You are at netAirspace : Forum : Air and Space Forums : Military Aviation

Fumanchewd wrote: My main point has only been that we are not on the same level as Russia with bomber and fighter incursions.

And you know this how? You do realize Fox News isn't out floating around on the oceans right? The only reason we know about this incident is because the US Government decided to throw a hissy fit. Which means the only way to find out about the US doing it to Russian forces is if the notoriously open Russian military told the notoriously open Russian media... oh, wait. But then again, the Russian government has been protesting us doing this sort of thing to them. Which I guess is a catch 22 because you probably don't believe anything Putin says... so no matter what it's not happening.. right?

Fumanchewd wrote: Comparing a Bear and a SU24 with the SR71, E aircraft, and missions over international airspace of the pole?

You really don't understand the implicit threat in the US flying masses of strategic bombers over the pole?

Really?

Seriously?

Honestly?

I mean... come on. Have you ever looked at a globe? Put pins in the major Russian cities, Naval bases and military installations. Notice an awfully odd relationship with the artic? Remember when I said that flying a TU-95 up to the edge of your airspace is just pointless posturing because a real attack would be conducted with ALCMs? Guess where those US based ALCM bombers would be launching from? Putting a huge mass of nuclear capable ALCM bombers at their IP is a much bigger threat than flying to international airspace then turning around.

I mean honestly, it takes either a heck of a lot of ignorance of chutzpah to complain about a formation of TU-95s flying near your airspace but ignoring formations of B-52s flying around over the arctic. Seriously, do you think it's coincidence that was where the Chrome Dome routes were?

Fumanchewd wrote:We have had Russia flying nuclear capable bombers right to the edge of at least 4 NATO country's airspace (that we know of).

And we do the exact same thing to them too. Lad Dee Dah, so F'n what. This is a game that's been played for decades even if you don't believe so.

Fumanchewd wrote:We have had Russia entering NATO member Turkey's airspace unauthorized and armed.

Another completely off topic example. That aircraft was conducting war fighting operations against Syria and wandered off course. That has absolutely nothing at all to do with what we are talking about.

Fumanchewd wrote: We have had Russia buzz our war ships with fighters over and over. Just tell me in the last 5 years where we have had a similar incident with our fighters or bombers and Russia.

You know why all the best books about this kind of thing come out 20-30 years after the events happened? Think about it for a moment and you might realize why we hear about the opposition doing it in real time, but never hear about us doing it until years later...

Seriously, give it a moments thought and it becomes painfully obvious.

Hint: There are things I did wearing green cammie jammies that I can't tell you about for several more years.

Fumanchewd wrote:Lol, so this is just you trying to do your best Tom Clancy writing? I understand now

You really are that ignorant about this stuff aren't you? You really think the US doesn't do this don't you?

You probably also think the Soviets were the provocateurs in the Cuban Missile Crisis and say "what missiles in Turkey?"

Yes, you are right... Tom Clancy and I completely and totally invented all of this. I even invented the term "Rigging Pass" just for this thread. I also wrote and distributed dozens of books written by Cold War veterans talking about these sorts of things, then cunningly posted them and backdated them on Amazon to make it look like they've been there all along.

Let me ask you a question though... If Tom Clancy and I just made this up.. why are all the sailors out on the bridge wings taking videos with their cell phones and the water tight doors standing open instead of the ship being at battle stations? Doesn't that imply that this is old hat for them and the captain and crew know that nothing is going to happen? You know, just like the Navy pilots with their goofy masks and Playboy magazines?

Look, the fact that you don't understand what is going on and how this is played out means that you have a lot to learn about how things really work.


Your "US shiat don't stink" routine has become trite and tiresome. Either you have no clue what you are talking about or have chosen to be delusional. Either way, I'm done discussing it with a person who clearly has zero intent to understand how things really work. Good day.

Polar flights? Who cares it is international airspace and the airlines fly over the poles. Yes lecture me on geography and polar routing. I deal with many aircraft on the polar route and I've had to call and do research on severAl Siberian airports just this month. But yes, tell me to look at a globe as if I don't understand. It's really not a big deal, when it comes down to it, it is just training in international airspace.Yet they did not approach Russian airspace. You state that we do the same thing with regard to sending nuclear capable bombers right to the edge of their airspace. That is untrue. Prove it, show me examples in the last 5 years. Frankly , there is no need to do it in modern times.

For the third time, show me specific examples in the last 5 years. You can't yet you insist it happens. You mention the U2 and SR71 but they are not flying over Russia and they haven't for a long time. You even mention yourself that your accounts are from the cold war, nothing from the present. You have provided lots of bluster and irrelevant topics, but little else.

Click Click D'oh wrote:

Fumanchewd wrote: My main point has only been that we are not on the same level as Russia with bomber and fighter incursions.

And you know this how? You do realize Fox News isn't out floating around on the oceans right? The only reason we know about this incident is because the US Government decided to throw a hissy fit. Which means the only way to find out about the US doing it to Russian forces is if the notoriously open Russian military told the notoriously open Russian media... oh, wait. But then again, the Russian government has been protesting us doing this sort of thing to them. Which I guess is a catch 22 because you probably don't believe anything Putin says... so no matter what it's not happening..

So you state that the Russian government has been protesting this, but yet they don't have one picture of our bombers on the edge of their airspace? BS.

Or if it is so common, not one factual based mention of it on the internet from the thousands of Russian civilians or military who must have some evidence?

Of course that is ludicrous.

Show me the evidence or it hasn't happened except in your cold war antectdotes. The Russians have been stepping up their games and there is plenty of accounts and pictures from dozens of sources in their incursions. If there are so many of ours as well, show me that evidence from the last 5 years.

Back to the ROE.

Though you never need to wait for a weapons discharge, this issue raises the Stark and Vincennes events from the Tanker Wars, and the enormously challenging mission to not take a hit and not start the next war.

In 1987, SecDef Weinberger provided the below passage to Congress on hostile intent:

“The threat of imminent use of force against… forces, for instance, any aircraft or surface ship that maneuvers into a position where it could fire a missile, drop a bomb, or use gunfire on a ship is demonstrating evidence of hostile intent. Also, a radar lock-on to a ship from any weapons system fire control radar that can guide missiles or gunfire is demonstrating hostile intent. This includes lock-on by land-based missile systems that use radar.”

halls120 wrote:

DXing wrote:Agreed, but absent a threat such as the attack radar lighting them up or a spray of shells coming across the water at them, the fingers would be off the triggers. Do not fire until fired upon would remain the ROE. Only one time has a navy ship disregarded that and an Iranian airliner paid for the mistake.

I don't believe that's the accurate ROE. If the Russians lit up their fire control radar, I suspect the US vessel would be allowed to shoot at that instance.

The ship has self defense capability. Once a weapon was actually launched you can bet the destroyer would have gone into action. But just the radar firing up would not be enough justification, just like the same destroyer firing up its active sonar and ranging a Russian submarine would not be cause for that submarine to fire a torpedo. Or the reverse if it were a Russian destroyer/U.S. submarine. Especially now since although there is some aggravation between the two countries on a number of political issues, it is no where near a shooting war level.

Fumanchewd wrote:

DXing wrote:
Agreed, but absent a threat such as the attack radar lighting them up or a spray of shells coming across the water at them, the fingers would be off the triggers. Do not fire until fired upon would remain the ROE. Only one time has a navy ship disregarded that and an Iranian airliner paid for the mistake.

Not an aircraft but Gulf of Tonkin as well.

In the Gulf of Tonkin incident the ships captain was given erroneous information that he actually had been fired upon. In the Vincennes incident the aircraft was merely on a course that suggested an attack, no actual weapon launch was ever observed or recorded prior to anti-aircraft operations by the Vincennes.

Fumanchewd wrote:Polar flights? Who cares it is international airspace and the airlines fly over the poles.

Honestly, I was hoping for a more intelligent response than this when I got back.

You honestly don't understand the implicit threat the US is making by patrolling nuclear ALCM capable bombers on polar routes?

Really?

Seriously?

Honestly, are you just pretending to be obtuse or do you really not get it?

Do you think that polar routes were randomly chosen for this type of "training". Maybe B-52s are allergic to training flights over places like the Pacific where there isn't an implicit threat to anyone? Again, do you realize why these "training exercises" replicate old Chrome Dome operations? You do realize the Chrome Dome flights were targeted at a specific nation right? What nation besides Russia do you think the US has in mind when conducting polar "training flights" with nuclear capable ALCM bombers?

Get real.

Step 1: Admit that polar "training flight" with nuclear capable ALCM bombers are sending a message to Russia

If you can't accomplish step 1 you aren't being honest or don't know what you are talking about.

Fumanchewd wrote:It's really not a big deal, when it comes down to it, it is just training in international airspace.

So then it's just the same as the Russians do and you have nothing to complain about what the Russians are doing. Flying a bomber through international airspace then turning around is the same thing as flying bombers in circles in international airspace.

Problem solved, your complaints are unfounded by your own admission.

Fumanchewd wrote:So you state that the Russian government has been protesting this, but yet they don't have one picture of our bombers on the edge of their airspace? BS.

Or if it is so common, not one factual based mention of it on the internet from the thousands of Russian civilians or military who must have some evidence?

Of course that is ludicrous.

You truly believe the rest of the world works like the US don't you? First off, how would Russian civilians have evidence of US flights? How many Russian do you think are floating around in boats in the Artic with high zoom lenses so they can take pictures of US aircraft? You do realize the reason that we have so many pictures of Soviet and Russian aircraft being intercepted by US forces is because any picture or video taken by a US service member on duty is public domain right? I hope you also realize that in Russia those pictures aren't public domain. Here's a challenge for you, find pictures of RC-135s being intercepted by Russian jets. Having trouble finding them? There are shockingly few of them aren't there. By your logic, this means RC-135s don't fly close to Russian airspace. Lol. OMG, I can't laugh harder. Clearly there's a flaw in your logic.

And why does Putin need to provide photos when the US government is constantly complaining about "Unsafe Intercepts" of their aircraft? Is it like Schrodingers Intercept. The US airplane may or may not have been there to be "unsafely" intercepted based on your personal beliefs regarding US foreign policy?

Come on, I think I sprained my eyes rolling them so hard.

I have explicitly asked you, over and over, to show where we have flown nuclear bombers to the edge of Russian airspace (nope, training in the polar region is not) or when we have had a fighter or bomber low pass over a Russian vessel in the last 5 years.

STILL NOTHING.

I guess we can assume that JFK and Sinatra were sleeping together because you insist it's true and why bother with evidence cause the Secret Service wouldn't allow it. That proves it's true, lol.

Sorry, MULTIPLE international ATC components, loose lips, and or civilian sightings would have some evidence or even discussion of it if it was at the same level of the Russians doing it.

Furthermore, you claimed that the Russians have complained of incidents yet refuse to offer evidence. Well that's just outright silly. Then you bring up the RC135 flights as evidence of what? They are not bombers or fighters and their flights are very well known by the public. Hardly a good example of how we keep these supposed flights secret.

Lastly, I am more than happy to discuss how this administration does anything in its power to avoid international confrontation while the Russians seem to enjoy it.

AGAIN, get back to me when you have something credible.

Fumanchewd wrote:I have explicitly asked you, over and over, to show where we have flown nuclear bombers to the edge of Russian airspace...

I understand that some people are stuck in the "If it's not on Google, it ain't true" mindset, but if you were paying attention, I just showed how foolish that is. Unless you've found all those RC-135 intercept pictures. We know the intercepts are happening. The US is complaining about the intercepts... yet, no pictures, so by your logic... It's not happening

So, are the RC-135 intercepts happening or not? Yes they are. The lack of pictures of them doesn't mean squat. Or as rational people know, lack of evidence is not evidence of a lack.

Fumanchewd wrote:Sorry, MULTIPLE international ATC components, loose lips, and or civilian sightings would have some evidence or even discussion of it if it was at the same level of the Russians doing it.

Let's try this again, Russia is not the US.

Do you get that?

Again, where are the RC-135 intercept pictures?

We know those intercepts are happening. The US is complaining about them. Where are the Russian pictures of them?

Do you get it yet? Russia is not like the US. You can't logically maintain that since information is readily available and open in the United States that you can expect the same level of openness and availability in Russia.

Fumanchewd wrote:Furthermore, you claimed that the Russians have complained of incidents yet refuse to offer evidence.

Oh good lord, seriously? Which of the three monkies are you playing at being now? I mean seriously, the article in the OP contains the Russians complaining about aggressive US actions. That's just epic fail on your part. At least make some minimal effort to keep up here.

As for other things Russia is complaining about:
We just deployed F-22s to Romania
We deployed A-10s to Estonia
Who do you think was meant to see Operation Dragoon Ride?
Who do you think Polar Growl was aimed at?
Why do you think B-2s do deployment exercises to Fairford?
Who do you think BALTOPS is aimed at?
Who do you think Saber Strike is all about?
Do you even know what the European Reassurance Initiative is or why we are spending $3.4 Billion in 2017 alone on European military development?

There seem to be an awful lot of "training exercises" being conducted on Russias front door. If you dare say, "Yeah, but we didn't buzz a ship so it's totally different", god help me you have no clue what the hell you are talking about. Oh wait, you're the guy who in this thread alone has shown you didn't know the difference between and EP-3 and a P-3C or realize that the Bear-F and the P-3 fly the exact same mission.. so yeah, you've done more than enough to prove you're a wee bit out of your league on this one.

Fumanchewd wrote:Then you bring up the RC135 flights as evidence of what?

Stupid typical modern American Conservative. Are you bothering to read what you are replying to?

Let's do this by the numbers:
1) We know RC-135s are flying along the Russian border
2) The Russians are intercepting RC-135s
3) We know the intercepts are happening because the US complains about them.
4) There are no Russian pictures of RC-135 intercepts out there

MEANING: We know these intercepts are happening, yet no pictures... ergo what does that say about the likelihood of other pictures being released? And yet you still somehow go "GRR GRRR NO B-52 PICS!"

Do you get it yet? The Russians don't have public domain property rights like the US does. Ergo, you won't be seeing these pictures. One morning you are going to wake up and realize the US Government doesn't tell you everything it does, or often only tells you what it wants you to know.

Fumanchewd wrote:Lastly, I am more than happy to discuss how this administration does anything in its power to avoid international confrontation

Yeah, except for that list of stuff above.

Don't let your idiotic blind hatred of the current president turn you into a moron.

So yeah, everyone but apparently you knows the US does provocative stuff to Russia all the freaking time. Seriously, this is pathetic.

The RC135 flights are well documented. A horrible horrible example on your part if you are trying to use that as an illustration of how we keep flights secret.

Still....

Click Click D'oh wrote:"Again, where are the RC-135 intercept pictures?

We know those intercepts are happening. The US is complaining about them. Where are the Russian pictures of them?

1. Not Russian, but there are pictures
2. The flights are well documented by military and civilian sources

Anything else I can help you with?

Click Click D'oh wrote:"Stupid typical modern American Conservative. Are you bothering to read what you are replying to?"

Click Click D'oh wrote:"Oh good lord, seriously? Which of the three monkies are you playing at being now? "

Click Click D'oh wrote:"Don't let your idiotic blind hatred of the current president turn you into a moron. "

You are getting really emotional and using personal attacks to a silly level. I have seen your frantic and emotional rants over and over and it needs to stop. I have no respect for that because it is a diversion from intelligence and reason.

Click Click D'oh wrote:"You truly believe the rest of the world works like the US don't you?"

Where did I EVER state that?

My only point was to disagree with your false (and still unproven) statement that "The US does this stuff all of the time as well!" And your response is emotional silliness, stating that I am a conservative (I am not) who believes that the rest of the world "works like the US", and comparing our reconnaissance and electronic flights with nuclear bomber flights . Your are off of the handle and being disrespectful. Stick to the points, put your blinders on and move forward.

You have a lot of "passion" and hot headed responses but still nothing to prove that we have recently had bombers flying at the edge of Russian airspace or fighters flying 50 feet over Russian war vessels.

It is a fact that the Russians had AND have a climate of antagonism and carelessness in these incidents. The US currently has the opposite approach.

Prove me wrong, you still have given no evidence to support your false assertion.

Fumanchewd wrote:These incursions have always seemed to be, a vast majority of the time, a one way street-all cynical stories of Thatcher and Reagan aside.

Incorrect. We've done it to the Russians, and our Allies have done it to the Russians as well. We used to buzz Russian and Chinese Intelligence ships of the coast of California and Washington in the B-52. Not a big deal. Had some nice pics, but the ex-bitch destroyed them all.

Fumanchewd wrote:Lol, and how was the ship to determine, with confidence, that they weren't armed?

Unarmed during flyby, no radar lock on. How would the Russians determine that our aircraft flying close to their territory are not armed ?

I've read some pretty knowledge people stating that the law can easily justify a shoot, but it's fairly ambiguous. Don't get me wrong, I am glad calmer heads prevailed, but to me the Russians are asking for an international act of war for a reason. To claim that it is no big deal is incorrect.

Not a big deal, really. The crew was out on deck and gave us these great videos. They didn't seem concerned at all.

http://www.navytimes.com/story/military ... /83000858/

"If you have visual identification of the jet, can see it isn't carrying weapons, and don't detect any electronic emissions suggesting there was a missile lock on the ship, there's nothing to be done.

And ultimately, the rules of engagement allow the CO to take defensive action if they feel they safety of their vessel is in danger
"

Fumanchewd wrote:The P3's have always gotten real close to Soviet and Chinese territory, thus we had one that was hit by a Chinese fighter and landed in Hainan 15 years back. BUT, it was used for surveillance only, and it is known that they NEVER carry weapons. Comparing a P3 and a Bear is not an apples to apples comparison and you cannot find a low fly by incident with one of our fighters in the last 5 years, or for that matter probably in the last 25 years.

And how exactly would the Soviets or Chinese know a P-3 was a unarmed P-3 or RC-135, without intercepting it ? The Bears are not carrying weapons during their recon missions near U.S. and European airspace.

It is a US carrier, but B-52s did do low passes over Soviet ships, just maybe not this low, so as not to crash like the Soviet Bomber that crashed after buzzing US Navy ships.



Even the Chinese and Japanese do this.



How do you think the US Navy took these photos. Notice the crew on the aft deack looking up at what is more than likely a US Navy aircraft performing a low buzz.

Click Click D'oh wrote:Stupid typical modern American Conservative.

Fumanchewd wrote:And your response is emotional silliness, stating that I am a conservative (I am not)

Two self-proclaimed non-conservatives arguing over a conservative label, now that's funny.

Click Click D'oh wrote:"Don't let your idiotic blind hatred of the current president turn you into a moron. "

Not liking this foreign raised and foreign educated commie of a 'president', is not what makes one a moron. Claiming it does.....

Fumanchewd wrote:1. Not Russian, but there are pictures


My only point was to disagree with your false (and still unproven) statement that "The US does this stuff all of the time as well!"

We do....48 miles from the DMZ...low flyby..

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-north ... Y420160110

"U.S. flies B-52 over South Korea after North's nuclear test"



http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/t ... korea.aspx

"F-22 Raptors conduct show of force over South Korea "

and comparing our reconnaissance and electronic flights with nuclear bomber flights .

http://www.nytimes.com/1983/09/06/world ... wanted=all

"Soviet forces had been tracking seven RC-135 reconnaissance planes on missions off the Soviet Far East coast in the period between 3:45 P.M. and 8:49 P.M. Moscow time on the day of the incident. It said there were three United States naval vessels just outside Soviet teritorial waters in the area at the same time. "

"Following the disclosure at the White House Sunday that an RC-135 had actually been in the area an hour and a half to two hours before the 747 went down"

How does a nation tell from a radar blip if the aircraft is a bomber or reconnaisance aircraft ? This has been tragic in the past with recon and airliners....

It is a fact that the Russians had AND have a climate of antagonism and carelessness in these incidents. The US currently has the opposite approach.

Prove me wrong, you still have given no evidence to support your false assertion.[/quote]

https://www.rt.com/news/321766-china-is ... s-bombers/

"Two US B-52 strategic bombers have flown near Chinese artificial islands in the South China Sea, ignoring calls to “get away” from Beijing’s airspace, the Pentagon said, claiming the “routine mission” was in accordance with international treaties. "

We used converted bombers for recon flights decades ago, and airliners...

* April 8th, 1950 A US Navy PB4Y-2 Privateer was shot down by 23mm cannon fire from a pair of Soviet Lavochkin La-11 fighters over the Baltic Sea near what is now Latvia. The ten man crew was presumed dead and has not been found. In 1993 retired Soviet General Fyodor Shinkarenko stated that he believed the wreckage was secretly salvaged and sent to Moscow.

* December 4th 1950 A USAF RB-45C Tornado was shot down by 23mm cannon fire cannon fire from Soviet Mikoyan-Gurevich (MiG) 15’s over China near the North Korean border. Two of the four crewmen died in the attack. The remaining two bailed out across the North Korean border and were captured. One was killed during interrogation and the second was hung.

* December 26th, 1950 A USAF RB-29 Superfortress (converted from atom bomb dropper to photographic reconnaissance aircraft) was shot down by cannon fire from two MiG-15s over the Sea of Japan.

* November 6th, 1951 A US Navy P2V-3 Neptune was shot down near Vladivostok by two Soviet La-11 fighters. The ten men crew was presumed dead.

* June 13, 1952 A USAF RB-29 Superfortress was shot down by cannon fire from two MiG-15 fighters over the Sea of Japan. The American recon aircraft was intercepted nine miles off the coast and quickly destroyed. The 12-man crew was presumed dead however unconfirmed reports surfaced that one had survived long enough to be picked up by a Soviet ship in the area. Who this crewman was and his ultimate fate is unknown.

* October 7, 1952 A USAF RB-29 Superfortress was shot down by machine gun fire from Soviet La-11 fighters over the Kurile Islands. The eight man crew was all presumed dead. In 1994 the remains of one of the crewmen, Captain John R Dunham was located and returned to the US after former Soviet documents related that a crewman had been found and was buried on nearby Yuri Island. Former Soviet KGB Maritime Border Guards sailor Vasili Saiko came forward in 1993 and gave the US Naval Academy a ring that he took from Captain Dunham’s body in 1952. The ring was eventually given to Captain Dunham’s widow.

* July 29th, 1953 A USAF RB-50G Superfortress was shot down near Vladivostok by cannon fire from two MiG-17s. A single survivor of the 18-man crew was pulled from the sea by a destroyer. A week later the remains of two more of the crew washed up in the coast of Japan. Conflicting reports after the Cold War by former Soviet military personnel who were present at the event seem to indicate that others may have survived in Soviet custody but are unaccounted for.

* September 4th, 1954 A US Navy P2V-5 flying from Atsugi Japan was shot down over water by cannon fire from two MiG-15s off the coast of Siberia. The pilot ditched in international waters and was rescued with the loss of one crewman.

* November 7th 1954 USAF RB-29 Superfortress was shot down by cannon fire from two MiG-15 fighters near northern Japan. Ten of the eleven-man crew was rescued while one unlucky crewman drowned.

* April 17th 1955 USAF RB-47E was shot down by a cannon fire from a pair of MiG-15s near Kamchatka off the Siberian coast. The three-man crew was presumed killed.

* June 22nd, 1955 US Navy P2V-5 Neptune flying over the Bearing Strait in international waters was jumped by two Soviet MiG-15s. The pilots managed to crash land the stricken plane on US territory and the crew survived although most were injured.

* Christmas Eve 1957 A USAF RB-57 was shot down over the Black Sea by Soviet fighters and its crew all died.

* June27 1958 USAF C-118 Liftmaster transport (military version of a Douglas DC-6) reportedly used by the CIA at one time was shot down by rocket and cannon fire from two MiG-17s over Soviet Armenia. The aircraft was destroyed but the crews parachuted to safety and were given back by the Soviets a week later.

* September 2nd, 1958 USAF C-130A Hercules transport modified for signals intelligence was shot down by cannon and rocket fire from two MiG-17s over Soviet Armenia. The entire crew died. Six of the bodies were given back by the Soviets that year and the remaining 11 were recovered by the U.S.-Russia Joint Commission on POWs/ MIAs in 1998.

* May 1st 1960 CIA owned U-2 spy plane flown by Gary Powers a “sheep-dipped” Air Force officer flying as a civilian from a base in Pakistan was shot down by a lucky hit from one of at least 14 SA-2 surface to air missiles ripple fired at it over Sverdlosk (formerly called Yekaterinburg back in 1918 when the Tsar was killed there) in about the most absolute center of the Soviet Union. Powers was captured and embarrassingly placed on public trail before going home in 1962

* July 1st 1960, USAF RB-47H Stratojet flying over the Barents Sea was shot down by 30mm cannon fire from a Soviet MiG-19. Four crewmembers were killed and two were captured and held for six months by the KGB.

* October 27 1962 USAF U-2 of the 4080th Strategic Reconnaissance Wing shot down by another magic BB SA-2 Guideline surface to air missile over Cuba from a Soviet manned battery. The pilot was posthumously awarded the Air Force Cross.

* January 24, 1964 USAF T-39 Sabreliner flying from West Germany on a training mission crossed over East German airspace and was downed by a Soviet MiG-21, killing all three aboard.

* March 10, 1964 USAF RB-66 Destroyer was shot down over East Germany by a Soviet MiG-21 on a flight from West Berlin when it crossed out of authorized airspace over East German airspace. The crew was rescued and repatriated.

* October 21, 1970 US Army RU-8 Seminole flying from Turkey (military variant of a Beech craft twin engine) lost over Soviet Armenia

Rumor is that the SR-71 stopped probing Soviet Airspace because of the introduction of the Mig-31......

Fumanchewd wrote:The RC135 flights are well documented. A horrible horrible example on your part if you are trying to use that as an illustration of how we keep flights secret.

Look... Again, because you are either super stupid or very good at playing super stupid:

I'm using a well known and public example, of which there is almost zero documentation despite it being well known and public, to demonstrate why there is almost zero documentation of the less well known practices.

Get it yet? If you have almost zero documentation of the well known practice, how much documentation would you expect from the lesser known practice? This is a basic logic exercise now. Regarding the lesser known practice Would you expect more evidence or less evidence than the well known practice?

The answer is less. And since the well known practice has almost zero evidence, what is less than almost zero?

<Insert Jeopardy theme>

Fumanchewd wrote:1. Not Russian, but there are pictures

Do you even comprehend the complete and total failure or your argument that you just acceded to? You said that if these flight were taking place, "thousands of Russian civilians or military who must have some evidence?". So I challenged you to find that evidence for the most well known of these flights, the most undeniable of these flights.. And you come back with only an American picture. Too make thing more hilarious (bad hilarity for you) it's not even an RC-135 at that. It's a Gulfstream. So, you failed on every single condition of the challenge. Maybe next time don't rely on the Daily Mail as a source because you just completely and totally blew your own argument right out of the water.

So, no. You can't find any Russian pictures. Thank you very much for proving that point for me. So, your previous comment about "thousands of Russian civilians or military who must have some evidence?" has been shown to be poorly based logic in that if the pictures exist at all, they aren't public domain and can't be readily found.

Do you get it yet that Russia doesn't work like the US and you can't just expect there to be pictures out there? Ergo, you can't logically say that B-52 flights aren't happening based on there being no Russian pictures of them readily available

Oh, and it helps the US government admits to things like Polar Growl. So yeah, they are happening, your argument is invalid and thank you very much for proving it for me.

Fumanchewd wrote:I have no respect for that because it is a diversion from intelligence and reason.

Lol.

Like you've displayed either intelligence or reason so far in this thread.

Let's see, so far in this thread you have shown us that you don't know the difference between a P-3 and a EP-3 or their missions. You deny that rigging passes happen despite being shown proof of them (and why would the term even exist to describe a nonexistent practice?), you've shown us that you had no clue the Bear-F and the P-3 perform the exact same mission, you've had three veterans tell you directly that we do these things while still maintaining that we don't, and then you graced us with the rare Gulfstream RC-135... So yeah, if I'm insulting you it's because you have earned it. The best course is to admit that you were wrong and back out instead of doubling down the stupid... such as by trying to use an American photo in response to a statement that Russian photos are almost non-existent, thereby completely and totally missing the point (yet again) that the US and Russia aren't the same.

But wait, I'm not going to let you play the holy white knight offended by the lowly gutter dweller. You started the slinging, "Lol, so this is just you trying to do your best Tom Clancy writing? I understand now.", and now you don't want to play anymore because your teeth are getting kicked in. Tough. You start it, you own it. Next time try playing with someone who 1) Doesn't enjoy kicking teeth and 2) Doesn't clearly know a whole heck of a lot more about the topic than you do.

Fumanchewd wrote:Where did I EVER state that?

Then why do you keep expecting evidence from the Russian side simply because the US side discloses such things? Why do you expect any evidence at all from "thousands of Russian civilians" unless you expect open information policies?

Fumanchewd wrote:My only point was to disagree with your false (and still unproven) statement that "The US does this stuff all of the time as well!"

You mean, except for all this proof:

Click Click D'oh wrote:As for other things Russia is complaining about:
We just deployed F-22s to Romania
We deployed A-10s to Estonia
Who do you think was meant to see Operation Dragoon Ride?
Who do you think Polar Growl was aimed at?
Why do you think B-2s do deployment exercises to Fairford?
Who do you think BALTOPS is aimed at?
Who do you think Saber Strike is all about?
Do you even know what the European Reassurance Initiative is or why we are spending $3.4 Billion in 2017 alone on European military development?

But then again, you don't consider flying nuclear capable ALCM bombers to their IPs (do you even know what an IP is) to be an intimidation tactic, so you probably also don't consider a naval exercise with the stated goal "of flying the flag and proving our resolve to operate in waters in the enemies back yard" to be an intimidation exercise either, nor do you consider driving a combat brigade 1,100 miles up and down the Russian border to be an intimidation tactic either. Tell us, if Russian decided to get together with Mexico and hold an armored combat exercise with 800 vehicles fifty miles south of El Paso, would you think that to be an intimidation exercise? **COUGH COUGH** Saber Strike *COUGH*

I asked you earlier and you refused to answer so far, who but Russia is the target of an operation that orbits nuclear ALCM capable bombers over IPs designed for strikes into Russia? Answer that truthfully if nothing else. Go ahead, tell us that's not intimidation aimed at Russia. Can you be honest about this?

It's not so much that I'm not providing evidence to you, as much as you playing the three monkeys and steadfastly ignoring everything put in front of you.

Fumanchewd wrote:and comparing our reconnaissance and electronic flights with nuclear bomber flights

Except that one of my above listed items is with nuclear ALCM capable bombers and you already declared that flying around in international airspace is no big deal you you don't get to complain about Bears, Backfires and Blackjacks anymore.

So now that you don't get to complain about Bears, Blackjacks and Backfires anymore, all you've got left is a couple of Fencers which got covered by rigging passes all the way back in my first or second post.

Which means you've actually got nothing to complain about.


In summary, if you take nothing else out of this thread and continue to completely ignore everything I have posted, at least read Zaks Been There Done That post and CALTECHs Been There Done That post, accept that you are full of it and move on.

CALTECH wrote:Two self-proclaimed non-conservatives arguing over a conservative label, now that's funny.

Oh I'm a conservative, just not a part of the GOP. Not a big fan of the religious right or the modern social conservatism pushed by it. And yes, I absolutely hate and loathe what I call "Glenn Beck Conservatives"

CALTECH wrote: Claiming it does.....

I'm referencing the flawed belief that the US doesn't use military assets in force presence and intimidation roles.. then claiming we don't do such things because the current administration.

Hate on the current POTUS all you want, just don't make up stuff about what we do or don't do as a nation then falsely ascribe it to him.

**Statement of course directed at the person actually doing these things**

"Look... Again, because you are either super stupid or very good at playing super stupid:"


Nothing new from Click except more childish insults. I'm now convinced that he is nothing but a punk bitch. Want to delete my comment, then delete the insulting and childish insults from click as well. I thought you were getting out of this conversation about 10 replies ago? You haven't and still no evidence from the last 5 years. I guess that makes you a liar who can't keep your trap shut as well. The ranting discourse into the differences in conservatives and how we who disagree with Clik should be labeled adds a comical value to his idiocy.

Some interesting instances from the cold war that are listed above, a note that bombers fly by the North Korea border.....but still nothing that can be proven or considered from the last 5 years (or after the cold war) with Russia. Click still yammering trying to pretend that all flights in the polar region are right to the edge of Russian airspace. Idiot.

Here is my nice post, despite personal insults over and over.

Thanks for the interesting videos and info Cal. Most of the videos and instances are from the cold war era though. I still don't believe that the US takes our nuclear bombers to the edge of Russian airspace or flies over Russian ships with with fighters or bombers anymore. I have asked Clik to show me of evidence and instances of say, in the last 5 years, and he has yet to produce any evidence.

Besides his personal insults and claims that I am the wrong kind of conservative, which is somehow relevant to our conversation (?), I have asked him over and over and over for evidence of similar situations that we have been involved in in the last 5 years.. Somehow we got on a silly rant of his on how our widely disclosed and known RC135 flights prove that we would keep our similar nuclear bomber flights secret. You can't make this stuff up, its irrational.

And no exercises at the north Pole, aircraft based in countries in Europe, and recon flights are not similar. Show me us doing what the Russians are doing with Bear flights to the edge of European airspace multiple times or a SU making 20 passes over our warships. There is no evidence because it hasn't happened in the last 5 years.

So far nothing, still waiting.

Click Click D'oh wrote:As for other things Russia is complaining about:
We just deployed F-22s to Romania
We deployed A-10s to Estonia
Who do you think was meant to see Operation Dragoon Ride?
Who do you think Polar Growl was aimed at?
Why do you think B-2s do deployment exercises to Fairford?
Who do you think BALTOPS is aimed at?
Who do you think Saber Strike is all about?
Do you even know what the European Reassurance Initiative is or why we are spending $3.4 Billion in 2017 alone on European military development?

Let's try this again..show me something directly comparable to the Russians flying their Bears within miles of Nato airspace or low flying fighters for multiple passes.

We just deployed F-22s to Romania---->>An ally who has agreed to base our aircraft. We have done this stuff forever in Korea, in the ME, in Baltic countries. Yet it is not us flying to the edge of their airspace with nuclear bombers. Do I need to tell you 5 more times?
We deployed A-10s to Estonia---->>> See above, and they are A10's!!! Lol
Who do you think was meant to see Operation Dragoon Ride?-------->> Are kidding me? As a direct response to evidence of Russia sending their troops into Ukraine we have a convoy drive around ally roads invited by our allies! That comment has to be a joke, you are kidding right? You should hear my girl's story about how the Russians used to drive tanks over their homes in the 1970's when she was a little girl. Please show me how your mind even remotely relates that to nuclear Bears flying withing 5 miles of N European countries
Who do you think Polar Growl was aimed at?--->>We have exercises all over the world with allies. Right now our big deal is with the Asians to show China we are serious about their incursions with our allies (Philippines). It is common around the world and is NOT similar to Bears flying to the edge of airspace with nuclear bombers. I don't know why you are so excited that this instance is at the N Pole. Is there any reason that you are more worried about this than our exercises with the Philippines? You shouldn't be... Polar Growl did not have nuclear bombers flying to the edge of Russian airspace. Not a valid comparison to the Russians. Do I need to repeat that 5 more times as well?? It won't matter, you are arguing from a point, not from reason.
Why do you think B-2s do deployment exercises to Fairford?------>> We have had bomber bases in the UK since WWII and before even. Take a look at the map and tell me how far Russia is. You can't be serious.
Who do you think BALTOPS is aimed at?---->> Military exercise with allies, not similar to Bears flying to the edge of airspace. Again, this is done around the world and not at the level of the Russians flying nuclear bombers to the edge of airspace.
Who do you think Saber Strike is all about?--->>> See above


I have been very simple in what I asked to see. I just want you to show me recent incidents of us flying nuclear bombers to the edge of Russian airspace. You come up with a bunch of training exercises, recon flights, etc but not the one thing that I asked for.

But of course those are top secret, and to prove that you brought up the RC135 flights that are anything but secret.

The saddest part of is your insults because you can't produce evidence of what you claim. Not respectable.

Fumanchewd wrote:An ally who has agreed to base our aircraft. We have done this stuff forever in Korea, in the ME, in Baltic countries. Yet it is not us flying to the edge of their airspace with nuclear bombers. Do I need to tell you 5 more times?

It wouldn't become more right if you did.

In the Baltics, you will never be more than 300 km away from Russian airspace. Basing aircraft there is impossible without flying them at the edge of Russian airspace. It's what comes with extending NATO right up to the Russian border.

I'm not saying that NATO had no right to do so, but I can at least understand that the Russians don't like it.

Fumanchewd wrote:We have had bomber bases in the UK since WWII and before even. Take a look at the map and tell me how far Russia is. You can't be serious.

About 1200 km, at the closest point. Not a huge distance for military aircraft.

Fumanchewd wrote:Military exercise with allies, not similar to Bears flying to the edge of airspace. Again, this is done around the world and not at the level of the Russians flying nuclear bombers to the edge of airspace.

What you just said is: "If we hold military exercises with allies and fly bombers right up to the edge of Russian airspace, then this is not at the level of the Russians flying bombers to the edge of others' airspaces."

Why not?

My contention is that we don't have bombers fly right up to the edge of Russian airspace. The Russians have gotten within 10 miles at least a half dozen times just in the last 2 years. Exercises are typically announced well in advance and don't get anywhere near that close. The difference in having a nuclear capable bomber fly to the edge of your airspace (by miles) and an announced multinational exercise is obvious. One is considerably more antagonistic and requires a possibility of a live fire incident to the Nth degree compared to an exercise to wearily watch (and to even learn from). Bases are also not an active and immediate possible threat.

It's a whole different ballpark.

Jeez, lighten up......

Now its barrel rolls over recon jets. And here I was thinking that the 27 had a problem with its inverted tanks.... oh wait, that's the mig28

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/04/29 ... -says.html

For the second time in less than a month, a Russian fighter jet conducted a barrel roll over a U.S. spy plane in the Baltic Sea Friday, flying within just 100 feet of the aircraft, a senior U.S. defense official told Fox News.

Fumanchewd wrote:My contention is that we don't have bombers fly right up to the edge of Russian airspace. The Russians have gotten within 10 miles at least a half dozen times just in the last 2 years. Exercises are typically announced well in advance and don't get anywhere near that close. The difference in having a nuclear capable bomber fly to the edge of your airspace (by miles) and an announced multinational exercise is obvious. One is considerably more antagonistic and requires a possibility of a live fire incident to the Nth degree compared to an exercise to wearily watch (and to even learn from). Bases are also not an active and immediate possible threat.

It's a whole different ballpark.

Sorry to weigh in late, but I've been on vacation in the land of occasional WiFi access.

Fu, I hate to burst your bubble, but we actually do things on occasion that are far more provocative that a "fly by" that I can't mention because they are classified.

Fumanchewd wrote:Nothing new from Click except more childish insults. I'm now convinced that he is nothing but a punk bitch.

That's the spirit. When your position is completely and absolutely destroyed by a preponderance of evidence, try to go out in a blaze of glory.

Trust me, it makes you super awesome. You are going to have to try a bit harder than that though if you want to get to me. I mean, that's like kindergarten for insults.

Fumanchewd wrote:Click still yammering trying to pretend that all flights in the polar region are right to the edge of Russian airspace. Idiot.

I never said anything remotely like that.

But then again, this isn't the first time, in this thread alone, that you've been caught making up things I supposedly said. Go ahead, keep on that path. Really, it's cool. People will totally take up your side if you just invent more stuff that I supposedly said. It's great for your credibility.

Fumanchewd wrote:An ally who has agreed to base our aircraft. We have done this stuff forever in Korea, in the ME, in Baltic countries. Yet it is not us flying to the edge of their airspace with nuclear bombers. Do I need to tell you 5 more times?

Oh well then, if the jets are based in allied territory (Does one ever base their jets in enemy territory short of being in a shooting war?), then their presence doesn't count. Wait. Then the Russian flights don't count because they came from their own land... which presumptively must be allied territory.

So, you've yet again invalidated your own argument. Or do the Russian aircraft coming from Russian territory not count under the new "Allied territory" clause you've created because *hand waves* Of course, under this new standard that you have created, you have undermined the cause for concern regarding the Cuban Missile Crisis because hey, Cuba and the USSR were allies so no one cares what they put there. Everyone was just over reacting to the Cuban Missile Crisis right?

Fumanchewd wrote:See above, and they are A10's!!! Lol

Today on final Jeopardy...

**Jeopardy Theme** The answer is, "The only nation bordering Estonia that ground attack jets would be used against" **Jeopardy Theme**

Times up.

The question was, "What Is Russia."

Oh sorry, no points for Fumanchewed because he can't figure out why basing ground attack jets on the border with Russia might be a cause for concern with Russia.

Fumanchewd wrote:Are kidding me? As a direct response to evidence of Russia sending their troops into Ukraine we have a convoy drive around ally roads invited by our allies!

So, you would be completely and totally fine with Russia driving armored columns up and down the Rio Grande as long as they stayed on their side of the border?

You don't think that would cause any issue what so ever?

Furthermore, thank you for again admitting that I am 100% right. I bet that you didn't even notice you did, did you? Right here:

Fumanchewd accidentally admitting I'm right wrote:"As a direct response to evidence of Russia sending their troops into Ukraine"

A direct response to Russia military actions... Now, was that response intended to be received as "Hey good job on the invasion Russia, high five let's have a party", or was the response intended to be received as "Here's a pile of combat troops in allied nations that we are willing to use force to defend so don't F with us"

It's the second. Everyone knows it the second. So yeah, it's the US using military presence and the threat of force to sway Russian actions. Exactly what I said it was, and proof that your position is wrong.

You really should stop posting now because you are doing wonders for proving me right.

Fumanchewd wrote:We have exercises all over the world with allies. Right now our big deal is with the Asians to show China we are serious about their incursions with our allies (Philippines). It is common around the world and is NOT similar to Bears flying to the edge of airspace with nuclear bombers.

So, you admit we do these operations and admit we do they with the express goal of sending a military capability message intended to sway the actions of another nation... then say it's not the same thing?

Seriously?

I... don't..

How? How do you keep typing after that? Do you not see what you just did? You just admitted I'm 100% right, then tried to hand wave it away because a quarter million tons of nuclear powered carrier battle group is totally not like a TU-95 in any way shape or form.

That's insane.

Fumanchewd wrote:I don't know why you are so excited that this instance is at the N Pole.

Look, we get that you still don't understand the significance behind American nuclear bombers flying polar routes.

We get that.

Seriously.

It's not a point in your favor that you don't get it. In fact, it's a serious point against you that you don't understand the significance of it. A huge point.

Just accept that you don't get it and that the North Pole is a very very significant factor in nuclear arms exchanges between the US and Russia. You don't have to understand why, just know that it is.

Fumanchewd wrote: We have had bomber bases in the UK since WWII and before even. Take a look at the map and tell me how far Russia is. You can't be serious.

Oh look, something else you don't understand.

The US has been demonstrating quite well for the last two decades that we can hit any where in the world from our bases in the US using long endurance bomber missions. Bombing missions in the Balkans, Iraq an Afghanistan have been conducted from Minot, Whiteman and Barksdale. Now, if we can hit targets anywhere in the world from our home bases, and deploying the B-2 to foreign airfields is prohibitively expensive due to the special hangars they require, why would we land them on the ground in England to participate in a war game? What purposed is served by investing the time, money and manpower to be able to land them in England versus SOP and flying them round trip? What possible reason could there be for that.

Do you know what the Great White Fleet was?

Honestly, do you not see the political undertones?

Fumanchewd wrote:The difference in having a nuclear capable bomber fly to the edge of your airspace (by miles) and an announced multinational exercise is obvious.

So, Russia is the bad guy because they don't have any friends to play with? That's pretty much the basis of your contention. We use our military to intimidate Russian with our friends the British, Norwegians, Germans and Dutch (list not inclusive, sorry for leaving your nation off), and that's okay... but the Russian, they don't have any friends to play with so when they do the exact same things we do they're being mean and evil.

Again, I hope you realize how absurd your position has become during this thread.

Fumanchewd wrote:But of course those are top secret, and to prove that you brought up the RC135 flights that are anything but secret.

Pointing out that you still don't get it does nothing more than confirm for us that you can't get it. You are doing nothing more than celebrating the dunce cap that you've slammed on your own head.

I ask you one more time to provide Russian side images of the "anything but secret" flights to help substantiate your claim of, "thousands of Russian civilians or military who must have some evidence?"

Do you really not understand what is being asked of you? You made a claim that X must not be happening because no evidence of it exists and there should be evidence because "thousands of Russian civilians or military who must have some evidence". I have countered that we know Y is happening, yet no evidence exists from the "thousands of Russian civilians or military who must have some evidence", ergo lack of evidence of X is not evidence of a lack of X because the "thousands of Russian civilians or military who must have some evidence" do not appear to have that evidence after all or we would also see it for Y.

Do you understand that?

Seriously, do you understand it? Because right now it really appears that you don't.

Tell us that you understand that lack of evidence from "thousands of Russian civilians or military who must have some evidence" in regards to the well known RC-135 flights, means that you can't count on those same "thousands of Russian civilians or military who must have some evidence" for evidence of anything else.

Tell us you understand that.

halls120 wrote:Fu, I hate to burst your bubble, but we actually do things on occasion that are far more provocative that a "fly by" that I can't mention because they are classified.

He's not listening. You're now the fourth person with direct knowledge telling him he's wrong... but by golly, he thinks he's right so.. something something.

Meanwhile, while we aren't doing anything accoring to Fumanchewed, Russia is responding to our not doing anything.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/05/05 ... cmp=hplnws

Glad we aren't doing anything, because I'm pretty sure there's a good Hunt For Red October quote applicable to the situation.

Alright boys and girls, this has pretty much run its course, play nice or don't play at all.

Click Click D'oh wrote:Oh I'm a conservative, just not a part of the GOP. Not a big fan of the religious right or the modern social conservatism pushed by it. And yes, I absolutely hate and loathe what I call "Glenn Beck Conservatives"

Sorry, thought I was the only one. I love it when GOPers or Glenn Beckers say I am not conservative.

Glenn Beck has really lost it this primary season. He was losing it for years, but he really went looney tunes this year, from what I have read. Listened to him way back and he was a bit too much for me back then.

Click Click D'oh wrote:I'm referencing the flawed belief that the US doesn't use military assets in force presence and intimidation roles.. then claiming we don't do such things because the current administration.

Hate on the current POTUS all you want, just don't make up stuff about what we do or don't do as a nation then falsely ascribe it to him.

**Statement of course directed at the person actually doing these things**

Ah, okay, gotcha.

Fumanchewd wrote:My contention is that we don't have bombers fly right up to the edge of Russian airspace. The Russians have gotten within 10 miles at least a half dozen times just in the last 2 years. Exercises are typically announced well in advance and don't get anywhere near that close. The difference in having a nuclear capable bomber fly to the edge of your airspace (by miles) and an announced multinational exercise is obvious. One is considerably more antagonistic and requires a possibility of a live fire incident to the Nth degree compared to an exercise to wearily watch (and to even learn from). Bases are also not an active and immediate possible threat.

It's a whole different ballpark.

Sorry, we did, we do and will continue to do so. You should read up on U.S.N. secret submarine missions. We violated Soviet and Russian territory.

As for not flying near borders,

http://abcnews.go.com/US/crew-safe-52-b ... d=39215047"
"The B-52 was deployed to Andersen AFB from Minot, North Dakota, as part of the DoD's continuous bomber presence mission in the Pacific. The aircrew are members from the 69th Expeditionary Bomb Squadron and were performing a routine training mission."

"Before the incident there were six B-52 Stratofortresses assigned to Andersen AFB as part of the rotational Continuous Bomber Presence."

I will just leave this here...

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-c ... SKCN0Y92ZA

Two Chinese fighter jets carried out an "unsafe" intercept of a U.S. military reconnaissance aircraft over the South China Sea, the Pentagon said on Wednesday, a further escalation of tensions in and around the contested waterway.

The incident took place in international airspace on Tuesday as the U.S. maritime patrol aircraft carried out "a routine U.S. patrol," a Pentagon statement said.

"Tuesday" as in "this week's Tuesday".

So the Pentagon said they carry out routine air patrols near foreign air spaces...

CALTECH wrote:

That will BUFF right out.

Back when my brother still was in the BONE driving business, he said that they would go to Anderson via Elmendorf then Kadena. He has some very good Mig-31 pictures.

USS Essex being buzzed by Soviet Tu-16 Badger. They buzzed, the US buzzed them.

USN F-14 crew had a term when buzzing Soviet ships as they lit their afterburners right above the ship. Forgotten what it was called,...