Su-35 Russian Aerospace Forces forced the U.S. Navy reconnaissance plane to abandon approach to military facilities in Syria

51

The Russian Ministry of Defense confirms that an American reconnaissance aircraft was trying to get closer to Russian military facilities in Syria. According to the latest information, one of such objects is the air base of the Russian Aerospace Forces “Khmeimim” in Latakia.

The Russian Defense Ministry noted that a fighter was raised to intercept an American reconnaissance aircraft. This is a Su-35 plane that took off from the aforementioned Russian air base located in Syria.



As a result, the Su-35 "met" the American reconnaissance board over the Mediterranean Sea. The Russian pilot confirmed the belonging of the aircraft to the US Navy. There was also a so-called visual contact - the Su-35 pilot recorded the board number of the US Navy aircraft.

The Russian military department noted that the Su-35 approaching an American aircraft did not carry any danger for the latter. Everything was carried out in strict compliance with international standards in neutral airspace.

It is known that after approaching the Su-35, the U.S. Navy reconnaissance aircraft was forced to change the route of its flight and refuse to approach the Russian military facilities in the SAR.

Recall that previously in the Pentagon, Russian pilots were repeatedly accused of “unprofessional actions in the air” and other “sins” in the interception or other variant of rapprochement of military means aviation.
    Our news channels

    Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

    51 comment
    Information
    Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
    1. +16
      April 20 2020 13: 23
      There was also a so-called visual contact - the Su-35 pilot recorded the side number of the US Navy aircraft.
      "When you caress me, my friend, with a simple and gentle look ..."
      1. +5
        April 20 2020 13: 32
        It’s not in vain that the Su-35S will equip the R-37M, because the competitors are on the alert. The arms race is gaining momentum. Even according to rumors, the R-37M integrates on the Su-30SM.
        In the Russian air force, work is underway to integrate long-range R-35M long-range air-to-air missiles into the armament of Su-37S fighters. This publication "Izvestia" said a source in the military-industrial complex of Russia. As expected, at the end of 2020, test launches of this missile from Su-35S fighters should take place, after which mass equipment with a new missile will begin. Previously, the R-37M was adopted, and it is equipped with fighter-interceptors MiG-31BM and MiG-31BSM, for which it was created to equip it.


        In addition to Russia, China possesses the owner of super-long range air-to-air missiles. It is known that China has a new long-range missile PL-15, which is equipped with a ramjet engine and is capable of developing a maximum speed five times the speed of sound. Estimates of the range of the PL-15 vary over a very wide range - from 150 to 300-400 kilometers. Probably, like the R-37M, the range of the PL-15 depends on the type of target being hit and the trajectory.

        At the same time, the United States, which has traditionally been a leader in the development of various aviation ammunition, has now become an outsider in the field of long-range missile development. Starting in 2017, Lockheed-Martin Corporation in the USA has been developing a promising long-range air-to-air missile AIM-260 JATM, which is being created as a response to the Russian R-37M and Chinese PL-15. According to the plans of the US military, the AIM-260 tests should begin in 2021, and full-scale purchases from 2026 fiscal year.
        Details: https://regnum.ru/news/polit/2922286.html
        Any use of materials is allowed only if there is a hyperlink to REGNUM.
    2. +7
      April 20 2020 13: 27
      Recall that earlier at the Pentagon, Russian pilots were repeatedly accused of “unprofessional actions in the air” and other “sins” in the interception or other variant of rapprochement of military aircraft.

      Blaming this is their creed; they simply cannot live without accusations. But it is necessary to drive away, all the same they will constantly probe. In Soviet times, they constantly flew into our airspace, but the Soviet Union was appointed the aggressor in them.
      1. +8
        April 20 2020 13: 43
        Quote: sanik2020
        But it is necessary to drive away, all the same they will constantly probe.

        That's why the pike in the river, so that the crucian would not doze off. Everyone should do their own thing. Scouts - reconnaissance, interceptors - intercept, air defense crews close the sky.
        1. +1
          April 20 2020 16: 45
          Quote: kjhg
          Quote: sanik2020
          But it is necessary to drive away, all the same they will constantly probe.

          That's why the pike in the river, so that the crucian would not doze off. Everyone should do their own thing. Scouts - reconnaissance, interceptors - intercept, air defense crews close the sky.

          It has inspired: in the military registration and enlistment office, a conscript - "I want to be a pilot" - a military commissar - "no, you will not be a pilot" - conscript: - "then I want to serve in an air defense -" military commissar: - "why in an air defense?" I fly, no one flies "- wassat
          1. +1
            April 20 2020 16: 51
            Quote: Hto tama
            I do not fly, nobody, does not fly "-

            So this is the long-standing motto of air defense officers: we don’t fly ourselves and don’t give others.
            1. +1
              April 20 2020 17: 24
              I just remembered a joke, well, in general we have anecdotes quoted from life bully hi
      2. +1
        April 20 2020 16: 11
        Quote: sanik2020
        But it is necessary to drive away, all the same they will constantly probe.

        Nobody calls them to our military and industrial facilities. Intrusive winged always drive away, but too persistent also gets on the first number! Or they don’t remember the past ?!
        1. 0
          April 21 2020 00: 45
          Quote: Starover_Z
          Nobody calls them to our military and industrial facilities.

          hi
          Moreover, Russia officially closed the sky over Syria for all aircraft except those belonging to the ATS and the Russian Aerospace Forces. Americans, Turks, and Israel are notified of this. So, we have the right to drive away unsolicited ATS from the borders.
    3. -29
      April 20 2020 13: 28
      I read and matured the question. And how much does an American reconnaissance flight hour and an SU-35 fighter flight hour cost? It looks like the cost of the first is much less than the second. I mean, it’s a little expensive to drive everyone away there, with such an expensive and complicated machine ... When will the light hawk appear in our VKS?
      1. +11
        April 20 2020 13: 35
        It will be a little expensive when the war begins! And you also have to pay for the world,
        1. -13
          April 20 2020 13: 42
          You need to pay for everything, a question of price. It is possible to hammer a nail with a microscope .. But why?
          1. +3
            April 20 2020 13: 51
            Quote: Doccor18
            But why?

            The base is not rubber, there is no point in taking up space with weak machines. A "light" fighter can only be useful to some small country, and we need to carry loads far and wide.
          2. +13
            April 20 2020 14: 04
            And you come to me in Debaltsevo and talk about microscopes, I will show you mountains of "microscopes" no longer needed by anyone in the form of metal. Don't think that war is out there somewhere! And the stronger the Yankees get on the musals now, the more stable the world will be tomorrow
            1. +2
              April 20 2020 14: 29
              Who says what should not be given? It’s necessary to give on scraps. I just raised the topic of fighter jets. The fact that all the news about fighters is heavy multifunctional cars. They are great air fighters, but sometimes they are just redundant. Light fighters are also needed. They are in the USA, China, Sweden sells them right and left. And in the USSR they were not just like that. It is possible to solve all tasks of the SU-57 when it appears in the troops. But is that reasonable? That is all I wanted to say. And in response, the negative ...
              And that the war is going on and today is going on - I know that.
              There is a proposal not to rush at each other, but to share thoughts and reasoning. Let everyone have different opinions, let
              someone doesn’t know something ..
              For me personally, VO is an outlet; I rest here with my soul.
          3. 0
            April 21 2020 00: 47
            Quote: Doccor18
            But why?


            And it’s convenient to hold onto the bracket.
      2. -2
        April 20 2020 13: 37
        How do you like the Mig-35D? Or are you asking about the fifth generation light fighter?
        1. -4
          April 20 2020 13: 47
          MIG-35 is certainly easier than the SU-35, but the language does not turn out to be called easy. 29,5 tons when fully loaded. You need something really light and moderately simple for secondary tasks. Fifth generation or 4 +++, but it is needed in the troops.
          1. +9
            April 20 2020 14: 42
            Quote: Doccor18
            MIG-35 is certainly easier than the SU-35, but the language does not turn out to be called easy. 29,5 tons when fully loaded

            So you will decide that you want either a light fighter to work in the operational-tactical depth or .... an "airplane", which must fly somewhere .. further.
            Gpus.- 11 tons, Gtop.- 5 tons, broadcast 3-4 tons of missiles or bombs or a "complex" and ... here's a light aircraft for you, practically with G break. wink
          2. -2
            April 20 2020 14: 49
            Quote: Doccor18
            MIG-35 is certainly easier than the SU-35, but the language does not turn out to be called easy. 29,5 tons when fully loaded. You need something really light and moderately simple for secondary tasks. Fifth generation or 4 +++, but it is needed in the troops.

            The maximum takeoff weight of the MiG-35 is 24 kg. And that's what you need. F-500 would suit you? Fifth generation, but it does not fit your definition of a "light hawk". It is about 35-5 tons heavier than the MiG-6. At the same time, the F-35 in the US Air Force will also be used for secondary tasks in the future, as they say for all occasions they have this machine.
            1. -4
              April 20 2020 15: 04
              Quote: Sky Strike fighter
              Quote: Doccor18
              MIG-35 is certainly easier than the SU-35, but the language does not turn out to be called easy. 29,5 tons when fully loaded. You need something really light and moderately simple for secondary tasks. Fifth generation or 4 +++, but it is needed in the troops.

              The maximum takeoff weight of the MiG-35 is 24 kg. And that's what you need. F-500 would suit you? Fifth generation, but it does not fit your definition of a "light hawk". It is about 35-5 tons heavier than the MiG-6. At the same time, the F-35 in the US Air Force will also be used for secondary tasks in the future, as they say for all occasions they have this machine.

              In my opinion, the MIG-35 is too heavy. So where is he in the troops? How much will our country be able to supply the SU-57 to the VKS? It is doubtful that more than 100 cars? Enough of this in the future?
              We need an analogue of the Swedish Flu.
              1. -2
                April 20 2020 15: 18
                So it turns out that the army does not need an analogue of Grippen. If they are going to make a fifth-generation light fighter, then again with two engines and they are unlikely to be weaker than the engines currently on the Mig-35, and if so, then they will begin to stuff the machine with ammunition to failure, so that a light machine will not work again until they wouldn’t want to create it. We would have more, but heavier. The next about the Mig-35 will be only 5 generations. Yes, and the same French cost an analogue of the Mig-35 - Rafale and do not whine about the light car. The same F-35 is also not a light fighter and no one bothers with this.
                In my opinion, the MIG-35 is too heavy. So where is he in the troops?

                State tests are underway. 6 Mig-35s already delivered to the VKS are, in my opinion, being mastered now in the flight training center. Then to teach pilots on this machine. The Azerbaijani military has already flown on the MiG-35, delivered to the VKS.
      3. +5
        April 20 2020 13: 37
        C'mon, where does this data come from? The scout is clearly more expensive. IMHO.
      4. -11
        April 20 2020 13: 41
        I don’t understand what the cons are?
        It seems to me that there is a contingent on the site that can only be minus and maybe the rest ..... is not enough!
        1. +4
          April 20 2020 14: 07
          Quote: Doccor18
          I don’t understand what the cons are?
          It seems to me that there is a contingent on the site that can only be minus and maybe the rest ..... is not enough!

          ----------------------
          Plus for your curiosity.
        2. +7
          April 20 2020 14: 46
          Quote: Doccor18
          I don’t understand what the cons are?

          For your questions and comparisons, dear! hi
          You would, by analogy, compare the wages of Sechin or Miller with a turner of the highest level (comparing with whom there is more benefit, and from whom .... as if to put it mildly ... some losses wassat )
          And what is .... minor tasks in DB mode? belay
          Explain, please .. "not reasonable" hi
      5. +2
        April 20 2020 13: 50
        Quote: Doccor18
        It’s me that it’s a little expensive to drive away everyone there, with such an expensive and complex machine ...

        It depends on what to drive away, dear negative
      6. +4
        April 20 2020 14: 06
        Quote: Doccor18
        And how much does an American reconnaissance flight hour and an SU-35 fighter flight hour cost?

        -----------------------------
        The Boeing 737-800, which is Poseidon R-8A, is more expensive than a fighter. He takes 2 times more fuel on board.
      7. +1
        April 20 2020 14: 07
        Quote: Doccor18
        When will the light hawk appear in our VKS?

        In the near future, it certainly will not appear. And maybe never. Because if Mig starts to develop it, then for a start 2 engines will be stuck to him. Since with one, like Grippen or F-16, 35, our aircraft may not pull everything that they want to hang on them (powerful weapons, powerful radar, etc.). As a result, the MiG-35 will still turn out. The car is good, but not a light hawk.
        1. 0
          April 20 2020 14: 36
          The F-35 will be heavier than the MiG-35. The Americans, too, will not have a "light hawk" of the new generation, but this does not prevent them from selling their F-35 all over the world and relying on it in their Air Force. So why everyone is not satisfied with the MiG- 35? Because it's not lightweight or because it's not stealth? It's a very successful car.
          About TTX Mig-35.
          MiG presented the following: maximum take-off weight of 24 500 kg, speed up to 2100 km / h, practical ceiling 16 km, maximum flight range of 3000 km. Nine points of external suspension for a maximum external load of 6500 kg - for guided missiles of the "air-to-air" and "air-to-surface" class, adjustable and conventional aerial bombs, bomb containers.
          Maximum operational overload - 9G.

          At the same time, the Mig-35 is more maneuverable than the Su-35S.
          very interesting: the maximum thrust is within 2 × 8800 kgf, and the angles of deviation of the thrust vector are ± 15 ° versus ± 20 ° in the MiG-35. At the same time, the maximum take-off weight of the car is almost a third higher than that of the competitor - 34 kg.

          The Mig-35 has a weak radar and high rate of climb.
          MiG-35 in rate of climb overtakes all other fighters of the world. At its 330 m / s French Dassault Rafale can best answer - 305 m / s. Su-35 is also worse - 280 m / s, but better than the F-16 with its 250 m / s. And the M-35A, with just 240 m / s, will beat our MiG like a duck. It makes no sense to compare electronic systems, radars, avionics: the best that can be developed and produced in our defense industry complex is placed on both machines. And all this, of course, will continue to improve. Already today the range of detection of air targets by a new modification of the Zhuk-AM radar reaches 300 km, and this is already enough for any reasonable reaction to the fact that the target is illuminated on the display.

          https://m.tsargrad.tv/articles/mig-sdelal-zajavku-na-pobedu-nad-su_218235
          1. +2
            April 20 2020 15: 15
            Quote: Sky Strike fighter
            So why doesn't everyone like the Mig-35? Is it not light or because it is not stealth?

            I am satisfied with the Mig-35. The car is very good. Just the previous commentator has already mentioned nails and a microscope. The thing is that the Mig-35 in terms of cost and operating costs (or whatever, you better know) not far from the Su-35/30. That is, a little expensive for some purposes. As for example, described above - to drive away the intruder from the base. You, as a specialist, may know better, but in my opinion, there should be an easy and cheap front-line fighter for tasks that are redundant for a heavy and expensive fighter. Even to the detriment of some characteristics.
            1. -1
              April 20 2020 15: 56
              The thing is that the Mig-35 in terms of cost and operating costs (or whatever, you better know) not far from the Su-35/30.

              Operation Mig-35 and a half times cheaper than the same Su-30SM. We do not have a more efficient machine for the cost of operation. The Mig-35 is just the workhorse in the USA as F-16, and in the USSR as Mig-29.
        2. +5
          April 20 2020 15: 02
          Quote: Gritsa
          our planes may not pull everything that they want to hang on them (powerful weapons, powerful radar, etc.)

          Well, what do you think, with 3340 kg of fuel and with 6,5 tons of load, your Grippen can fly somewhere? wink
          The plane is a priori non-rubber .. and if you want to hang something so that you can fly somewhere far away (4th turn0, then please hang up the PTB, but then subtract G b / c from the one having Gmax. ..proportional to the top .. otherwise no
          So the Mig-35 with a normal take-off weight is an excellent light fighter. soldier
          1. 0
            April 20 2020 15: 22
            Quote: ancient
            So the Mig-35 with a normal take-off weight is an excellent light fighter.

            Nobody argues that the Mig-35 is a wonderful aircraft. Just tell me, as a specialist, why does a light fighter have two engines? To eat more fuel and hook additional tanks? Why have we stopped designing single-engine aircraft?
            For me, so if you need to fly somewhere further, then use a heavy fighter. And if you need to drive away a scout from the base, as in the written case, then a lung would be enough.
            1. +5
              April 20 2020 16: 40
              Quote: Gritsa
              Why does a light fighter have two engines?

              Not a lot of incorrectly formulated question wink - if you asked why our light fighter does not have a single-engine layout, that is, there are many "+" and many "-".
              Cons:
              1. We do not have engines with the characteristics of the "Prits" and "Generals".
              2. Lag in REO, and AO (weight, dimensions, functionality).
              3. The increase in the empty weight of the aircraft.
              4. Greater fuel consumption.
              5. Problems with weight-dimensional criteria, you always have to "sacrifice" something - either avionics, or Fuel, or B \ K.

              Pros :
              1. Reliability and combat survivability (in all respects and at all stages of flight).
              2. Great thrust-to-weight ratio.
              Well and so on ...... drinks
      8. -1
        April 20 2020 14: 52
        What i read now fool
      9. -1
        April 20 2020 15: 03
        They wrote to you in the article that flew out to identify the target. Whence the conclusion that I didn’t know what kind of plane it was, but if there was some F-15 instead of Poseidon and you fly out to intercept such a cheap maize, nothing like a maize, the main thing is cheap.
    4. -2
      April 20 2020 13: 29
      The Yankees are not just panneckers, they are super-panneckers and liars !!! The video shows how our "Drying" gallantly walked past their aviashpigun, and the Yankees let a tear that we were on their plane! !! shattered! !! fool fool Yeah, and their crew, you see, rushed laughing !!!
    5. +1
      April 20 2020 13: 35
      All kinds of spies crawl like fleas in a famous place.
    6. +4
      April 20 2020 13: 35
      Well, it seems like no incident happened, what is the news then? Normal flight situation.
    7. -8
      April 20 2020 13: 37
      It all sounds strange. If the Su-35 did not carry any danger for Poseidon, then how did it make someone not to approach somewhere? It is naive to think that Poseidon decided to fly away simply because Su35 flew to him in neutral waters. The problem is that our officials and military are so used to lying and drawing a beautiful picture that no one bothers about the real situation.
      1. 0
        April 20 2020 16: 37
        Quote: Widiopedia Project
        It all sounds strange. If the Su-35 did not carry any danger for Poseidon, then how did it make someone not to approach somewhere? It is naive to think that Poseidon decided to fly away simply because Su35 flew to him in neutral waters. The problem is that our officials and military are so used to lying and drawing a beautiful picture that no one bothers about the real situation.


        It should be noted that this is the second case in the last 4 days when the Su-35 drives Poseidon away. From the news story in the last frames it is clear that Poseidon is doing the same lapel to the left, moving away from the coast of Syria. (plot here: https://yadi.sk/i/cI7TYY1HXR5EqQ).

        From a press release from the US 6th Fleet, it is known that our Su-35 escorted and intercepted the P-8A for 100 minutes. There were two interceptions, the first did not seem to have any effect on the Americans, and the second seemed dangerous to them, after which the P-8A turned away.
        On April 19, 2020, a US Navy P-8A aircraft flying in international airspace over the Mediterranean Sea was intercepted twice by a Russian SU-35 over a period of 100 minutes. The first intercept was deemed safe and professional. The second intercept was determined to be unsafe and unprofessional due to the SU-35 a conducting high-speed, high-powered maneuver that decreased aircraft separation to within 25 feet, directly in front of the P-8A, exposing the US aircraft to wake turbulence and jet exhaust.

        (https://www.c6f.navy.mil/Press-Room/News/Article/2155654/unsafe-russian-intercept-over-mediterranean-sea/)

        Video (slow-motion) from the P-8A board https://yadi.sk/i/wfqVbaf20DmL9Q
        original from here: https://twitter.com/USNavyEurope

        Where is it clear that someone is lying ?! Americans want to get secrets from Russian military facilities in Syria. Our dryers politely drive them away, do not knock us to them in neutral waters !!! A couple of turbulences in front of the nose of the P-8A as a result of the maneuvers of the Su-35, forces Poseidon to turn off the mission and set sail.
        1. 0
          April 20 2020 23: 34
          Голос Америки пишет https://www.golos-ameriki.ru/a/article-us-navy-russia/5379756.html?fbclid=IwAR0Kqxho2Gd4WHpxF_yXoqMx5DZeUVFI6DgpLHf6mjEZG8UqZ3BgHEj0WWE
          US forces report a dangerous rapprochement with a Russian fighter over the Mediterranean - this is the second such incident in the region in four days.

          A Navy statement released on Sunday did not specify exactly where the rapprochement occurred, but reported that it happened over international waters. According to several sites tracking the movement of aircraft, the incident occurred in the eastern Mediterranean, off the coast of Syria.

          According to the Navy, the Russian Su-35 fighter doubled closer to the American P-8A observer aircraft. The second time the distance was less than 8 meters.
          “The second interception was deemed unsafe and unprofessional,” the statement said.
    8. +1
      April 20 2020 13: 44
      Again Poseidon-8 was sent to conduct a group of Drones with bombs?
    9. -1
      April 20 2020 13: 46
      Is this already a publication on a single "news feed"? "And nothing has changed".
    10. +5
      April 20 2020 13: 49
      I read and matured the question. And how much does an American reconnaissance flight hour and an SU-35 fighter flight hour cost? It looks like the cost of the first is much less than the second. I mean, it’s a little expensive to drive everyone away there, with such an expensive and complicated machine ... When will the light hawk appear in our VKS?

      A light hawk cannot barrage in the waiting area, it only needs to take off, shoot and go home, and in this situation, you need to hang in the air, closing the zone and escorting the enemy.
    11. -2
      April 20 2020 14: 22
      It feels like they have only "women" serving ... Or half-dubs
    12. -1
      April 20 2020 15: 02
      A curious barbarian in the bazaar cut off his nose.
    13. -4
      April 20 2020 16: 01
      Well, intercepted, a common thing .. That's if I shot down!
    14. +1
      April 20 2020 19: 13
      when the striped ones block the path of Russian military equipment, then everything is fine, no indignation about "unprofessionalism" follows, but then just look at it, they immediately start squealing
    15. 0
      April 21 2020 11: 45
      Pentagon repeatedly accused Russian pilots of "unprofessional actions in the air"

      This is their "job". Propaganda aimed at turning the "world community" against Russia. They are still haunted by our natural resources, which we "have no right to dispose of alone." Only now it is not configured in any way. Barking is heard from afar ...

    "Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

    “Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"