August 10, 2007

Russian Military Bragging About Overflights

The Russian government continues its strange game of imperial ambitions, this time bragging about using Soviet-era bombers to overfly American-patrolled airspace. Moscow says it's reviving a grand tradition of Russian audacity by eyeballing American pilots. Americans say that Moscow is reviving a grand tradition of Russian baloney:

Russian bombers are reported to have buzzed an American military base for the first time since the Cold War when they flew over the Pacific island of Guam.

Moscow said that US fighter jets were scrambled to intercept the two Tupolev-95 warplanes as they resumed the Cold War era practice of flying over Western offshore military installations in a mission on Wednesday. ...

"It was always the tradition of our long-range aviation to fly far into the ocean, to meet (US) aircraft carriers and greet (US) pilots visually," Maj Gen Pavel Androsov, the head of long-range aviation in the Russian air force, told a press conference in Moscow.

"Yesterday we revived this tradition."

The Tu-95 can carry nuclear weapons, so such a sortie would be no joke. Only a gang of idiots would want to provoke an American military response, especially since we're currently keeping a close eye on North Korea and their paranoid dictator. At the least, they'd be inviting a buzz over the Siberian coast from American planes far more capable than the lumbering Tu-95s.

As it turns out, they would have had to have Superman's eyeballs to greet the US pilots visually, since they didn't get within 300 miles of them:

Today the American fleet commander in the Pacific poured cold water on the claims, however, insisting the Russian bombers never got within 300 miles of Guam.

"US planes went to an orbit point in preparation for an intercept that never occurred because the Bears didn't get close enough," said Admiral Robert F. Willard, employing a slang term for the Russian planes.

This does, however, lend a lot more credence to Georgia's claim that Russian jets invaded their airspace. The Russians have tested the British much closer to home as well, and Georgia is much more of a thorn in their side. Whether they dropped the missile or fired it at the radar station after passing over South Ossetia remains to be seen, but given the Russian braggadocio over its provocative manuevers, it's almost certain the Georgians at least have the airspace violations correct.

Why has Vladimir Putin decided to revive the more foolish aspects of the Soviet military posture? Does he want a war to break out, or does he want to just make the claim that he can strike fear into the West? Russian nuclear weapons certainly require us to treat Russia as a world power without all of the nonsense of obsolete bombers making runs over Western airspace, or planting flags under the North Pole.

Clearly, Putin has ceased being an ally and has decided to become an opponent. The West should show the consequences of that action by removing Russia from the G-8. When the nonsense stops, he can have access to Western financial systems again, but until then, he can find out what all of his Tu-95 games has bought the Russian people.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/tabhacht.cgi/11081

Comments (25)

Posted by Christoph | August 10, 2007 6:43 AM

Why has Vladimir Putin decided to revive the more foolish aspects of the Soviet military posture?

He wants a third term. Somehow, someway, you mark my words... he wants to stay in power and will move events in an effort to make this happen.

Posted by swabjockey05 | August 10, 2007 6:50 AM

Bear is a "slang term" ?

Posted by Nicholas | August 10, 2007 7:10 AM

Yeah, I thought "Bear" was the official NATO reporting name for the Tu-95. Well, the first half of it, anyway.

Posted by docjim505 | August 10, 2007 7:32 AM

Cap'n Ed wrote:

Clearly, Putin has ceased being an ally and has decided to become an opponent. The West should show the consequences of that action by removing Russia from the G-8. When the nonsense stops, he can have access to Western financial systems again, but until then, he can find out what all of his Tu-95 games has bought the Russian people.

I read about this in yahoo! news last night. This caught my eye:

The generals said under Putin long-range aviation was no longer in need of fuel, enjoyed better maintenance and much higher wages, a far cry from the 1990s when many pilots were practically grounded because there was no money to buy fuel.

The generals quipped that part of the funding boost was thanks to a five-hour sortie Putin once flew as part of a crew on a supersonic Tupolev Tu-160 strategic bomber, known as the "White Swan" in Russia and codenamed "Blackjack" by NATO.

The current state of Russia's economy, which is booming for the eighth year in a row, has allowed Russia to finance such flights, said Safranchuk from the World Security Institute. (1)

It would seem that we (the West) is financing Putin's stupid games. Now, will all the bankers and financiers and stockholders who do good business in Russia decide to cut off their own money just to teach Putin a lesson? I doubt it.

But, since he wants to bring back some Cold War traditions, perhaps we could initiate a scaled-back version of Operation Chrome Dome and start flying B-52 patrols near Soviet... er, Russian... airspace. Vlad, do we have your attention now?

As an aside, this from the second Telegraph story irritates me a bit:

"US planes went to an orbit point in preparation for an intercept that never occurred because the Bears didn't get close enough," said Admiral Robert F. Willard, employing a slang term for the Russian planes. [emphasis mine - dj505

It's not a friggin' slang term: "Bear" is the official NATO reporting name for the TU-95 bomber. Grrrr... This is almost as bad as a news report I saw back during the invasion of Iraq that talked about A-10's launching from US aircraft carriers. The average reporter just doesn't know jack s*** about the military....

And one last thing: before the lefties start jeering about Bush and his early trust of Putin ("I looked into his eyes, and it was magic..."), let me say here:

He was incredibly naive and stupid. I hope he's learned his lesson about trusting that Dobby-looking son of a bitch.

---------

(1) http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070809/ts_nm/russia_military_flights_dc

Posted by Mojo | August 10, 2007 8:25 AM

This is all a response to Russia's dramatically declining influence in the world. Their capabilities are declining, and their key allies are becoming increasingly isolated from the rest of the world. Throw in China's increasing power in asia, and Russia is beginning to feel a bit irrelevant. This is a pathological response to that, and like that arctic expedition, is likely intended for Russian domestic consumption more than internationally. To be sure, it's a stupid thing to do and it could accidentally trigger a war that Russia doesn't want and couldn't begin to handle, but their intent (however idiotic the execution) is to give the home folks something to feel good about.

Posted by tps | August 10, 2007 8:25 AM

An earlier version of that wikipedia article about the TU-95 it mentioned that the crews loved the 'Bear' name and used it themselves for their planes. They said it fit it perfectly because the TU-95 is big, lumbering, and noisy (growls).

Posted by Lowly Knave | August 10, 2007 8:35 AM

Relax, Captain. This is just a response to the deployment of eight F-22 Raptors in Alaska. Ol' Vlad just wants to point out we can't be everywhere even if his aircraft are antiques.

http://formerspook.blogspot.com/

Posted by Lurking Observer | August 10, 2007 10:15 AM

docjim:

Did you know that the largest recipient of foreign aid in Asia is North Korea?

And that much of that money comes from Japan, South Korea (most of it), and the United States? All of whom the North Koreans still detest?

That businessmen would work in Russia is not surprising. At least they're turning a profit.

It's the idiots who insist on giving money to the North Koreans, feeding a population that their own government is willing to starve, that I don't understand.

Posted by braindead | August 10, 2007 10:17 AM

Ha! Ha! Ha!

The reason the Soviet Union disintegrated was because they couldn't keep up the expenditure on weapons.

Mr. Putin will bankrupt Russia into the Stone Age if he chooses this path.

Also the Chinese and Japan have always been the traditional enemy of Russia.

Posted by viahj | August 10, 2007 10:33 AM

what all this means, when taken with the rise of anti-Americanism throughout the world is that the rest of the world is starting to see and believe that the US is weakened and now is the time to challenge us globally on all fronts: economically, politically, militarily and socially.

this is the result of the partisan politics that have torn this country apart over the past 20 years. we are no longer seen as anything but a blundering declining-economic empire paper tiger which is ripe for plundering.

Posted by Lowly Knave | August 10, 2007 10:49 AM

Seems my comment was eaten, and my e-mails were filtered, too.

Posted by Al in St. Lou | August 10, 2007 11:09 AM

At least that reporter who said the A-10s launched from aircraft carriers wasn't talking about AC-130s! "Well, you see, they line up the aircraft carriers so the plane falls off the end of one flight deck right onto the next one! Gee, isn't tecknowledgey wonderful--what's that? What's 'wingspan'?"

Posted by docjim505 | August 10, 2007 11:09 AM

LO,

I didn't know that, but I'm not surprised. Since nobody really wants to try using guns to deal with Kim Jong-Poofy Hair, they're trying what butter can do. That and people feel sorry for the suffering people of North Korea, who are starving and freezing because of their loopy stalinist "Dear Leader".

Posted by cgramaglia | August 10, 2007 12:13 PM

re: the NATO reporting names for Soviet aircraft and missiles. There is actually a simple system to it:

The first letter tells you the general mission of the aircraft. If it has one syllable, it is prop driven, two for jets.

FARMER, FISHBED, FLOGGER, FULCRUM - Jet Fighter

CUB, CRATE, CLANK - Prop Cargo/Transport Acft

CANDID - Jet Cargo/Transport acft

BEAR - Prop Bomber

BLINDER, BACKFIRE, BLACKJACK - Jet Bomber

you get the idea...

oh, helicopters start with H and if my memory serves, one syllable means conventional rotor arrangement (HIP, HIND), two syllables indicates contra-rotating configuration (HORMONE, HELIX)

Posted by docjim505 | August 10, 2007 1:31 PM

cgramaglia,

Thanks very much for that info! I knew about the first letter, but I didn't realize that the number of syllables also was a descriptor.

Posted by cgramaglia | August 10, 2007 1:44 PM

BTW, I was wrong about the helicopter reporting names... the number of syllables does NOT indicate rotor configuration...

Posted by pk | August 10, 2007 2:08 PM

the russian crews are very brave men.

look at the smoking hole in the ground statistics and you'll see what i mean.

C

Posted by Miller | August 10, 2007 2:39 PM

So when do we have something overfly Moscow? You know, just to "revive a... tradition..." Are U-2s still in service? What do we use for long range reconnaissance flights these days? I'm pretty sure the Blackbird went out of service, right?

...Or is that just what they want everyone to think? :)

Spend that money, Vlad! Enjoy yourself while it lasts :D

Posted by Christoph | August 10, 2007 3:01 PM

This is all a response to Russia's dramatically declining influence in the world. Their capabilities are declining, and their key allies are becoming increasingly isolated from the rest of the world. Throw in China's increasing power in asia, and Russia is beginning to feel a bit irrelevant. This is a pathological response to that, and like that arctic expedition, is likely intended for Russian domestic consumption more than internationally. To be sure, it's a stupid thing to do and it could accidentally trigger a war that Russia doesn't want and couldn't begin to handle, but their intent (however idiotic the execution) is to give the home folks something to feel good about.

Posted by: Mojo at August 10, 2007 8:25 AM

Well, except for the fact you're 180 degrees wrong on every substantive point you make, you're right.

Except for that minor little detail.

Posted by Tbird | August 10, 2007 5:46 PM

Of course US aircraft could have been overflying Russian installations for years and they'd never know it. B-2's aren't stealthy for nothing you know.

Posted by Ray | August 10, 2007 7:29 PM

"Ol' Vlad just wants to point out we can't be everywhere even if his aircraft are antiques."

Then Ol' Vlad needs to find an military base that doesn't have air support so his "antiques" won't keep getting chased away. Of course, finding an military base that doesn't have air cover would be a rather difficult.

If Russia had actually buzzed the base as they claim, the whole world would have known rather quickly as pictures of the wreckage would have been posted on the Internet as a warning. You don't overfly a military airbase and survive while we are in a state of war, especially if your flying military aircraft like Russian bombers.

""It was always the tradition of our long-range aviation to fly far into the ocean, to meet (US) aircraft carriers and greet (US) pilots visually," Maj Gen Pavel Androsov, the head of long-range aviation in the Russian air force, told a press conference in Moscow."

That's right, the Russians DID greet American pilots visually, 300 miles from any possible target which makes Russia's aircraft rather useless for anything other than expensive joyrides.

Posted by Joshua | August 10, 2007 8:01 PM

Re: cgramaglia at August 10, 2007 12:13 PM

FARMER, FISHBED, FLOGGER, FULCRUM - Jet Fighter

Was not the call sign for the Mig-15 (the North's workhorse fighter jet during the Korean War) a certain two-syllable word referring to gay people?

Posted by burt | August 10, 2007 9:01 PM

Bears are not just form the Soviet era. They go back decades before 1989. They come in three versions (bomber, surveillance, ASM carrier). The third version has been fitted with at least two different air to surface missiles. The first one was a very large nuclear capable turbojet with a range of at least 300 NM which I believe has been discontinued. The latter one is a high altitude rocket powered supersonic missile with a shorter range. In each case they are carried externally and are visually obvious from short range.

Posted by Sharpshooter | August 10, 2007 9:17 PM

And just like under the Soviets, the vast majority of people in Russia live in virtual poverty.

All that moeny (US provided) for military gadgets, a trickle (down?) for "the people".

Can you say "North Korea...Cuba"? Sure you can.

Posted by Slimm | August 11, 2007 12:21 PM

The number of syllables indicates the type of engines used, one syllable for props (Bear), two for jets.
Slimm

Post a comment