Thursday, March 19, 2009

Russian War Planes Fly 500 Feet over U.S. Aircraft Carrier

Russia is continuing to push.

Russian military aircraft flew just 500 feet over two U.S. Navy ships this week as the ships participated in a joint military exercise with South Korea in the Sea of Japan, according to U.S. military officials.

On Monday, two Russian Ilyushin IL-38 maritime patrol aircraft, known as “Mays,” overflew the U.S. aircraft carrier Stennis while it was in international waters in the Sea of Japan.

The Russian aircraft flew about 500 feet over the ship, lower than other flights the Russians have made over U.S. ships in the past year.

The USS Stennis was about 80 miles east of Pohang, South Korea, participating in the joint military exercise when the flyover occurred.

On Tuesday, the USS Blue Ridge, a lead command and control ship, and the Stennis were overflown by two Russian “Bear” long-range bombers multiple times, according to U.S. military officials.

The Bears overflew the ships at about 2,000 feet, officials said.

U.S. military officials said that in both cases, U.S. Navy F/A-18 fighters met up with the Russian aircraft about 70 nautical miles from the U.S. ships and flew alongside them until they left the area.

(10) Comments
Posted by Owen at 2008 hrs
Foreign Affairs + Military

  1. Owen,
    I was not in the military but can you answer me this question?

    I see it was a joint exercise’s but 500 ft,, why were they not shot down at 1000 ft, 5000 ft? Did the people in the twin towers just look and wonder if they were safe at 500 ft even if they were in New York City? 

    Was it policy or was it lack of communication with the Commander and Chief?

    Thanks, have a GREAT weekend.

    Posted by Paul - Berry Laker on March 19, 2009 at 2115 hrs


  2. Paul,

    I wasn’t in the military either, but I can venture a guess.  In general, there is a bubble around a carrier group in which people are not allowed to enter.  My guess is that the Navy knows that Russia is just trying to be provocative and are refusing to take the bait.  The F/A-18s escorted the Russian planes and were surely armed and ready to shoot down a threat at the slightest notion. 

    Personally, I would prefer a harder stand - like warn the Russians that we’ll shoot down anything that comes within 50 miles of a carrier - but I understand this stand.  As long as the 18s are armed and hot, it’s just showmanship on the part of the Russians.

    Posted by Owen on March 19, 2009 at 2141 hrs


  3. Thanks Owen, one last question,

    does our POTUS have your same opinion? Or can I ask what do you think is the position of our POTUS?

    Posted by Paul - Berry Laker on March 19, 2009 at 2152 hrs


  4. No idea.  I’m not sure that he can pull himself away from Leno and the NCAA long enough to think about carrier battle group security.

    Posted by Owen on March 19, 2009 at 2159 hrs


  5. The longer he remains distracted, the less damage he causes.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 19, 2009 at 2205 hrs


  6. Shooting down Russian military plane is almost the same as declaring war on Russia. Are you sure you want this? Nuclear war is not fun,

    By the way, flying over aircraft carrier in neutral waters is not illegal and is allowed by international law. I am quite sure that US flies over Russian/Iranian/Chinese ships all the time.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 20, 2009 at 0119 hrs


  7. Sergey is correct.  International waters and all that.  Military ships and aircraft play “games” with each other all the time.  Submarines are especially adept at it.  It wsas very common during the Cold War and is used to gather intelligence on the other side. For example, how will a carrier battle group respond to incoming enemy aircraft?

    POTUS is too busy (and tired, I’m sure) to be worried about something as piddling as this.  There’s a social agenda to complete, after all.

    Posted by Steve on March 20, 2009 at 0328 hrs


  8. I wonder what Reagan would have done?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 20, 2009 at 0856 hrs


  9. “NAVY vessels collide near Iran” -
    what do got the fuckin Bobzie Twins over there!!?
    This is a WAR, and WE are losing.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 20, 2009 at 0900 hrs


  10. Dan, the collision is a serious, and unfortunate incident. But we must remember that the Strait of Hormuz is an exceedingly narrow and somewhat shallow (as in for SSBN) to operate at a “safe” depth. Both the ships were headed to port and the incident occured. The strait is among the busiest in the world with almost a quarter of Oil commerce passing through it. Moreover the incident occured at night. Nonetheless, a Court of Inquiry needs to fix’em Caps, especially that of the Sub. And alter procedures as in some identification/communication mechanism between sister ships. Subs are stealth vessels, but only for the enemy.
    And yes, USA has and will always WIN, irrespective of such minor incidents. USN has a stellar safety record. Just see the Russians, and the dandy UK/French navies!

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on March 20, 2009 at 1027 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.