Russian jets conduct 'aggressive' passes of US warship in Baltic Sea, defence official says

[Zain Malik]

Two Russian warplanes have flown simulated attack passes near a US guided missile destroyer in the Baltic Sea, the US military says, with one official describing the incident as one of the most aggressive interactions in recent memory.

Key points:

• Attack jets fly over bow of US ship
• Warship was in international waters
• White House says incident raises serious safety concerns

The US military released videos and photos showing Russian Sukhoi SU-24 attack aircraft flying across the bow of the destroyer in the latest of many recent cases the White House said were unsafe and unprofessional.

"There have been repeated incidents over the past year where the Russian military, including Russian military aircraft, have come close enough ... to other air and sea traffic to raise serious safety concerns," spokesman Josh Earnest said.

"This incident ... is entirely inconsistent with the professional norms of militaries operating in proximity to each other in international water and international airspace."

The US military said the action had the potential to unnecessarily escalate tensions between countries, and could result in a miscalculation or accident that could cause serious injury or death.

"This is more aggressive than anything we've seen in some time."

US defence official
The repeated flights, which also happened near the ship a day earlier, were so close they created wake in the water, with 11 passes, a defence official said.

The planes carried no visible weaponry, the official said.

A Russian KA-27 Helix helicopter also made seven passes around the USS Donald Cook, taking pictures.

The nearest Russian territory was about 70 nautical miles away in its enclave of Kaliningrad, which sits between Lithuania and Poland.

"They tried to raise them [the Russian aircraft] on the radio but they did not answer," the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity, adding the US ship was in international waters.

"This is more aggressive than anything we've seen in some time."

 

[Windjammer]

 

[Oublious]

They deserved to be shot down.

 

[flamer84]

Looks like their rust buckets are practically begging for another AMRAAM.NATO should oblige.

 

[Blue Marlin]

its un-armed if the usa shot it down then they would be consequenses also not its far from a russain base. so a responce would be gurrantied. the usa is not stupid to do such a thing unlike other countries.

 

[Penguin]

its un-armed if the usa shot it down then they would be consequenses also not its far from a russain base. so a responce would be gurrantied. the usa is not stupid to do such a thing unlike other countries.

This is why the Navy didn't shoot down Russian jets

• in international waters
  
• unarmed Sukhoi Su-24 fighters
• weren't a credible threat.
• not at war with Russia,
• threatening attack profile from someone who might not recognize me — that’s not the case here
  
• 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.
• "You don’t get to kill people just because they’re being annoying,"
• the rules might be different in another situation. The Baltic Sea is not a contested area of responsibility. "We would probably not have accepted that from an Iranian aircraft in the Persian Gulf, although we’ve seen it,
• Or if it had been a civilian aircraft, the CO would have been more on guard for a potential suicide mission.
  
• The likelihood that a rogue Russian pilot would take a shot at an American ship and then try to fly home through the airspace of multiple NATO partners is very low.

http://www.navytimes.com/story/military/2016/04/13/why-navy-didnt-shoot-down-russian-jets/83000858/

(Hope the Chinese are paying attention too)

Russia's Defense Ministry has rejected complaints by U.S. officials.
Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov, spokesman for the Russian Defense Ministry, said Thursday that the pilots of Russian Su-24 jets saw the ship and turned back "while using all measures of precaution."

Konashenkov said he was baffled by what he described as the "distressed reaction of our American counterparts."

http://www.navytimes.com/search/russia downplays fly by/



Ready for theatre imho.

Russian bombers buzz carrier Reagan amid exercise
By David Larter, Staff writer 4:45 p.m. EDT October 29, 2015
http://www.navytimes.com/story/military/2015/10/29/russia-bear-overflight-carrier-reagan/74805130/

 

[Blue Marlin]

This is why the Navy didn't shoot down Russian jets

• in international waters
  
• unarmed Sukhoi Su-24 fighters
• weren't a credible threat.
• not at war with Russia,
• threatening attack profile from someone who might not recognize me — that’s not the case here
  
• 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.
• "You don’t get to kill people just because they’re being annoying,"
• the rules might be different in another situation. The Baltic Sea is not a contested area of responsibility. "We would probably not have accepted that from an Iranian aircraft in the Persian Gulf, although we’ve seen it,
• Or if it had been a civilian aircraft, the CO would have been more on guard for a potential suicide mission.
  
• The likelihood that a rogue Russian pilot would take a shot at an American ship and then try to fly home through the airspace of multiple NATO partners is very low.

my point exactly.
its was un armed so it posed no threat. (maybe it came to say hello)
it was not near any nato countries it was next to russain waters. it can easily hypothetically sink it if it wanted to. heck its close enough so they dont even have to deploy a fighter. it can use coastal missiles.
international waters but close to russia. chinese j11's intercepted a p8[i think] and that was armed
with close and beyond visual range missiles.

 

[Nattmara]

it was not near any nato countries it was next to russain waters.

I think you're confusing the Baltic with the Balkans.

In the Baltic you'd always be near a NATO nation, and outside of Russian waters unless in the Gulf of Finland or near Kaliningrad.

The OP says the incident took place 70 miles from Kaliningrad, which could put the Cook closer to Sweden, Poland or Lithuania and Latvia - the later three being NATO member nations - rather than the Russian enclave in the Baltics.

 

[Blue Marlin]

I think you're confusing the Baltic with the Balkans.

In the Baltic you'd always be near a NATO nation, and outside of Russian waters unless in the Gulf of Finland or near Kaliningrad.

The OP says the incident took place 70 miles from Kaliningrad, which could put the Cook closer to Sweden, Poland or Lithuania and Latvia, rather than the Russian enclave in the Baltics.

oops..... my bad.

 

[Penguin]

international waters but close to russia.

Since May 2004, with the accession of the Baltic states and Poland, the Baltic Sea has been almost entirely surrounded by countries of the European Union (EU). The only remaining non-EU shore areas are Russian: the Saint Petersburg area and the exclave of the Kaliningrad Oblast.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaliningrad_Oblast

Sailing 70nmi (130km) from Kaliningrad takes on whole a different meaning when you consider that for the Baltic Sea:
Max. length = 1,601 km (995 mi, 864 nmi)
Max. width = 193 km (120 mi, 104 nmi)

The straight line distance from Kaliningrad to Gdansk in Poland is: 118 km (73 mi , 64 nmi). So, when leaving that port, of nearby Gdynia, (126 km to Kaliningrad), a navy ship would already be closer to the city of Kaliningrad than this ship was. In short: pretty ridiculous.

http://fakty.interia.pl/news-amerykanski-niszczyciel-uss-donald-cook-wplynal-do-gdyni,nId,2181694
http://www.tvp.info/24880861/rosyjskie-mysliwce-prawie-otarly-sie-o-amerykanski-okret-na-baltyku

 

[Penguin]

Another aerial close call as Russian jet barrel-rolls over U.S. aircraft
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/16/politics/russian-jet-barrel-rolled-us-aircraft/index.html

Russian MoD Denies Allegations of 'Dangerous' Su-27 Baltic Fly-By
http://sputniknews.com/world/20160417/1038150447/russia-us-su27-defense.html

Apparently, the pilot of the Russian SU-27 flew for about fifteen meters of the left wing of the US plane and rolled over the head to the right side of the RC-135.

RC-135U Combat Sent:

The RC-135U Combat Sent is designed to collect technical intelligence on adversary radar emitter systems. Combat Sent data is collected to develop new or upgraded radar warning receivers, radar jammers, decoys, anti-radiation missiles, and training simulators.
Distinctly identified by the antennae arrays on the fuselage chin, tailcone, and wing tips, three RC-135C aircraft were converted to RC-135U (63-9792, 64-14847, & 64-14849) in the early 1970s. 63-9792 was later converted into a Rivet Joint in 1978, and all aircraft remain in service based at Offutt Air Force Base, Nebraska. Minimum crew requirements are 2 pilots, 2 navigators, 3 systems engineers, 10 electronic warfare officers, and 6 area specialists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_RC-135#/media/File:USAF_Combat_Sent.jpg

So, there are only 2 RCU-135U in the USAF.

 

[vostok]

Our sources say 70 km, not 70 miles.

 

[mike2000 is back]

KEEP THE Game going. Passive NATO members will hopefully wake up from their slumber.
So i'm with putin on this one. KEEP IT UP.

 

[AugenBlick]

Psshhhssst ...... show offs!!!!

 

[Penguin]

Our sources say 70 km, not 70 miles.

Same difference: the Baltic at its widest is 193km. Territorial waters are 12 nmi = 22 km.

70nmi = 130 km
70 mi = 113 km

A US guided-missile destroyer only 70 nautical miles from Russian territory at Kaliningrad is given a stern display of aerobatics by two Sukhoi Su-24s — and then Washington erupts with accusations of being harassed by an "insane flyby".

http://sputniknews.com/columnists/20160416/1038129155/us-russia-su24-reaction.html