How to "force" the Chinese Air Force and the Russian Federation to abandon the interception of US reconnaissance aircraft, the Western press said.


For American Intelligence Crews aviation hard times have come. Russian and Chinese pilots do not allow them to calmly fly and observe.


This is written by Tom Rogan in an article published by Washington Examiner.

Concern is noted about the "aggressive interceptions" of US reconnaissance aircraft by Russian and Chinese fighters.

Tom Rogan believes that the problem is serious, although such interceptions may seem to some people a harmless game. The fact is that interceptor actions can lead to a plane crash. And even if the pilots made no mistakes, the cause of the crash may be vortex turbulence caused by fighter maneuvers at high speeds.

Although Russian and Chinese pilots do not plan to shoot down American planes, the risk of crew death remains, according to the United States. The author cites as an example the event that occurred in 2001 over the South China Sea, when a Chinese fighter, having failed to maneuver, crashed directly onto an American reconnaissance aircraft. Then the US Air Force crew managed to stabilize the plane and make an emergency landing at the Chinese air base.

The fact that Russian and Chinese pilots "put US crews at risk" does not surprise the author. He is outraged by the inaction of the Pentagon, which does nothing to protect them. The author of the article suggests organizing escort aircraft reconnaissance by the US Air Force F-16 fighter jets. He believes that then the Russian Air Force and the Chinese Air Force simply will not have any chances. This, according to Rogan, will force the Russians and Chinese to immediately abandon the intercepts "so as not to damage their image":

Russia will not want to see the appearance of a video on which F-16 fighters will constantly show their superiority in air fights.

There is another way to solve the problem, which for some reason Tom Rogan did not think of. The United States could simply not endanger its crews and stop sending them on reconnaissance flights near foreign borders.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

103 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. poquello 30 May 2020 14: 08 New
    • 50
    • 0
    +50
    typical american, f16 our fso
    1. Atlant-1164 30 May 2020 14: 18 New
      • 54
      • 1
      +53
      "How to" force "the Chinese Air Force and the Russian Federation to abandon the interception of US reconnaissance aircraft"
      - the most effective, and proven method .. this is not to send to the shores of others .. their pepelats.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Mitroha 30 May 2020 15: 21 New
        • 21
        • 0
        +21
        For crews of American intelligence aircraft, difficult times have come.

        Here is the poor fellow. Interfere, you know, they scout.
        "They will tear you up, but you do not steal"
        1. Tatyana 30 May 2020 16: 06 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          The United States could simply not endanger its crews and stop sending them on reconnaissance flights near foreign borders.

          That's from something, but not from it the United States itself will definitely not refuse! The USA will continue to become impudent.
          1. Sky strike fighter 30 May 2020 16: 27 New
            • 6
            • 0
            +6
            Russian fighter escorted US B-1B bombers over the Black Sea: footage from the cockpit.
            Video link.
            https://m.tvzvezda.ru/news/vstrane_i_mire/content/20205291644-ZBApN.html
            1. Shurik70 30 May 2020 18: 42 New
              • 14
              • 0
              +14
              in 2001 over the South China Sea, when a Chinese fighter, failing to maneuver, crashed directly onto an American reconnaissance aircraft. Then the US Air Force crew managed to stabilize the plane and make an emergency landing at the Chinese air base

              Forgot to add that the pilot of the Chinese fighter for that "unsuccessful" maneuver received the order soldier
            2. uralant 31 May 2020 07: 51 New
              • 0
              • 5
              -5
              You see, what will happen if he falls? Such a maaalenky bomber, just off the coast of the Crimea, and they scare him with ITTERS. Not pretty. The states are not scared by our huge bombers, as well.
        2. Sky strike fighter 30 May 2020 16: 36 New
          • 20
          • 1
          +19
          The author of the article suggests organizing escort aircraft reconnaissance by US Air Force F-16 fighters. He believes that then the Russian Air Force and the Chinese Air Force simply will not have any chances.

          Yes Yes. laughing Hollywood rules.
          This, according to Rogan, force the Russians and Chinese to immediately abandon the intercepts, "so as not to damage their image":

          Russia will not want to see the appearance of a video on which F-16 fighters will constantly show their superiority in air fights.

          What is he talking about? belay What is the superiority of the F-16? This does not exist in nature (superiority). What a dreamer. lol Yes, to capture this on camera. Is he aware that our fighters are more maneuverable? And then they hung noodles on his ears about the superiority of the F-16, it hangs right down to the ground. Sorry to remove nobody.
      3. Sky strike fighter 30 May 2020 16: 43 New
        • 8
        • 1
        +7
        How to "force" the Chinese Air Force and the Russian Federation to abandon the interception of US reconnaissance aircraft
        before the orderlies arrived.
      4. figwam 30 May 2020 18: 53 New
        • 8
        • 0
        +8
        Just yesterday, the B-1 was intercepted ...
        1. Fantazer911 30 May 2020 20: 31 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          Ours, as I look, even flew from the bottom, God forbid it starts to fall, they insure the poor fellow, and they still scream, raise, in a word, psaki rests! laughing
      5. Bad_gr 31 May 2020 14: 11 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Yes, indeed, in the area of ​​American interests, foreign planes interfere with important tasks.
        Interestingly, what would they say if we and the Chinese began to do the same at the US borders?
      6. vik669 31 May 2020 15: 30 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Fly yourself over the Gulf of Mexico and not over the Baltic and Black Seas until others have arrived there!
    2. 210ox 30 May 2020 15: 42 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Why not F35?
      1. Sky strike fighter 30 May 2020 16: 28 New
        • 11
        • 2
        +9
        The F-16 will be more reliable. On the F-35 jambs unintentionally.
      2. gurzuf 30 May 2020 19: 19 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Everything is obvious. Then, under the record, the complete inconsistency of this fighter will be visible.
      3. poquello 31 May 2020 22: 46 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: 210ox
        Why not F35?

        probably think that showing fy35 is impossible because of its invisibility
        Russia will not want to see the appearance of a video on which F-16 fighters will constantly show

    3. Eskobar 31 May 2020 15: 12 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      They’re glavnyuki!
  2. yfast 30 May 2020 14: 11 New
    • 25
    • 0
    +25
    "proposes to organize escort aircraft reconnaissance by US Air Force F-16 fighters. He believes that then the Russian Air Force and the Chinese Air Force simply will not have any chance." On the contrary, everything will become more interesting, it will be possible to intercept the F-16, there will be a Sunday market in the air. But they don’t even discuss not to send reconnaissance planes to foreign borders. Is this impudence or world imperialism?
    1. tihonmarine 30 May 2020 15: 24 New
      • 10
      • 0
      +10
      Quote: yfast
      Is this impudence or world imperialism?

      Both that and another, and if it is simpler then "greyhound".
  3. svp67 30 May 2020 14: 11 New
    • 13
    • 0
    +13
    Russia will not want to see the appearance of a video on which F-16 fighters will constantly show their superiority in air fights.

    Yeah, already "shown, proved" ...
  4. Alex777 30 May 2020 14: 14 New
    • 20
    • 1
    +19
    The author cites an example of an event that occurred in 2001 over the South China Sea, when a Chinese fighter, having failed to maneuver, crashed directly onto an American reconnaissance aircraft. Then the US Air Force crew managed to stabilize the plane and make an emergency landing at the Chinese air base.

    And in my opinion, the Chinese fighter’s maneuver was successful. It’s a pity, only the pilot died.
    Miraculously prepared, the Chinese dismantled the Amer scout to the screw and, EMNIP, returned it in parts after a few months, without bothering to assemble it to its original state. hi
    1. Antokha 30 May 2020 14: 27 New
      • 15
      • 1
      +14
      Miraculously prepared, the Chinese dismantled the Amer scout to the cog and, EMNIP, returned in parts a few months later

      Moreover, they were forced to charter a Russian An-124 for this. Shame on the United States was to the ears.
  5. Vasyan1971 30 May 2020 14: 16 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    This, according to Rogan, force the Russians and Chinese to immediately abandon the intercepts, "so as not to damage their image":

    And ideally, they will give up altogether. In order not to "see the appearance of a video on which F-16 fighters will constantly show their superiority in air fights."
  6. stalki 30 May 2020 14: 17 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Although Russian and Chinese pilots do not plan to shoot down American planes, the risk of crew death remains, according to the United States.
    And who told them such nonsense? Complacency or what? laughing
  7. Bykov. 30 May 2020 14: 18 New
    • 12
    • 0
    +12
    Russia will not want to see the appearance of a video on which F-16 fighters will constantly show their superiority in air fights.

    Yes, yes, they will take and release the chassis during the flight, the Poles have already shown the superiority of the Fu-16.
  8. Alex777 30 May 2020 14: 19 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    There is another way to solve the problem, which for some reason Tom Rogan did not think of. The United States could simply not endanger its crews and stop sending them on reconnaissance flights near foreign borders.

    Do not add do not diminish! hi
  9. Operator 30 May 2020 14: 19 New
    • 21
    • 5
    +16
    Is it okay that the F-16 and other American fighters have a flight range even with suspension tanks that is several times less than that of reconnaissance aircraft, plus an attempt to maneuver against Russian / Chinese ground-based fighters will lead to accelerated fuel production? laughing

    At the same time, the United States does not have a single fighter with maneuverability comparable to the Su-35, so videos on the Internet will only demonstrate this disastrous moment of the US Air Force.
  10. rocket757 30 May 2020 14: 21 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    . There is another way to solve a problem that for some reason I did not think of.

    Are you kidding? How can they think about it ???
    By the way, at the expense of the superiority of their own fighters, wouldn’t it be a good idea to THINK?
  11. Antokha 30 May 2020 14: 34 New
    • 11
    • 0
    +11
    Ours will launch a couple of Dryers. One will deal with interception. and another time after time to do in the air duel F-16e and do them electronic missile launches. There will be many cool videos and commercials for our aircraft.
  12. Vitaly gusin 30 May 2020 14: 42 New
    • 6
    • 22
    -16
    And again it is written as you want. But there are agreements and agreements signed by the two parties and so far no one has terminated them
    The United States could simply not endanger its crews and stop sending them on reconnaissance flights near foreign borders.
    1972 High Seas and High Seas Incident Prevention Agreement (INCSEA)
    over international waters "
    Article IV
    The commanders of the aircraft crews of each of the Parties should exercise the greatest caution and prudence when approaching the aircraft of the other Party operating over the open sea, and ships of the other Party operating on the high seas, in particular, ships engaged in the release or reception of aircraft, and in the interests of mutual security, shall not allow: imitation of attacks by simulating the use of weapons on aircraft, any ships, performing various aerobatic figures over ships and dropping near them various objects in such a way that they represent a danger to ships or interference with navigation.
    And it is clear that no boundaries are being discussed. the border ends 22 km from the coast of the state, and then these are neutral waters and airspace.
    1. NordUral 30 May 2020 15: 06 New
      • 10
      • 1
      +9
      The commanders of the aircraft crews of each of the Parties should exercise the greatest caution and prudence when approaching the aircraft of the other Party operating over the open sea,

      And why are these open seas all the time at our borders?
      And again it is written as you want
      so write, it became interesting.
      1. iouris 30 May 2020 15: 35 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        And why are they already afraid: let them fly ...
        1. cniza 30 May 2020 16: 30 New
          • 8
          • 0
          +8
          Quote: iouris
          And why are they already afraid: let them fly ...


          Yeah, are they tourists?
      2. Vitaly gusin 30 May 2020 16: 01 New
        • 3
        • 24
        -21
        Quote: NordUral
        And why are these open seas all the time are at our borders?

        I highlighted the word are near our borders
        But there is a difference between is NEARBY and BROKEN
        "The Russian Su-34 violated Estonian airspace without warning, writes ERR with reference to the General Staff of the Estonian Defense Forces."
        "South Korea states that its aircraft fired warning shots at a Russian observation plane, which has entered into her airspace "
        Twice by "mistake" they violated the border with Israel.
        Well, I hope you know about military flights near the border of countries such as Great Britain, Norway and Sweden. USA (Alaska). So all the disturbances are in vain
        But to violate what they signed
        The commanders of the aircraft crews of each of the Parties must exercise the greatest caution and prudence when approaching the aircraft of the other Party operating over the open sea
        This is fraught.
        1. NordUral 30 May 2020 16: 30 New
          • 9
          • 1
          +8
          Vitaly Gusin, you will bring this to the NATO people, otherwise they don’t seem to know this.
        2. akarfoxhound 30 May 2020 17: 06 New
          • 5
          • 1
          +4
          Your guardians also climb into our territory regularly. It's just that journalists are not always aware of this. And these are not isolated cases. Do you propose to bring down most universally?
        3. forpost 30 May 2020 20: 53 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          tryndet-not bags tossing
        4. Leon68 30 May 2020 22: 28 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Quote: Vitaly Gusin
          "South Korea claims that its aircraft fired warning shots at a Russian surveillance aircraft that entered its airspace"

          South Korea stated that it entered the space controlled by air defense systems, and not what you deigned to write.
        5. Bad_gr 31 May 2020 14: 46 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Vitaly Gusin
          The Russian Su-34 violated Estonian airspace without warning,

          The navigator forgot to update the cards, flew in Soviet. And in the context of history, most recently, the king signed so
          It’s a pity the pilots have not survived since then, otherwise, according to old memory, they could have flown there.
        6. Bad_gr 31 May 2020 15: 10 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Vitaly Gusin
          I highlighted the word are near our borders
          But there is a difference between is NEARBY and BROKEN

          So if you do not drive, then they will violate.
          "List of incidents involving foreign aviation over the USSR (1946-1991)" - https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BA_%D0%B8%D0%BD%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2_%D1%81_%D1%83%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%BC_%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%B8_%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%B4_%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A1%D0%A0_(1946%E2%80%941991)
          Can you find the same list of incidents involving foreign aircraft in US airspace?
      3. borberd 30 May 2020 17: 06 New
        • 1
        • 14
        -13
        Quote: NordUral

        And why are these open seas all the time at our borders?

        Since when did the Mediterranean Sea draw at your borders?
        1. ™ Ramzes ™ 30 May 2020 19: 36 New
          • 7
          • 1
          +6
          Since our base in Hmeimim.
          1. borberd 31 May 2020 10: 46 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            Ahh, well then you have no more rights in the Mediterranean than they have.
        2. Bad_gr 31 May 2020 14: 53 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: borberd
          Since when did the Mediterranean Sea draw at your borders?

          Is this the territorial sea of ​​America?
    2. tihonmarine 30 May 2020 15: 40 New
      • 9
      • 2
      +7
      Quote: Vitaly Gusin
      And it is clear that no boundaries are being discussed. the border ends 22 km from the coast of the state, and then it is neutral waters and airspace.

      I completely agree with you here that neutral waters are estimated at 12 NM and any ships and ships, both civilian and military, can be located behind them. BUT you can imagine how the howl and stench will begin from the side of Uncle Sam's sons and grandchildren, when there will begin to appear on their shores a large enough group of Chinese and Russian military aircraft. And the question is, why do they howl like a polar bear in warm weather, being close to the territories adjacent to China and Russia? Well, if you’re getting into it, keep quiet, and if you’ve gotten dirty too, don’t tweet. For example, Israel does not send its planes to the Black Sea, and there is no noise whatsoever.
      1. Vitaly gusin 30 May 2020 18: 31 New
        • 0
        • 11
        -11
        Quote: tihonmarine
        BUT you can imagine how the howl and stench will begin on the part of Uncle Sam's sons and grandchildren, when there will begin to appear on their shores a fairly large group of Chinese and Russian military aircraft.

        I don’t know whether I will please or disappoint, but this does not affect the situation.
        The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) has published a video of “escorting” F-22 and CF-18 fighters to two Russian Tu-142 anti-submarine aircraft.
        9 March 2020 of the year Alaska area. According to NORAD, the Tu-142 were in the air defense recognition zone. According to the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, Russian aircraft were over neutral waters The Chukchi Sea and the Beaufort Sea and strictly observed all international airspace regulations.
        I hope you remember "play here, but do not play here"
        Quote: tihonmarine
        For example, Israel does not send its planes to the Black Sea, and there is no noise whatsoever.

        Well, in Israel and their seas in bulk, but their own and on the Black Sea have always been and conducted exercises. But I want to remind you that the Black Sea ALL here’s a map that doesn’t belong to Russia, so you have to endure neighbors who have the same rights and are in other military blocs.
        1. poquello 31 May 2020 23: 09 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Vitaly Gusin
          March 9, 2020 in the Alaska area.

          clumsy example, to Alaska Suplatovich walked on foot
      2. Vitaly gusin 30 May 2020 18: 49 New
        • 3
        • 4
        -1
        [quote = tihonmarine] BUT you can imagine how the howling and the stench will begin on the part of Uncle Sam's sons and grandchildren, when there will begin to appear on their shores a large enough group of ki
        AND FOR VISIBILITY

        And a mustache without noise and dust
        1. gurzuf 30 May 2020 19: 31 New
          • 5
          • 0
          +5
          Claiming a violation of something does not mean that this is so. What Swedes dozens of years in their territorial waters are caught by Soviet, and now Russian submarines? That's just with proof, not everything is as clear as the Estonian media to which you refer.
          1. Vitaly gusin 30 May 2020 20: 22 New
            • 1
            • 5
            -4
            Quote: gurzuf
            Claiming a violation of something does not mean that this is so.

            According to the Russian Defense Ministry, Russian aircraft were above the neutral waters of the Chukchi Sea and the Beaufort Sea and strictly complied with all international rules for the use of airspace.
        2. tihonmarine 31 May 2020 21: 44 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: Vitaly Gusin
          And a mustache without noise and dust
          Russia doesn’t howl or make noise, but on which side are you guys here
  13. vkd.dvk 30 May 2020 14: 59 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    The image of these and the diots flying near foreign borders, accompanied by, wouldn’t it hurt if they were met by the ARMED interceptors? And they will have marks on the indicators that they are taken to support air defense systems?
  14. vkd.dvk 30 May 2020 15: 01 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    Quote: Vitaly Gusin
    And again it is written as you want. But there are agreements and agreements signed by the two parties and so far no one has terminated them
    The United States could simply not endanger its crews and stop sending them on reconnaissance flights near foreign borders.
    1972 High Seas and High Seas Incident Prevention Agreement (INCSEA)
    over international waters "
    Article IV
    The commanders of the aircraft crews of each of the Parties should exercise the greatest caution and prudence when approaching the aircraft of the other Party operating over the open sea, and ships of the other Party operating on the high seas, in particular, ships engaged in the release or reception of aircraft, and in the interests of mutual security, shall not allow: imitation of attacks by simulating the use of weapons on aircraft, any ships, performing various aerobatic figures over ships and dropping near them various objects in such a way that they represent a danger to ships or interference with navigation.
    And it is clear that no boundaries are being discussed. the border ends 22 km from the coast of the state, and then these are neutral waters and airspace.

    Then write this to your friends, sending their interceptors as our TU approaches the area of ​​location monitoring - 150 km from the coast.
  15. Vitaly Tsymbal 30 May 2020 15: 03 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Either the American is mentally abnormal from the asylum, or the translation does not meet the quality ???
    1. Free wind 30 May 2020 17: 50 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      What I found on the Internet is a link to this article on VO. they’ll come up with it, and their cheeks are bloated. No translator, no links, nothing.
    2. asv363 30 May 2020 18: 54 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      The article is translated almost literally, here is the original (in English):
      China and Russia are threatening American aircrews; why won't the Pentagon stop them?
      https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/china-and-russia-are-threatening-american-aircrews-why-wont-the-pentagon-stop-them
      1. Vitaly Tsymbal 30 May 2020 19: 00 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Then wrote a mentally inadequate person or for idiots. And in this article there are no comics to explain by accident?))) I hope that 99% of readers are adequate people, so we should not be loaded with such a "foolishness))))
        1. asv363 30 May 2020 19: 27 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          The part of the text that was not included in the article contains the snot and drool of the author (Tom Rogan) that he was not answered anywhere except the Pacific Navy command. They hinted that they would sort it out without civilians. And his suggestions for lifting to escort aircraft near the borders of China's F-18 from the aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt, who is now near the Philippines (according to the author).
  16. NordUral 30 May 2020 15: 04 New
    • 7
    • 0
    +7
    Do not fly near our borders and you will be alive.
  17. vkd.dvk 30 May 2020 15: 05 New
    • 4
    • 1
    +3
    Quote: svp67
    Russia will not want to see the appearance of a video on which F-16 fighters will constantly show their superiority in air fights.

    Yeah, already "shown, proved" ...

    I did it right. He showed his belly with surprises and began to retreat to the launch distance.
  18. HAM
    HAM 30 May 2020 15: 08 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    As practice shows, arrogant intelligence will continue until one of the "scouts" is landed forever .... and who and how will help to "land" no difference ... arrogant people only understand that ..
  19. lopvlad 30 May 2020 15: 11 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Quote: Vitaly Gusin
    And it is clear that no boundaries are being discussed. the border ends 22 km from the coast of the state, and then it is neutral waters and airspace.


    this nonsense comes to mind only to profane and lamers, in whose head the enemy reconnaissance plane is a sort of airplane fixed on a wire in a flight mission which is not reconnaissance, as close as possible to the border of a potential enemy, but a tourist route "just to see nature."
  20. tihonmarine 30 May 2020 15: 23 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    For crews of American intelligence aircraft, difficult times have come. Russian and Chinese pilots do not allow them to calmly fly and observe.
    They must be chased constantly, like husky cats.
  21. Ratmir_Ryazan 30 May 2020 15: 35 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    The author of the article suggests organizing escort aircraft reconnaissance by US Air Force F-16 fighters. He believes that then the Russian Air Force and the Chinese Air Force simply will not have any chances.


    And how does this prevent our VKS from intercepting American and NATO aircraft? ))) What kind of nonsense is this "expert"

    Interception is essentially just detection and tracking, we show that we see them and since we caught up with them, we could shoot them down.

    If there was escort even to an entire air regiment, this would not hinder the interception.
    1. cniza 30 May 2020 16: 27 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      They really want to hang out in front of an internal audience ...
  22. Pvi1206 30 May 2020 15: 48 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    well, dumb ...
    a game of cat and mouse ... or catch-up ... the same training useful to pilots ...
  23. wachmann 30 May 2020 16: 02 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Thanks, neighing.
  24. Raven 95 30 May 2020 16: 04 New
    • 14
    • 2
    +12
    Why did this Rogan decide that "the Russian Air Force and the Chinese Air Force simply will not have any chance." Take a full-time patrol Su-27, so no one has yet managed to bring him down in aerial combat, for his entire long life.
    And there is also a super-maneuverable Su-35S. In short, Mr. Rogan will be very surprised and bewildered when he finally finds out that the fe-16s never surpass Sushki.
    1. cniza 30 May 2020 16: 25 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Raven-95

      And there is also a super-maneuverable Su-35S. In short, Mr. Rogan will be very surprised and bewildered when he finally finds out that the fe-16s never surpass Sushki.


      Hooray is good, but I must admit that they have a good F-16 and it would be interesting to "compete", to hear our aces what they say ...
      1. Raven 95 30 May 2020 17: 17 New
        • 10
        • 1
        +9
        To, as Mr. Rogan put it, "F-16 fighters will constantly show their superiority in air fights," it’s not good to be good. The “dry ones” were not made with a finger either, and VKS pilots are running in at a hot spot. So "Hurray" only Mr. Rogan screams, and we only have facts.
        1. cniza 30 May 2020 17: 40 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          I did not say that our “Dry” bad or worse, and much depends on the skill of the pilots ...
      2. Ratmir_Ryazan 30 May 2020 17: 21 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        What to compete during the interception? By the way, our Chinese airborne forces, like the Chinese one, can detect and escort a bomber / scout flying alone or accompanied by several F-16/15/35/22.

        Nobody shoots at each other in this situation, when intercepting, we simply demonstrate that we see them and are ready to use weapons if something happens.

        If the United States is not ready to declare war on us, then there is nothing to resent the interception in neutral waters.

        Another point is that with such articles, they simply escalate the negative in our direction and draw in the minds of the Americans the image of the evil Russians who “dared” to intercept the peacefully flying bomber / reconnaissance aircraft from the USA near their borders.
        1. cniza 30 May 2020 17: 42 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan


          Another point is that with such articles, they simply escalate the negative in our direction and draw in the minds of the Americans the image of the evil Russians who “dared” to intercept the peacefully flying bomber / reconnaissance aircraft from the USA near their borders.


          Yes, they work for their audience ...
  25. NF68 30 May 2020 16: 07 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Do not fly close to the borders of the Russian Federation and China. Then no one will intercept you.
    1. cniza 30 May 2020 16: 22 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      They’re used to it, but they’ll get used to it and don’t fly close ...
  26. cniza 30 May 2020 16: 21 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    Russia will not want to see the appearance of a video on which F-16 fighters will constantly show their superiority in air fights.


    Dear gentlemen, staffers, this is not Hollywood for you, it’s there that you defeat everyone ...
  27. shinobi 30 May 2020 16: 38 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Apparently Rogan should be personally nosed in the video as our pilots drive their aces away from our transporters.
  28. jaroff 30 May 2020 16: 43 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    I read comments, friends, because a kindergarten.
    Okay, it’s excusable to journalists, this corrupt family, for the sake of fashionable hype, will sell its family.
    But we, ordinary readers with real life experience in military aviation, why comment on all this garbage?
    After all, we know perfectly well that there is a so-called "Rules of the game" and all adhere to them.
    1. Ros 56 30 May 2020 16: 56 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Uh, no, dear, but where to put emotions?
  29. boris epstein 30 May 2020 16: 48 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    And I liked it when two Russian fighters clamped the Poseidon from both sides and took it where it needed to. Now, if you still had to sit on a Russian airfield to gut it ...
  30. Ros 56 30 May 2020 16: 54 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    There is a much easier and cheaper way - to sit in a puddle and not shine, and our wolves will be full and striped sheep will be intact. stop negative am
  31. demo 30 May 2020 17: 28 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    This is written by Tom Rogan in an article published by Washington Examiner.

    This freak writes the letter "M", which suggested that the Ukrainian Air Force bomb the Crimean bridge.
    And on which the RF IC began a criminal case on extremism.
    No wonder.
    Apparently the guy did not smell the gunpowder, and does not know the price of either his own or someone else's life.
    It’s very simple to advise someone to go under the bullets, being safe at home.
  32. Fedorovich 30 May 2020 18: 04 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Do not fly - no one will intercept you.
  33. Quadro 30 May 2020 20: 16 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What a blatant scum. Let them knock on their continent and there at least 100 scouts near Mexico are allowed there.
  34. boss 30 May 2020 21: 16 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Rogan is original in his repertoire.
    Will there be enough f-16 fuel to accompany the scout throughout the entire mission?
    Or gas stations?
    Rogan is burning)
  35. Ilya Nikitich 30 May 2020 21: 38 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Don’t whip around, comrade amerikantsm ....
  36. ZVS
    ZVS 30 May 2020 21: 40 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Interestingly, in the US Army are all like that? Are they really not able to understand elementary things that the interception will be carried out not by one interceptor, but by several. And I would like to see how they will drive, as a lousy puppy.
  37. 2 Level Advisor 30 May 2020 23: 10 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Washington Examiner, transcription "Washington Examiner" Circulation 50 copies.
    Komsomolskaya Pravda Circulation 2,7 million copies.
    What kind of a newspaper, to put it mildly, was suggested to us for discussion, the level of a regional newspaper? 1/54 Komsomol? Strong source ..
  38. businessv 30 May 2020 23: 12 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The United States could simply not endanger its crews and stop sending them on reconnaissance flights near foreign borders.
    Gold words! The only right decision, but the minke whales will not accept it - not that education to make the right decisions! smile
  39. APASUS 30 May 2020 23: 52 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Boeing P-8 Poseidon Flight Performance
    Maximum speed: 907 km / h
    Cruising speed: 815 km / h
    Patrol / search speed: 333 km / h at an altitude of 60 m
    Combat radius: 3 km
    Ferry range: 8 km (300 miles)
    Ceiling: 12 500 m

    I can imagine how the F-16 will patrol along with the P-8 Poseidon, and from the back it still needs a tanker with fuel
  40. va3610 31 May 2020 00: 32 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Tom Rogan seems to be clinical.
  41. Pavlik K. 31 May 2020 00: 40 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Again, the same thing ... Ask not the pilots, but the operators (navigators) of the BP (combat. Note) - This is the MAIN during tactical combat operations in air battles. Maneuverability is the last, I repeat - the last component in success. At first - sights (both carriers and factors), captures, range of defeat, detection. escorts, EWs, evasions (not shunting) .... wake up ...
  42. Boris ⁣ Shaver 31 May 2020 00: 42 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    F-16 fighters will constantly show their superiority in air fights

    2 moments elude me:
    1) How exactly will they do this, and even in such a situation (with such close contact)? Like niggas in a rap battle?
    2) The range of the reconnaissance is often significantly greater than the range of fighter aircraft. Would you also have to take a tanker with you? Total: reconnaissance, a couple of fighters, a tanker. Such an "armada" already and the aircraft AWACS in the state does not hurt.
  43. tolmachiev51 31 May 2020 04: 50 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    was and will be !!! don't shy away where nobody needs you. Patrol Canada. Fine-grained. Maybe Australia.
  44. LLeonid 31 May 2020 07: 12 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    In general, to understand what is happening, you need to understand what “interception” is and why it is needed. So, the brief “essence of things” is that ANY country has secrets of an economic and military nature. Which (which is natural for a number of reasons) are often located along its borders. And these secrets, using methods of special technical reconnaissance devices, it is possible to find out to its "potential adversary." Moreover, the data cannot simply be "retrieved from space by reconnaissance satellites." And if something is possible, then it may require rechecking "on the ground." Since the results "from outer space" may have traces of "technical error" or "intentional deception." And, right here, intelligence is needed from ships and aircraft that do not violate (!) Another’s border, but with a direct pass along it. In this case, it turns out that the aircraft or sea vessel itself, so to speak, “by its own body” does not violate the border. Being "legally" in neutral territory. But in fact (!) This vessel, with all its technical "tentacles", has long violated this boundary by NAGO! And, like a worm-parasite, it literally "picks" in our "giblets". Therefore, it is impossible to “knock down” it (after all, he allegedly “does not violate the border”), but to “drive out” it is simply necessary. And then “interceptions” take place, forcing the stranger to poke his stuck nose out of someone else's fence. But here is what is interesting: between Russia and the United States an “open skies” treaty was in effect. Ours and their scouts HAVE THE RIGHT to fly over someone else’s territory and make sure that their "home countries" are not at the moment a clear threat to the "potential adversary." It would seem - it is mutually beneficial. But now the United States has announced withdrawal from this treaty. That is, they honestly do not want to conduct intelligence. But to get in thieves “through the window” to where they honestly “went through the open door” yesterday — this is “the very thing” for them! Is there a mentality like that? NO ALREADY! Do not want to be honest, that means there will be no way at all! And a Chinese man who "accidentally fell" on a US intelligence agent, by the way, well done! And the US "discontent" is understandable: their damaged "sophisticated intelligence" is much more complicated and more expensive than a Chinese simple fighter. It turns out that the thief wanted to steal something, but he received losses ...
  45. Oleg Salov 31 May 2020 11: 29 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Fresh tradition, but angry with difficulty, it's me about the superiority of the F-16.
  46. The comment was deleted.
  47. Prisoner 31 May 2020 21: 46 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    "That's elementary, Watson!" (c) That there would be no interceptions, let them fly at their borders and not put their insolent noses into other people's houses. After all, the patience of the owners can burst and then take care of the noses of the mattresses.
  48. Tolik_74 31 May 2020 22: 24 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Since when did mattress fe-16 become better than Su ?? Clowns in stripes are sitting in Natashka and Pintagon
  49. Sailor 1 June 2020 10: 07 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Something I strongly doubt the superiority of the F-16 over the Su-27-35 which form the basis of air defense.
  50. 9PA
    9PA 1 June 2020 10: 35 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Like how, altitude speed and stealth. No more ways