Russia proposed NATO to regulate the concept of “dangerous rapprochement” for aviation and navy

As you know, the US military often accuses the Russian side of the fact that military aircraft or ships “are making dangerous rapprochement” with US planes and ships. Often phrases are added about the "unprofessional" actions of military pilots and sailors of the Russian Federation. At the same time, when it comes to which particular approach (in meters and configuration) is considered dangerous, the Pentagon does not say.

In Russia, they proposed to solve this problem by regulating the minimum distance that ships at sea and airplanes in the air can approach. We are talking about ships and planes of Russia and NATO countries.

During the briefing, General Sergei Rudskoy, the head of the State Educational Institution of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces, spoke about the Russian proposal. According to him, there is a willingness to fix joint rights, which will determine the minimum distance of approach and the order of interaction of the crews.

General Rudskoy added that special attention is being paid to the implementation of the initiative on the mutual use of transponders using military means aviation when flying over the Baltic Sea.

The Russian general added that Russia is counting on the readiness of the states that are members of the North Atlantic military bloc for concrete decisions on the issues voiced.

In fact, it is proposed to honestly and openly regulate the very concept of "dangerous rapprochement."

So far, NATO’s official response to the Russian proposal has not followed.

Comments

[marchcat]

So far, NATO’s official response to the Russian proposal has not followed.

I think that it will not follow, they do not need regulations. If you accept it, then there will be no one to write "lampoons" against in newspapers. And so in any case, you can write that he will brand.

[Sky strike fighter]

Of course it is not needed. Moreover, Trump, who does not need either the INF Treaty or START-3. And Trump, who hid in a bunker, like Hitler hid in a bunker at one time, all the more does not need anything. And you mean some kind of regulation on "dangerous rapprochement ".

[Civil]

In general, I don’t understand the meaning in these rapprochements, or in battle or what to spend in empty fuel.

[Sky strike fighter]

In a fight? Do you want the whole world to go to waste ahead of time? Not an option. It will be silly as it turns out. But insistently indicating who is the boss in the house and escorting uninvited guests is another matter. The border is on the castle. Guarding the world, so to speak.

[Tusv]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

In the battle? Want the whole world to trash ahead of time?

Maksim And what immediately into dust then. They have an order. We have an order. No one is afraid of anyone. For example, at a distance of 120, I started to wave my arrows (P-12). Like, I warned you. Further, air defense aviation will talk with you, and not my radar. Americans are adequate people - understand

[Sky strike fighter]

I hope that they are still adequate, although they are clearly degrading in terms of adequacy. They have already been warned. I hope they will understand.

Russian air defense systems are ready to shoot down American strategic B-1B bombers, similar to those that flew near the Russian border on May 29. This was announced by the head of the Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces Sergey Rudskoy. According to the expert, Russia is closely following the flights of strategic aviation of the US Air Force. He also added that on the 29th, when American planes approached the Russian border, the air defense systems were ready for immediate use.
Source: https://versia.ru/genshtab-rf-soobshhil-o-gotovnosti-pvo-sbivat-amerikanskie-bombardirovshhiki

[Tusv]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

I hope that they are still adequate, although they are clearly degrading in terms of adequacy.

The wizard Suleman honestly without cheating

It should be. Flew in and received. But alas, the command happens to be stingy and allows, and this is not at any gate

[orionvitt]

Quote: Tusv

Americans are adequate people - understand

They are now "adequate". And if you remember how many emergency situations in the air, they created when escorting ours in the 70s and 80s. Then it was considered daring. Oh yes, I completely forgot, as they say, not that. They probably can.

[Starover_Z]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

But insistently indicating who is the boss in the house and escorting uninvited guests is another matter. The border is on the castle.

In Russia, they proposed to solve this problem by regulating the minimum distance that ships at sea and airplanes in the air can approach. We are talking about ships and planes of Russia and NATO countries.

But it would not be bad to tie the distance of approach to the distance to the border and the type of aircraft going to it. The closer scouts and bombers fly to our borders, the closer fighters fly to them. And let them think there for themselves!

[mark1]

Quote: Starover_Z

It wouldn’t be a bad thing to tie the distance of approach to the distance to the border

And in case of crossing the border, regulate the depth of penetration into the building

[eklmn]

“In Russia, they suggested solving this problem by regulating the minimum distance that ships at sea and planes in the air can approach. We are talking about ships and planes of Russia and NATO countries. ”
Actually, there are international laws that regulate behavior / min.distance and all non-military people abide by these laws. The question for Russia is why separate laws are needed for the Armed Forces of Russia and NATO?
Borders do not violate each other. I consider it pointless to adjust the minimum distance by which you can approach the border, because both countries can determine the accuracy of a meter.

[kit88]

Do you understand the difference between military and civil?
Appendix 1 to the FAP discloses the basic concepts including
"dangerous approach" - aircraft rapprochement not stipulated by the mission for flight between themselves or with other material objects at intervals of less than half of the established Federal regulations use of the airspace of the Russian Federation.
In turn, the Federal Rules regarding the minimum intervals on several pages of long text interpret about trains, intervals, semicircular coordinate systems ...
For example.
Art.101
b) between aircraft flying along intersecting routes at the same height, or between an aircraft and other material objects at the time the aircraft crosses the flight route of another aircraft or other material object - at least 2 km for aircraft with a flight speed of 300 km / h and less and not less than 5 km - for aircraft with a flight speed of more than 300 km / h

Night, SMU. What will an interceptor pilot see from 5 kilometers? How does the target recognize? Moreover, in HIS assignment provides such a rapprochement.

The military has its own rules.

[aviator6768]

Absolutely, a colleague. I will not even list all the reg.documents for GA (since 91-92 - I had problems with ICAO in regulating and equipping OS systems), by the way, a Tatar fifty dollars with cargo Boeing (or watermelon) only from -for distrust of those encountered) ... In short, everything has been described for a long time ... no need to shag grandmother.

[eklmn]

“The military has its own rules.”
4-5 days ago, the Amer R-8 was intercepted by 2 Russian fighters over the Mediterranean Sea. The R-8 could not maneuver left and right without risking the lives of Russian pilots.
Video here
https://youtu.be/H7XhshJRzKI?t=4
the first 25 seconds. Russian fighter is closed by the right engine R-8, slightly visible. But one can also see how dangerous he approached from the plane. And then, in general, “circus indifferent numbers.”
Do you want to say that this is a rapprochement according to the legal rules of the military?
By the way, pay attention to the description of such incidents in the Russian press from different angles. From the Russian side: “Amer’s planes approached our borders and were intercepted by air defense fighters.” Not a word about breaking the border.
Or: “The Americans complained about the dangerous unprofessional interception of their scout flying near our borders.” I didn’t break the borders, but complained.
There were no complaints on both sides of the flight of Russian planes and the NATO fighters accompanying them.
It turns out that only Americans complain about Russian escort. Russia does not complain about NATO.
Question to you (based on the video) - are the Americans right or not?
Is the Russian military flying professionally?
Of course, the most ready answer is “What are they doing here?”
If you are a supporter of such an answer, then I'm sorry to bother you ...

[kit88]

You are confusing concepts.
You measure the civilian patterns of the military.
The professionalism of the military is determined by the ability to fulfill the order accurately and on time.
In addition, military personnel of any state are intended to use violence against the military of another state. In turn, violence can be applied to them up to destruction. This is permitted by international legal acts, no matter how wild it sounds to your liberal ear, but it is.
The military of all countries know this and do not whine, the press is aching to stir up excitement in civilian brains.
And about the dangerous maneuvers. No one will tell you anything. The rules for intercepting violators are secret; no one here will pour out your soul. What real task Poseidon performed, so no one will voice; what order the interceptor pilots had - similarly. Perhaps they were generally presented to the orders for completing the BATTLE mission.

[eklmn]

“The rules for intercepting violators are secret ...”
Russia did not complain about crossing its borders, do not compose.
Do not confuse the hot with the round - there were no border violations, look at my footnote. If Russian pilots do not complain about NATO interceptions, then the interception was carried out according to the rules / laws. If the Amer pilots complain, and the video shows, then the interception of Russian air defense was carried out in violation of the rules. There is no need to change / supplement the rules - they must be performed. Very simple ... !!!

[kit88]

Quote: eklmn

“The rules for intercepting violators are secret ...”
Russia did not complain about crossing its borders, do not compose.

Are you adequate?
How is one related to the other?

... the video shows that the interception by Russian air defense was carried out in violation of the rules of the Rules; it is not necessary to change / supplement - they must be performed. Very simple ... !!!

Dear, you are reasoning as if the Rules are now before your eyes.
Once again, do not confuse the Rules for civilians, which are in the public domain, and the Rules for the military, which are in armored safes and are issued against signature to persons who have the appropriate Permission, and if this applies to them.

So the Russian Federation also offers NATO something like to jointly establish these Rules for the military.

[Bez 310]

Quote: kit88

The rules for the military, which are in armored safes and are issued against signature to persons who have the appropriate Permission, and then if this applies to them.

Rave?

[kit88]

No. Itself issued.

[Bez 310]

What betrayed?
What is the name?

[kit88]

Literature issued.
Under the painting.
A pen.
Sharikova.
So see?

[Bez 310]

I clarify the question - in what "literature" are the "Rules for the military" indicated? If you cannot say what kind of "literature" and what "Rules ..." we are talking about, then you are just a balabol.
Or maybe you just worked as a "secretary", and in the process
Labor grabbed the headlines?

[kit88]

It's better to read the names with your own eyes, right?
You are welcome, graduate from a military school, receive an appropriate higher education institution, receive admission and please read, maintain your knowledge.
But, I see this is not yours. With your knowledge and intellect, write words only on fences, and bounce people off sites with your stupid statements.
Empty nickname.

[Bez 310]

I understood everything, there will be no answer.
It's a pity...

[kit88]

How intelligent you have become.
Then the expense. Let's go.

[Bez 310]

I realized that again I ran into an amateur balabol ...

[kit88]

And you park on Zen. All the pros are there. There they will tell you everything and "put the final point" in this matter ...
And here amateurs .... You are right ..
Ruddle ..

[demo]

You're right.
To remove such a convenient excuse to "squeal" once again - these are not the "partners" to do this.

[Borsht]

Quote: marchcat

I think that it will not follow, they do not need a regulation.

Even if it follows, they cf .. do not care about all sorts of regulations. Rules are for the weak.

[Peter is not the first]

They will not agree to this, because as long as there is no approved minimum distance, then any Russian plane can be blamed for the "dangerous approach", even if it has not yet taken off from the airfield.

[sharp-lad]

Well, you have to limit yourself!

[Reserve buildbat]

The reaction will not follow. After all, the adoption of such norms will deprive politicians and warriors of the room of screaming about unprofessionalism, dangerous rapprochements, etc. And you have to be silent in a rag.

[Mavrikiy]

Quote: Stroibat stock

The reaction will not follow. After all, the adoption of such norms will deprive politicians and warriors of the room of screaming about unprofessionalism, dangerous rapprochements, etc. And you have to be silent in a rag.

Screaming and screaming will be. What bazaar rules are written?

[Valery Valery]

Good move!

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Valery Valery

Good move!

And what, the 1972 treaty with the United States on the prevention of incidents at sea with warships and airspace over them no longer applies?
As far as I remember, there was an agreement not to get closer to each other closer than 2 cable ones. (365m).
So let the flyers take on the experience gained by the sailors, and the sailors can extend this agreement to NATO ships. Problems!

[Vitaly gusin]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

And what, the 1972 treaty with the United States on the prevention of incidents at sea with warships and airspace over them no longer applies?

Article VIII
This Agreement shall enter into force on the day of its signing and will be valid for 3 years. In the future, it will be automatically renewed every time for 3 years.

The validity of this Agreement may be terminated by any of the Parties 6 months after written notification of the other Party.
https://www.armscontrol.ru/start/rus/docs/incsea.htm

[Simon]

Let them not come closer to our borders, but fly in the aisles of their borders, then our planes will fly within their borders. And then they themselves provoke, and then tearfully complain that the Russians behave dangerously.

[Tusv]

Well, in the Soviet Union it was regulated. A dangerous rapprochement with the border is this. For sea 70 km, for land 20 and then under the Warsaw Pact. And the fact that it is not dangerous for the border, then a simple escort without mutual hooliganism

[Mountain shooter]

10 meters is normal? And then it is possible and less. They’re very nervous

[Terenin]

Quote: Mountain Shooter

10 meters is normal? And then it is possible and less. They’re very nervous

Today, in NAT, they will take our technology to approach them in parsecs.

[novel66]

Gene and we have to introduce the concept of "special approximation zone". so that they don't wander around the borders

[Terenin]

Quote: novel xnumx

Gene and we have to introduce the concept of "special approximation zone". so that they don't wander around the borders

So our borders are the only borders that attract them very much, do not give rest and through which they cannot fly with impunity ...
Roma

[Adventurer]

Quote: Terenin

So our borders are the only borders that attract them very much, do not give rest and through which they cannot fly with impunity ...

Beckon and haunt you day or night! Because Russia is unpredictable and can be reborn literally from the ashes (41st, after the 90s) ..
The US profiled Russia .. While celebrating the victory (the collapse of the USSR) .. Look, but the Russians are again threatening "hegemony and crap."

[Terenin]

Quote: Avanturist

Quote: Terenin

So our borders are the only borders that attract them very much, do not give rest and through which they cannot fly with impunity ...

Beckon and haunt you day or night! Because Russia is unpredictable and can be reborn literally from the ashes (41st, after the 90s) ..
The US profiled Russia .. While celebrating the victory (the collapse of the USSR) .. Look, but the Russians are again threatening "hegemony and crap."

The United States would not hurt to invade itself in order to bring at least a little democracy to the United States.
Although, this does not threaten them, they do not have the US Embassy ...

[Adventurer]

Quote: Terenin

The United States would not hurt to invade itself in order to bring at least a little democracy to the United States.

Bravo, a great pun and very much in the subject ..)))

Quote: Terenin

Although, this does not threaten them, they do not have the US Embassy ...

Everything fell under the table Gennady !!!!!

[novel66]

but the Chinese will soon kick them

[Adventurer]

Quote: Mountain Shooter

10 meters is normal? And then it is possible and less. They’re very nervous

Let's just plain text .. Cowardly! Psychologists then demand compensation for a nervous breakdown ..

[Charik]

Verified from the US and NATO-to conclude contracts to no avail

[Adventurer]

Quote: Charik

Verified from the US and NATO-to conclude contracts to no avail

But you need to try, otherwise Russia will be blamed again .. And so in case of something, here we warned and offered .. (so that no lawsuits were brought)

[HAM]

Vasya Tsymbal has his own opinion .......

[Boa kaa]

Quote: HAM

Vasya Tsymbal has his own opinion .......

Air Hooligans - Not Our Profile!

[Adventurer]

Quote: BoA KAA

Quote: HAM

Vasya Tsymbal has his own opinion .......

Air Hooligans - Not Our Profile!

Something I remembered a song .. !!!!

And the hooliganism we then "scrub the floors" ...))))

[Pvi1206]

NATO considers it below its dignity to meet Russia's proposals ...

[Voltsky]

Russia proposed NATO to regulate the concept of “dangerous rapprochement” for aviation and navy

100 km from the air defense system, already a dangerous rapprochement; for at 10km it’s hard to get away from the rocket.

[iouris]

Naive guys: you can start regulating only after someone is shot down or drowned.

[bald]

This is all chewing gum and no orbits. They restored the army (they defended themselves, not the people), and then what? For example, I’m filthy when a flock of birds crap on your head and it doesn’t matter who benefits from it.

[Vladimir Kiev]

I am not a military expert in any field. And this is purely the opinion of a person who has been "at the household / business level" in various conflict or situations close to them - the parties will be ready to establish rules when their absence leads to unjustified losses and costs on both sides. And when such rules allow them to be avoided. So - to start a conversation, perhaps it would be nice if a couple of f16 / f35 landed unsuccessfully in Syria with a "dangerous approach" to the borders of the state / allied forces?
And so ... About nothing.
That's when, in response to a sniper's bullet, art in the Donbass generously pours out the sniper hunters in response (both on the one and the other). They will not give their own (who, of course, "at the time").
So it seems to me here.

[iouris]

No compromises are possible here, because the stronger dominant power requires the weaker dependent power to play only by the rules that were prescribed to it in 1991 in exchange for energy prices. What a weak power does is seen as revisionism. The question is: what is the weak dependent power ready and ready to get out of dependence and what the dominant power is ready for in order to maintain the status quo. Getting out of dependence requires sober calculation and courage from the leadership, and from the military - a willingness to take risks and even sacrifices. This is their job. And concern for "ensuring security" means maintaining the status quo. Perhaps he suits you, but you are not the supreme commander-in-chief, but a soldier.

[ZhorikVartanov]

The bottom line is that without a transponder an air defense object is difficult to classify. C - 400 in a lateral projection will not see the difference between a380 and b52

[Mavrikiy]

Russia proposed NATO to regulate the concept of “dangerous rapprochement” for aviation and navy

Do we need it? Well, there is a definition, and then what? The scout invades, we approach within the framework, and he continues the flight, confident that the distance and safety are guaranteed within the definition. And we will be forced again to "unprofessional" get closer.

[Avior]

You can’t measure the distance with roulette. Rapprochement is possible in principle.
It should allow convergence in order to provide visual observation and identification for the necessary time, when it comes to the flight mission.
That is, it flew up, visually identified, the side number looked, determined that the missiles do not hang under the wings — there is no need to fly a short distance anymore, to be accompanied, just in case, if there is an order, it is possible at a greater safe distance.
There are other cases when it is visually necessary to determine.
I remember that from our MIG the pilot ejected from the engine stop, and then the engine started again and the plane flew to Europe, crashed in Belgium or something, the NATO members circled and visually determined that there was no pilot.
But these are the usual tasks of identification, we are talking about a few minutes.

[sleeve]

And it won't. The principle of "no principles" is NATO ideology. However, we can introduce our own rules. Something like 500m observation, neutral space. 10 m "blocking action". 5 km to the airspace of the State-zone for blocking. All this is in the Security Council. Purely "show". Well, and "distribute" to the neighbors via diplomatic channels. Say you want it or not, but here it is.

[Bez 310]

It is ridiculous to read about this "general's" imitation of activity.
All that is needed for safe flights has long been invented, and
There is no need to invent anything new.
It should be noted that "unprofessional rapprochement" is a sin
it is our pilots, and why they climb, and why even proud
with my antics, I understand - then they will be praised in all
Mass media for "skill, heroism and courage", and maybe even reward.
If once it is indicative to "rip out" such our "master", then
everyone else will immediately remember the safe intervals, and stop
these idiotic "attacks" on the planes of "our partners"
violate our borders.

[certero]

Western countries will never agree to this. They just like the right of the strong

[Adventurer]

Quote: certero

Western countries will never agree to this. They just like the right of the strong

But why then complain about the Russian pilots that they constantly scare them with dangerous maneuvers? We offer them to settle everything so that they do not fit our borders, etc. ..Russia is the only country in the world that doesn’t really cherimone (now) with these brazen amers ..
Our business is to offer, and then let them blame themselves ..

[askort154]

Russia proposed NATO to regulate the concept of “dangerous rapprochement” for aviation and navy

On May 25, 1972, an agreement was signed in Moscow between the governments of the USSR and the USA on the prevention of incidents in the open sea and in the airspace above it. as amended in 1979 and 1986
The whole agreement is riddled with declarative appeals - to provide, not to allow, to avoid, etc. No specific cir of intervals or distances is provided, as in the civilian sectors, because there is no objective control over their registration.
It is not that simple.