Norway, Royal AF intercept Russian bombers

[BobbyMac]

Norwegian and British fighters scrambled Thursday to intercept eight Russian bombers that neared the Nordic country's territory in the latest show of air power by the Kremlin, defense officials said.

The Tu-95 strategic bombers rounded Norway's northern tip over the Barents Sea and flew south over the North Atlantic before turning back, Norwegian defense officials said.

The Russian planes, known as "Bears" in NATO lingo, stayed inside international air space during the maneuvers, which officials described as an assertion of Russia's increasingly assertive posture on the world stage.

"This is a message that Russia is back as a superpower," Norwegian Deputy Defense Minister Espen Barth Eide said.

Norway did not see the increased activity as a threat "but a signal that Russia wants to be taken seriously by the West," he told The Associated Press.

British defense officials said four Royal Air Force fighters scrambled to monitor the flight, which did not enter British territory.

Lt. Col. John Inge Oeglaend, of the Norwegian Joint Headquarters, said two Norwegian F-16 fighters were sent up both times that the Russian aircraft approached the northern tip of Norway, in keeping with normal practice. He said it was the third time since mid-July that Norwegian fighters have scrambled to monitor Russian air maneuvers.

"They followed a normal route in international air space," Oeglaend said by telephone from the western Norway port of Stavanger.

Norway, a member of the NATO alliance, and Russia share land and ocean borders in the Arctic, including the vast Barents Sea.

Alliance spokesman James Appathurai said Norway and Britain launched quick-reaction interceptor and airborne-warning planes and tankers "as part of routine NATO procedure."

He added that the Russians had every right to carry out the maneuvers: "There is no controversy about this."

Russian news agencies quoted air force spokesman Col. Alexander Drobyshevsky as saying the Tu-95 bombers had begun patrols of distant areas of the globe late Wednesday, in accordance with plans announced by President Vladimir Putin for a resumption of the flights.

The long-range bombers began the patrols "over the Pacific, Atlantic and Arctic oceans involving in-flight refueling," ITAR-Tass and Interfax quoted Drobyshevsky as saying.

According to ITAR-Tass, he said the bombers were "flying over neutral waters, not approaching close to the air borders of foreign countries."

"About 20 NATO jets were scrambled to escort our strategic bombers, including F-16s and Tornadoes, but there were no excesses from the foreign planes," Interfax quoted Drobyshevsky as saying.

Putin said in August that he had ordered strategic bombers to resume regular long-range patrols, which analysts say signaled a significant change for Russian military policy.

Analysts said the increased activity shows that the Russians have the aircraft, the trained pilots, the fuel and the funds to use them, all of which were lacking in the years after the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union.

Fredrik Westerlund, an analyst at the Swedish Defense Research Agency, said Russia was reviving maneuvers along Soviet-era routes down the North Sea and toward Guam in the Pacific.

"These are Cold War routes," he said. "These are the routes they had before for nuclear weapons strikes. ... The closest route to the U.S. is over the North Pole. And the route over the North Sea makes it possible to reach Great Britain.

Jakub M. Godzimirski, an expert on NATO and Russia at the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs in Oslo, said the increased activity is directed at the West in general.

"It shows they have the ability to do it, that they have the economic means and the political will to take steps that could increase tensions," he said by telephone.

In mid-August, Norwegian fighters scrambled to monitor a flight of 11 Russian bombers off western Norway in the biggest show of Russian air power over the Norwegian Sea since the early 1990s.

In recent months, there have been repeated incidents, including two of the RAF's new Typhoon Eurofighter jets last month shadowing a Tu-95 over the North Atlantic, and in July two Russian aircraft were warned off by RAF jets as they headed toward British airspace.

In May, two Tornado F3s were scrambled to intercept a Tu-95 observing the Royal Navy exercise Neptune Warrior.

Associated Press writers Paul Ames in Brussels, Jill Lawless in London, Steve Gutterman in Moscow and Karl Ritter in Stockholm contributed to this report.

Copyright 2007 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed

Posted in entirety for those capped. http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/09/06/ap4089489.html

 

[antowan]

All good as long as Russia knows the west will bomb them to the stone age and take all their women if they pull any ****!

 

[killadoob]

would not be so sure that the west would be able to do this

dont mess with russians is what i say

 

[icyrus]

would not be so sure that the west would be able to do this

dont mess with russians is what i say

The American minutemen and SLBMs pretty much guarantee this.

Pointless posturing though, to go with America's pointless posturing.

 

[lion_fish]

Is it me or is the entire world readying itself for another war?

 

[Skeptik]

The American minutemen and SLBMs pretty much guarantee this.

Pointless posturing though, to go with America's pointless posturing.

The Russians have a huge nuclear arsenal. They are also commissioning new subs. Now these are very capable. They can sit off the Florida coast and wipe out 1/4 of the country in one go. As was said - Don't mess. I've met many in Moscow and St Petes. These are very professional, dedicated military folk, not Zimbabwe.

 

[Roman4604]

Looks like pure political posturing.

Those Tu95s are closer to Dakotas then any thing else. Completely useless in an age of modern stealth fighters such as a F22 Raptor.

 

[Skeptik]

Looks like pure political posturing.

Those Tu95s are closer to Dakotas then any thing else. Completely useless in an age of modern stealth fighters such as a F22 Raptor.

How old is the B52 (take a guess).
And the P3 Orion (?)
... the Bell Cobra (?)
... The Nimrod (?)

Age isn't that important when they still work.

Speaking of Dakotas, I saw one yesterday over Ysterplaat (CPT)

 

[Roman4604]

Age isn't that important when they still work

It is when comparing front line combat systems.

The US would only deploy something like a B52 for crude phycological carpet bombing type missions once air superiority had already been achieved. The real precision first strike stuff would be done by B2s and F117s and Tu95 is as good as a Dak when compared to these.

 

[noxibox]

All good as long as Russia knows the west will bomb them to the stone age and take all their women if they pull any ****!

I'm sure they're quaking in their boots.

The real precision first strike stuff would be done by B2s and F117s and Tu95 is as good as a Dak when compared to these.

If they were no threat there would be no reason to send out fighters to intercept them.

 

[Tux]

It is when comparing front line combat systems.

The US would only deploy something like a B52 for crude phycological carpet bombing type missions once air superiority had already been achieved. The real precision first strike stuff would be done by B2s and F117s and Tu95 is as good as a Dak when compared to these.

Have you seen how many guided missiles a B52 can pack? Look it up. It's more than just a WW2 type bomber. Maybe that is what it was designed for
originally but not in its last incarnation

 

[icyrus]

The Russians have a huge nuclear arsenal. They are also commissioning new subs. Now these are very capable. They can sit off the Florida coast and wipe out 1/4 of the country in one go. As was said - Don't mess. I've met many in Moscow and St Petes. These are very professional, dedicated military folk, not Zimbabwe.

Uhuh... and the American's and British have what? Pop tarts?

There is no possible winner in a nuclear war and everyone knows it. In the end - who wants to be the ruler of a parking lot?

 

[Roman4604]

If they were no threat there would be no reason to send out fighters to intercept them.

I meant they were usless as a stike combat system when compared to what they would be up against. Obviously in an unforseen pre-emptive situation anything in the sky is a threat, just look at what 2 unarmed 757s did to the World Trade Centre.

 

[Tux]

In 1991 the B-52Gs from bases in England and on the island of Diego Garcia flew low level bombing missions until Coalition forces completed air superiority and were able to suppress any air defense systems capable of reaching bombers at a higher altitude. B-52s were an important part of the air war during Operation Desert Storm as they could be employed with impunity. Though less destructive than more advanced weapons such as cluster bombs or precision guided projectiles, the conventional strikes were used because they were economical, and it was hoped that by demoralizing the defending Iraqi troops, they could be induced to surrender rather than be destroyed.[citation needed] During the Gulf War the B-52 suffered only one aircraft loss, with several receiving minor damage from enemy action.

The B-52 also contributed to the US success in Operation Enduring Freedom in 2001 (Afghanistan/Southwest Asia), providing the ability to loiter high above the battlefield and provide Close Air Support (CAS) through the use of precision guided munitions, a mission that had been restricted to fighter and ground attack aircraft. B-52s also played a key role in Operation Iraqi Freedom, which commenced in 2003 (Iraq/Southwest Asia), where they provided close air support and bombing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B52

 

[noxibox]

Uhuh... and the American's and British have what? Pop tarts?

There is no possible winner in a nuclear war and everyone knows it. In the end - who wants to be the ruler of a parking lot?

Which is why the US/NATO couldn't simply bomb Russia into the stone age. Russia can just as easily do the same to them. At one time they had significantly more nuclear weaponry.

Have you seen how many guided missiles a B52 can pack? Look it up. It's more than just a WW2 type bomber. Maybe that is what it was designed for
originally but not in its last incarnation

The TU95 can carry nuclear weapons and surface to air missiles. The B52 can definitely carry nuclear weapons.

 

[Tux]

Uhuh... and the American's and British have what? Pop tarts?

There is no possible winner in a nuclear war and everyone knows it. In the end - who wants to be the ruler of a parking lot?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction

 

[BobbyMac]

Uhuh... and the American's and British have what? Pop tarts?

There is no possible winner in a nuclear war and everyone knows it. In the end - who wants to be the ruler of a parking lot?

Does the parking lot have oil?

 

[Roman4604]

Have you seen how many guided missiles a B52 can pack? Look it up.

My point was about survivablility not capacity. A B52 like the T95 would be taken out instantly in a first stike situation by any half capable air defence system, which would not be the case for the B2s or F117s.

In 1991 the B-52Gs from bases in England and on the island of Diego Garcia flew low level bombing missions until Coalition forces completed air superiority and were able to suppress any air defense systems capable of reaching bombers at a higher altitude.

I cant believe this statement, the B52 would be a very poor lumbering low-level bomber and even 60s era SAMs would take them out in no time at all. Do you have a more credible source than Wikipedia which states B52s were used for first strike low level bombing of AA assets (e.g. Radar, SAM & AA sites). To my knowledge this was performed almost exclusively by the F117s

 

[wcoetzee]

put on your blazers guys its going to be a cold war

 

[Tux]

The aircraft's flexibility was evident in Operation Desert Storm and again during Operations Allied Force. B-52s struck wide-area troop concentrations, fixed installations and bunkers, and decimated the morale of Iraq's Republican Guard. The Gulf War involved the longest strike mission in the history of aerial warfare when B-52s took off from Barksdale Air Force Base, La., launched conventional air launched cruise missiles and returned to Barksdale -- a 35-hour, non-stop combat mission.

During Operation Allied Force, B-52s opened the conflict with conventional cruise missile attacks and then transitioned to delivering general purpose bombs and cluster bomb units on Serbian army positions and staging areas.

http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=83