Military Review

"To strengthen collective defense": American B-1B Lancer bombers will be deployed in Norway

55
"To strengthen collective defense": American B-1B Lancer bombers will be deployed in Norway

The United States will deploy B-1B Lancer strategic bombers in Norway. According to The Drive, the task of American bombers will be Russia and the Arctic.


According to the newspaper, in the near future the US Air Force will transfer an unnamed number of B-1В Lancer bombers from US territory to the Norwegian Orland airbase to "strengthen collective security." The main task of the redeployment of aircraft is called the desire of the United States, together with its NATO allies, "to work on the northwestern borders of Russia" and "to operate in the Far North."

We value the strong partnership we have with Norway and look forward to future opportunities to strengthen our collective defense

- said on this occasion the commander of the US Air Force in Europe and Africa Jeffy Harrigian.

It is noted that Orland airbase is located about 300 miles (more than 480 km) from the Arctic Circle, and the fifth generation F-35 Lightning II fighters of the Royal Norwegian Air Force are deployed there. Also, the airfield is the temporary placement of the American E-3 Sentry AWACS aircraft stationed in Germany.

Earlier, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced the increased frequency of flights of American strategic bombers near Russian borders. According to the military department, the US Air Force is studying the future theater of war. The United States and its NATO partners pay special attention to the Crimea, Kaliningrad and, more recently, the Arctic direction.

According to experts, building up aviation component in the Arctic region, the United States is trying to compensate for the lack of an icebreaker fleet and surface ships capable of operating in northern latitudes.
55 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Eldorado
    Eldorado 3 February 2021 14: 19
    +8
    In return, I demand to place Tu-160 in Venezuela!
    1. Alexey-74
      Alexey-74 3 February 2021 14: 25
      +3
      you can also in Venezuela, negotiate with Cuba. And at the North Pole to strengthen the MiG-31 grouping and of course the air defense.
      1. frruc
        frruc 3 February 2021 15: 47
        0
        The flight time from Venezuela to the USA is too long. If only Cuba, the perfect place.
        And on the border with Norway and on the islands there are long-range air defense systems and MiG-31 aircraft with hypersonic missiles.
      2. Dikson
        Dikson 3 February 2021 21: 08
        -4
        Are you going to serve on the North Pole? Well, there, to clean the runway from the snow .. planes in the wind 20m, sec to catch, so as not to roll away ..? To rattle with wrenches again in the cold ..?
        1. frruc
          frruc 4 February 2021 16: 12
          0
          I've already been there. Thank you for attention.
    2. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan 3 February 2021 14: 40
      +13

      In return, I demand to place Tu-160 in Venezuela!


      We don’t have so much money to maintain a Tu-160 base in Venezuela and security for them, and there is nothing for that. There they will become easy prey for a US missile strike, for example, from a submarine with cruise missiles or an air strike, again with cruise missiles. It will not be easy for us to supply this base, and the power in Venezuela is not stable, and the country is in deep crisis.

      We "play" from active defense. We need to build up air defense and build more multipurpose nuclear submarines with cruise missiles, so that such boats, being on duty somewhere in the sea, at any time can release 40 calibers each and plow both the Lancers and the airfield on which they are based in Norway.
      1. Starover_Z
        Starover_Z 3 February 2021 15: 20
        +2
        Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
        We "play" from active defense.

        The states are fine with that. While we are defending ourselves, he surrounds our territory with his bases and more and more modern types of weapons, and here we are losing.
        Here you need a move like "Kuzkina's mother". Build missile cruisers that sail close to American territorial waters and not one at a time, but in groups! That would be the answer!
        1. Ratmir_Ryazan
          Ratmir_Ryazan 3 February 2021 15: 29
          +4
          We just put frigates on stream, and you already want an atomic cruiser))

          In terms of money, try to estimate how much it will cost the country and what we will get in the end.

          You really need to look at things, without fantasies.

          Even if we have a full-fledged AUG, it will be vulnerable off the coast of the United States, since the enemy's forces are many times greater both at sea and on land.

          If the United States needs it, a massive air raid with cruise missiles will smash such an AUG to pieces.
          1. Starover_Z
            Starover_Z 3 February 2021 16: 05
            +2
            Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
            We just put frigates on stream, and you already want an atomic cruiser))

            I have not written anything about the atomic cruiser, because I do not even try to understand the naval qualifications of ships. But to sit and stupidly watch as our "partners" are laying around the territory, I just disgust! And they perceive peaceful arguments as weakness!
            1. Ratmir_Ryazan
              Ratmir_Ryazan 3 February 2021 18: 41
              +1
              Well, we not only look, but also take countermeasures. According to our capabilities.

              And to make a base near the territory of the United States, consider exposing it to attack, it will not bring any benefit.

              But each extra nuclear submarine of the Yasenya-M type is always an opportunity to fire 40 cruise missiles unexpectedly from under the water through enemy territory. And unlike strategists, we can build as many / as we can.

              Even if such boats will simply be near our shores, the enemy will always have the feeling that they can all be right under their noses at a missile strike distance and force him to burn resources for countermeasures.

              And for the public of any country, a war with a strong state that has many such nuclear submarines will be regarded as suicide, even if they have 20 AUG, there will always be a chance that some nuclear submarine, or maybe more than one, will pass and hit with cruise missiles. and even with a nuclear warhead on their territory.
          2. seacap
            seacap 4 February 2021 15: 14
            -1
            Yes, we are somehow strained with frigate flow, MRK and DPL somehow at least master, managers and beau monde with bankers, do not want to become shipbuilders, and after good school, and even on the basis of Hollywood and glamorous pictures, trigonometry and sopromat is from another parallel world. Yes, and curls with Chubais, it is not necessary, but the guarantor and the TV set will be enough.
            1. Ratmir_Ryazan
              Ratmir_Ryazan 5 February 2021 10: 41
              0
              All is well with us with the frigates.

              Thanks to Putin's policy, as well as to our engineers and workers, including those who passed the exam, Russia received a powerful and modern frigate of project 22350 with the latest missile defense system that can be used on ships, submarines and objects on land (with 2600 km).

              In addition to the URO, the new frigate received modern and powerful artillery, air defense, as well as submarine detection systems + a helicopter on board.

              2 frigates are already in service, 6 are under construction and contracts have been signed for 2 more.

              Each frigate costs the country about $ 500 million.

              And despite the development of cooperation with Ukraine in terms of the construction of engines and sanctions that block access to Western technologies, Russia has overcome this problem and now completely produces these engines on its own.

              For example, such an economically powerful country like Germany has 9 frigates for the entire fleet, and the frigates of the new type "Saxony" are approximately similar to our project 22350, but without tactical missiles so far (although the installation of Mk.41 will allow you to shoot Tomahawks if necessary) they have only 3 pieces, the remaining 6 frigates of the 70s and 80s.

              Japan was going to build a series of frigates of 10 Lafayette, but only 5 were mastered, because it was expensive.

              Moreover, both Saxonte and Lafayette are inferior to Project 22350 in terms of armament power.

              So, everything is fine with us with frigates, but we always want better and more, but what we have is already good, especially considering the conditions in which our shipbuilders and the country have to work.
        2. dauria
          dauria 3 February 2021 15: 46
          +4
          Build missile cruisers


          Withdraw from the strategic treaty and build conventional strategic missiles. All types. Mine, mobile. It is against the territory of the United States. And let them consider "debit with credit".
        3. Lipchanin
          Lipchanin 3 February 2021 15: 50
          0
          Quote: Starover_Z
          who would walk near American territorial waters and not one by one, but in groups!

          Well, what should the crews of these groups be fed with?
          Do you think that in case of war, at least one transport with provisions will suit them?
          1. Starover_Z
            Starover_Z 3 February 2021 16: 09
            -1
            Quote: Lipchanin
            Well, what should the crews of these groups be fed with?
            Do you think that in case of war, at least one transport with provisions will suit them?

            And now how long do military ships sail on the oceans? In the event of full-fledged hostilities, the ships of the navy of any belligerent country will not be walking the seas for long, it is not for nothing that almost all boats have torpedo tubes.
            1. Lipchanin
              Lipchanin 3 February 2021 18: 07
              +1
              Quote: Starover_Z
              And now how long do warships go on the oceans

              Within 30 days.
              And back to base.
              And walk
              would be close to American territorial waters and not one by one, but in groups!

              These are targets.
              Against ALL US aviation, against the entire fleet, against coastal forces, they won't last even 5 minutes
        4. Piramidon
          Piramidon 3 February 2021 20: 14
          0
          Quote: Starover_Z
          Build missile cruisers to sail near American territorial waters

          And the Yankees will have nothing to shoot them with on their shores? Why not a PL? We do it better, and they are less noticeable. request And roaming around in front of enemy coastal aircraft and batteries is not a good idea.
      2. lelik613
        lelik613 4 February 2021 18: 46
        0
        Rent out to Cuba, Kim, Ayatollahs and Maduro "Poplar" for a penny a year.
    3. Pragmat ...
      Pragmat ... 3 February 2021 17: 15
      +2
      Russia is impatiently awaiting the final transfer of American Lancers to Norway, in order to know which nuclear warhead and how many MGT to send there in case of force majeure!
    4. bk0010
      bk0010 3 February 2021 20: 43
      +1
      Quote: El Dorado
      In return, I demand to place Tu-160 in Venezuela!
      Not worth it, they slipped their long-range bombers to us for slaughter, under the attack of our operational-tactical missiles, you should not repeat their mistakes. In Venezuela, there is only a jump airfield.
  2. credo
    credo 3 February 2021 14: 19
    +9
    In the near future, the US Air Force will transfer an unnamed number of B-1B Lancer bombers from US territory to the Norwegian airbase Orland to "strengthen collective security." The main task of the redeployment of aircraft is called the desire of the United States, together with its NATO allies, "to work on the northwestern borders of Russia" and "to operate in the Far North."

    And what will the "highly respected" Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev, the most peaceful of all citizens of Russia, say about this?
    1. Lipchanin
      Lipchanin 3 February 2021 14: 26
      +2
      Quote: credo
      And what will the "highly respected" Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev, the most peaceful of all citizens of Russia, say about this?

      Yes, it would be better if he was silent
      1. Guru
        Guru 3 February 2021 14: 45
        +1
        Hello Sergey.
        And what will the "highly respected" Mikhail Sergeevich Gorbachev, the most peaceful of all citizens of Russia, say about this?
        Yes, it would be better if he was silent

        Gorbachev would immediately suggest "Convene a consultation and come to a general consensus" laughing
        1. Lipchanin
          Lipchanin 3 February 2021 14: 49
          +1
          Hi Oleg hi
          Gorbachev would immediately suggest "Convene a consultation and come to a general consensus"

          But about restructuring nata, not a word laughing
    2. Alexey-74
      Alexey-74 3 February 2021 14: 26
      +1
      He will scratch his bald head and say that they have "cheated" .....
    3. saygon66
      saygon66 3 February 2021 14: 28
      +2
      - This one will turn out! He will say that all this is the result of the actions of the current administration ... but he would have avoided this. Verbiage verified!
      1. Lipchanin
        Lipchanin 3 February 2021 14: 51
        +3
        Quote: saygon66
        Verbiage verified!

        I noticed him then. When he answered the question asked, he began to talk about anything, but just not on the topic of the question.
        1. saygon66
          saygon66 3 February 2021 16: 55
          0
          - Here is the dog and rummaged! smile
      2. VORON538
        VORON538 3 February 2021 14: 53
        -2
        Not,itt would go out with raised hands with the words "surrender"
        Although, he passed so many things! hi
  3. Mouse
    Mouse 3 February 2021 14: 25
    +3
    The main task of the redeployment of aircraft is called the desire of the United States, together with its NATO allies, "to work on the northwestern borders of Russia" and "to operate in the Far North."

    At least somehow stretch your hand to the Far North ...
    Icebreakers are not ...
  4. Lipchanin
    Lipchanin 3 February 2021 14: 25
    0
    look forward to future opportunities to strengthen our collective defense

    One thing I can't understand, from whom are they going to defend themselves? request
    and "to act in the High North".

    From polar bears? request
    1. VORON538
      VORON538 3 February 2021 14: 55
      0
      Well, there is such a brigade of the MP in the North of Russia
      Rather not defend, but attack that part of the land where the same "polar bears"
      In general, the norgi must realize that American military bases on their territory are targets for our weapons hi
    2. tralflot1832
      tralflot1832 3 February 2021 15: 06
      0
      You are not far from the truth, the 61st Red Banner Kirkennes Separate Brigade of Marine Paratroopers, unofficially "Polar Bears", a polar bear is painted on the cars. Differs in the first Chechen war, took Dudayev's palace Official losses in the two Chechen wars 80 people. But they completed all the tasks set .. hi
      1. Lipchanin
        Lipchanin 3 February 2021 15: 52
        +1
        Quote: tralflot1832
        , 61st Red Banner Kirkennes Separate Brigade of Marine Paratroopers, unofficially "White Bears", a polar bear is painted on the vehicles.

        Did not know
        thanks for the info hi rmation
  5. Sands Careers General
    Sands Careers General 3 February 2021 14: 26
    +3
    US B-1B Lancer bombers to be deployed in Norway


    Our air defense-shniki are already in full swing in the ZVO, deploying and training)))
    And the fleet is not asleep))
  6. yehat2
    yehat2 3 February 2021 14: 27
    +3
    When did this bomber designed to intercept a powerful stationary (!) air defense system suddenly become an improvement in defense? And why is the Russian Foreign Ministry silent?
    1. Lipchanin
      Lipchanin 3 February 2021 14: 53
      +2
      Quote: yehat2
      And why is the Russian Foreign Ministry silent?

      Well, he will say. Are they going to give up their plans?
      The answer comes from the MO. Strengthening AA defenses
      1. yehat2
        yehat2 3 February 2021 15: 16
        +6
        it needs to be discussed at the UN
        why is the United States stepping up armed confrontation
        why forced to retaliate
        dozens of official protests have to be filed against the presence of American submarines in our territorial waters, etc. Instead of silently swallowing statements about the Russian threat every time. Take examples from the Norwegians - they constantly scream about Russian submarines, although they are mostly NATO ones.
        And in the same way, each reinforcement of our troops on the border must be formally tied to a specific threat that the US and NATO have previously created. Not just dryly voicing "We have put the Iskander battery and put it where we want", but add - that's because a specific armored battalion has appeared in Estonia or a new missile defense base in Poland.
        So that the argument about the formless Russian threat disappears into oblivion, so that it simply does not exist.
        To keep reality, the threat comes only from NATO.
        1. Lipchanin
          Lipchanin 3 February 2021 15: 53
          0
          Quote: yehat2
          it needs to be discussed at the UN

          In this pocket money organization? I'll tell you right away how it will end
          1. yehat2
            yehat2 3 February 2021 15: 58
            +5
            there it is not decisions that are important, but representation.
            I assure you, there are many third countries that constantly hesitate, hear and see the positions of the countries. And if they are silent and do not show their position, smiling mysteriously, they can only believe in what the State Department says. And this will eventually bring results, like surveys in Korea. Who are the Russians? These are evil scumbags who threaten the whole world.
            here is the result of the silence. Even the Japanese, who were bombed by the US with nuclear bombs, burned more than 100 thousand civilians in Tokyo, are still occupying, they are sure that the aggressor is Russia, which has abandoned its zone of occupation in Japan. It is impossible to remain silent, because your position will be voiced all the same, only not you, but your enemies.
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. rocket757
    rocket757 3 February 2021 14: 51
    +2
    "To strengthen collective defense": American B-1B Lancer bombers will be deployed in Norway

    In principle, the tactics are understandable, common for them, for everyone .... we threaten, we shake weapons, etc.
    But why are they surprised, then, that on our tactical maps, crosses are added, exactly in accordance with the existing military-political situation ???
    Their indignation "and we are for sho", as it is not appropriate, and stupid!
  9. askort154
    askort154 3 February 2021 14: 56
    +1
    It is not clear why Norway, a small wealthy state, calls fire on itself for the sake of US ambitions. It seems that the United States, besides the "printing press", has some kind of psycho-weapon for probing the leading elites of the countries they need, and only after retiring, some of them, I begin to understand what it was.
    1. Berber
      Berber 3 February 2021 15: 07
      +2
      There are many levers. The first is green papers, and the last is physical elimination.
  10. Cympak
    Cympak 3 February 2021 15: 12
    -1
    It's good that the Americans don't have that many B-1Bs left. In 2020 there were 59 units, of which 2021 units are planned to be written off in 17.
  11. Old26
    Old26 3 February 2021 17: 13
    +3
    Quote: yehat2
    When did this bomber designed to intercept a powerful stationary (!) air defense system suddenly become an improvement in defense? And why is the Russian Foreign Ministry silent?

    What can the Foreign Ministry say? Norway is a NATO member. They can place something on their territory by agreement with the United States. Like these 4 bombers

    Quote: yehat2
    it needs to be discussed at the UN

    What to discuss? The fact that, under a bilateral agreement, one NATO country is temporarily deploying several aircraft of the other side there? Do you want Russia to look like a laughing stock in the eyes of the whole world?

    Quote: yehat2
    And in the same way, each reinforcement of our troops on the border must be formally tied to a specific threat that the US and NATO have previously created. Not just dryly voicing "We have put the Iskander battery and put it where we want", but add - that's because a specific armored battalion has appeared in Estonia or a new missile defense base in Poland.

    From the same series. Hysteria for every sneeze is not a royal business. And those who post - and so they know what will come in response

    Quote: Cympak
    It's good that the Americans don't have that many B-1Bs left. In 2020 there were 59 units, of which 2021 units are planned to be written off in 17.

    Even with the condition of decommissioning these bombers will be 2,5 times more than our Tu-160
  12. Old26
    Old26 3 February 2021 19: 32
    +3
    Quote: Pragmat ...
    Russia is impatiently awaiting the final transfer of American Lancers to Norway, in order to know which nuclear warhead and how many MGT to send there in case of force majeure!

    ICBMs and SLBMs are not good. And the prospect of hitting "Isander" - so there is a warhead of a kiloton class.
  13. Bear
    Bear 3 February 2021 20: 52
    +2
    Come on, the nearest Russian military base to the border with Norway is 20 km away. Even if you do not "take a steam bath", the time of arrival of the KR to airfields and naval bases is no more than 5 minutes. It's good that the "Sea Wolves" were placed closer, there is less crap to chase after them. And to destroy the missile defense radar - 2 minutes. And for the 61st brigade - a couple of hours of march to the border.
  14. Old26
    Old26 3 February 2021 21: 47
    0
    Quote: Orso
    Come on, the nearest Russian military base to the border with Norway is 20 km away.

    Almost 900 km before the one where the Lancers will be based. For a cruise missile, more than an hour of flight. During this time they will be able to shoot down

    Quote: Orso
    And to destroy the missile defense radar - 2 minutes

    Minimum 5 if not from ship
  15. iouris
    iouris 3 February 2021 22: 39
    0
    This is a violation of the START Treaty.
  16. Evgeny Seleznev
    Evgeny Seleznev 3 February 2021 23: 05
    0
    Can the air defense of the Northern Fleet cope?
  17. Old26
    Old26 3 February 2021 23: 27
    +2
    Quote: iouris
    This is a violation of the START Treaty.

    What do you see as a violation of the contract? B-1B are not strategic carriers after the alteration) and removed from the list of bombers falling under the START
  18. Dainis
    Dainis 3 February 2021 23: 38
    +2
    Those countries that host US bases should know. That in the case of the warriors will be destroyed.
  19. Old26
    Old26 3 February 2021 23: 53
    0
    Quote: Dainis
    Those countries that host US bases should know. That in the case of the warriors will be destroyed.

    Do you think they don't know? But participation in the bloc obliges. As in their time, the countries that were part of the VD understood that, if something happened, the GDR, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland would be among the first to be destroyed. Block strategy costs
  20. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 4 February 2021 09: 13
    +1
    Everything is rapidly heading towards the start of production of MRBMs. And Norway aims to be a target for nuclear strikes. ...
  21. Old26
    Old26 4 February 2021 14: 03
    +2
    Quote: Zaurbek
    Everything is rapidly heading towards the start of production of MRBMs. And Norway aims to be a target for nuclear strikes. ...

    This is not the best option for us now. We'll have to choose: either-or. Or re-equip the Strategic Missile Forces and SSBNs, or start "riveting" the MRBM. The first task is still more pressing. So far, the United States does not even have a blueprint for creating a workable MRBM ...