United States for no actual tactical reason? Why would they advertise this capability? It just gives the US time to fix the issue.

My favorite phrase ever: "it was reported," because technically any random **** on the internet can make the claim and it technically "was reported."