Moscow struck training strikes on US missile defense facilities

78
Moscow struck training strikes on US missile defense facilities

Russian strategic bombers Tu-22M imitated strikes with cruise missiles at a number of US missile defense systems in the Asia-Pacific region. One of the targets was the American warship, which is located off the coast of Japan.

“Russia continues aggressive offensive exercises in the Pacific against the United States and its allies,” said retired Air Force Lieutenant General Tom McInerney. - You need to understand that they look at the "reset" is not the way we do. They perceived it as the return of the former status of a superpower, as under the USSR, and our administration is striving for unilateral disarmament. ”

The Pentagon refuses to comment on the incident in any way, reports InoTV. The American side wonders what caused this operation. However, this means that Russia is aiming at US missile defense facilities, which, due to the tension in the DPRK, were brought on high alert.

Russia does not hold such exercises for the first time. Moreover, such operations almost always coincide with political events. Now Washington is linking the exercise with the upcoming visit of American national security adviser to the president, Thomas Donilon, to Moscow. He will come to Russia to resume talks on missile defense.

Recently, Pentagon chief Chuck Hagel announced that missile systems would be deployed in Poland as part of the European missile defense system. These systems will protect against short-range and medium-range missiles, rather than intercontinental ballistic missiles, as previously planned. The US military explained that the decision was made in connection with budget cuts in the country and a reassessment of the threat posed by the DPRK.
Our news channels

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

78 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +22
    April 8 2013 13: 18
    The American side is perplexed at what caused such an operation.

    Perhaps the deployment of missile defense facilities along the perimeter of the borders of the Russian Federation? smile
    Unless, of course, such exercises were carried out.
    1. VAF
      VAF
      +16
      April 8 2013 13: 35
      Quote: Bronis
      Perhaps the deployment of missile defense facilities along the perimeter of the borders of the Russian Federation?


      If it is to "send" the Tu-22M3 to the missile defense objects along the perimeter of the borders of the Russian Federation, and even as in the photo in the article with the FAB-3000M54, then they are there and ... will stay ... forever!
      And the X-22 missiles for these purposes ... are not adapted. If only with YaBCH!

      And so only on ships with Aegis! And then without air cover. And if the goals (missile defense ships will stand within 300-400 km from their territory, then ... and there will be .. sadness!
      1. +3
        April 8 2013 13: 53
        Yes, my impression is that even if it was, then the action was purely political, without emphasis on real effectiveness from a military point of view. The same "Iskander" is not a response specifically to the US missile defense, but to the US itself and satellites (politics). The standard Iskander missiles will not be able to hit half of the anti-missile defense facilities in Europe in range, and the missile defense missile systems are not very fast in terms of speed characteristics - they will have time for the shapash analysis.
        For the same Tu-22M - Japan is the best "aircraft carrier" for the United States. There they have quite a lot of combat aircraft concentrated. And the self-defense forces will not remain on the sidelines ... The conclusions are clear - the Tu-22M has little chance, especially considering their number. More chances for SSGNs. But even this on condition that we start the war ...
        1. +3
          April 8 2013 14: 39
          Why did our foreign bosom friends raise such a howl? Or is their destroyer with missile defense systems a cruise liner, on which it is not like a boy to "work out" ?!
        2. VAF
          VAF
          +4
          April 8 2013 17: 32
          Quote: Bronis
          Yes, my impression is that if it was, then the action is purely political,


          Yes, this is not a single action, but ordinary scheduled route flights, with training tactical launches, and the amers raised a howl just to ... raise it.

          And in general, this is a PRO .. a complete hat .. a divorce for suckers, here are some of our leaders .. "are underway."

          And why hit the Iskander missile defense facilities ???? Only PSU translate.

          With the second part of komenta (WHERE ABOUT THE Aircraft Carrier) I AGREE!

          1. +2
            April 8 2013 19: 56
            And in general, this is a PRO .. a complete hat .. a divorce for suckers, here are some of our leaders .. "are underway."

            By itself and in its current form - yes, still a hat hi But potentially a thing can become dangerous (a question of time and cost). Especially when combined with Rapid Global Strike. However, over the past 30 years, they have been thrown and resumed many times ... with notorious results. Here, to a large extent, there are traditional "American complexes" - the thirst for invulnerability of their territory. Even imaginary. Politics is the same. At the same time, the same radars located in Europe are, in fact, an early warning system. And this is a competitive advantage - they will see earlier, calculate where the gift will fly. The main thing in countering the American strategy is the development of an early warning missile system both in terms of ballistic missiles and the CD. And the presence of a sufficient number of hard-to-hit carriers for a retaliatory counter / retaliatory strike - SSBN, BZHRK, "Yarsov", etc.
            The main thing is that in order to successfully complete the missile defense mission, it must be many times greater than the enemy's strategic nuclear forces. And in this situation, you can stay without pants ... expensive and technically difficult.
            1. Land
              0
              7 May 2013 20: 26
              In your article, everything is "encrypted" - some abbreviations. For example, I realized that you are well, very in the subject! Only, not really, divulge all the secrets. The enemy is cunning and cunning !!! ABVGD YOZHI ICL!
      2. Don
        +3
        April 8 2013 14: 09
        Quote: vaf
        And the X-22 missiles for these purposes ... are not adapted. If only with YaBCH!

        And the X-55 on the Tu-22 can not be placed? Or are they only for the Tu-160 and Tu-95?
        1. +5
          April 8 2013 14: 12
          Exactly. X-55 is not RCC. It is very difficult for her to destroy the destroyer ... But X-22 was created precisely for this.
          1. VAF
            VAF
            +2
            April 8 2013 17: 47
            Quote: Bronis
            X-55 is not RCC.


            This is true, but on its basis it was designed and tested exactly as the anti-ship missile system. It’s called the X-65, but the truth is that it still doesn’t exist in the troops, and the warhead like the X-22 (a hundred kilograms less, though) is still for the destroyer or cruiser URO quite .. enough !!!

            1. +1
              April 8 2013 21: 47
              By the way, the range of the X-65 seems to be less than its "strategic" counterpart. Something in the region of 500 km.
        2. VAF
          VAF
          +3
          April 8 2013 17: 38
          Quote: Don
          And the X-55 on the Tu-22 can not be placed? Or are they only for the Tu-160 and Tu-95?


          No, you can’t unfortunately .. firstly, constructively, and secondly ... BEBO does not allow it!

          The experimental work was ... hang on the 4th under the plane, but ... so they remained in ... conception!

          So only X-22, well, before X-15th (in the belly)!

          1. +3
            April 8 2013 21: 21
            Quote: vaf
            No, you can’t unfortunately .. firstly, constructively, and secondly ... BEBO does not allow it!


            Sergei! I heard such a thing that they are going to upgrade it under the KR X-32 and then he will not have to enter the air defense zone as in Georgia. The tests of the X-32 anti-ship missiles were successful already in the late 90s. Long-range aviation worked here in conjunction with the sailors: they willingly gave their old vessels for firing. And what? In the early 2000s, everything stalled! X-32 is still not in service. And for Tu = shek she is just good!
            1. VAF
              VAF
              +1
              April 9 2013 00: 40
              Quote: Ascetic
              I heard such a thing that they are going to upgrade it under the KR X-32


              Hi Stanislav! I heard the same thing from my ear, but ... no more. and even more so. that no one really saw her in the army at all.
              In 2004 I was at the anniversary of our division. just in Shaikovka. I talked with the guys from the "Long" regiment .. the same picture .. not even by hearing.
              And in general .. in my opinion this is a "duck", tk. the principle of operation of the GOS for her is not clear at all ... the PNA simply does not see at such a distance, and the control center from the satellite, so there are no such satellites yet, and by the time they appear, the planes will already be released ... "age"!
              By the way, all the photos in this article from the Tu-22m3 are just all Shaikovsky (November-December 2012) as you can see only the X-22'e!
      3. -1
        April 8 2013 16: 40
        You can sometimes be difficult to understand. Why dots, omissions?
    2. +7
      April 8 2013 14: 33
      It is as if NATO itself is training on cats ... The same is practicing an attack on military facilities in Russia ... innocence itself, at a loss they are ... hypocrites!
      1. 0
        April 8 2013 16: 26
        Apparently, the message was about the US destroyer of the Arly Burke project with the Aegis system, upgraded to the ability to solve missile defense problems, and not just traditional air defense.
      2. +3
        April 8 2013 16: 57
        First: the Tu-22M has never been a strategic bomber.
        Secondly: in the picture the FAB and not the KR.
        Third: the retired general came up with a new type of exercises - "aggressive offensive", and he probably spent the entire service "peace-loving retreat".
        Fourth: Thomas Donilon in connection with such an erection, oh sorry - Washington’s reaction is to gather not in Moscow, but in Burkina Faso and there to hang up noodles about the missile defense designation, because by definition such hysterical idiots can’t be negotiated by definition.
    3. 0
      April 9 2013 10: 27
      It was carried out more than once ... a fool would have become clear what was happening ...
  2. +4
    April 8 2013 13: 19
    This news has already been
  3. +1
    April 8 2013 13: 19
    It is very interesting who it can get to Poland with short- and medium-range missiles. After all, this missile defense is not directed against Russia in any way. Probably Transnistria was chosen as the likely aggressor.
  4. Vtel
    +2
    April 8 2013 13: 20
    Recently, Pentagon chief Chuck Hagel said that missile systems would be deployed in Poland as part of the European missile defense system. These systems will protect against short- and medium-range missiles, rather than intercontinental ballistic missiles.

    Yes, in Poland there are a lot of kosher ponds, we will rub our ears with pshek, that all this is for our own good.
  5. +16
    April 8 2013 13: 22
    Bringing the US missile defense facilities into combat readiness in connection with the actions of the DPRK gives us a unique opportunity to identify these objects and practice their destruction. It was a sin not to take advantage of this! Well done !!!
    1. +7
      April 8 2013 13: 30
      Absolutely right! Not every day there are such flashes, but we really need to train!
    2. VAF
      VAF
      +3
      April 8 2013 13: 31
      Quote: treskoed
      gives us a unique opportunity to identify these objects and practice in their destruction.


      And what identify them then? belay they have long been all .. "identified" and Amerovskie and Djumpovskie! bully
      1. +3
        April 8 2013 13: 45
        And what to identify them then? belay they have long been all .. "revealed" and Amerovskie and Jumpovskie!

        Moreover, most likely, the complex exercises with a probability of 147% under water, the mineral carrier also reached the launch line.
    3. Bashkaus
      0
      April 8 2013 20: 22
      And where is the guarantee that the "Zulu dances" around Eun are not a hidden preparation for an attack on Russia?
      What are we? we just labeled "guys, do not fuss, the miracle shield that gives +100 protection in this case will not fail.
  6. +4
    April 8 2013 13: 30
    I hope there was massive diarrhea on the American ship laughing
    1. dmitry46
      +3
      April 8 2013 13: 32
      and then massive constipation! laughing
    2. +5
      April 8 2013 13: 33
      Quote: Alexander Romanov
      I hope there was massive diarrhea on the American ship

      - Well, just a little trolling amers on this topic, like rockets and bombs streaming onto their heads, is possible and even necessary. That would be in good shape were remembered that they are not the only ones on the planet who can bombard the enemy with bombs at most do not indulge! laughing
      1. WWW.budanov
        +1
        April 8 2013 14: 50
        And I think, why are the amers in August 2008 brought in for transport on the upper deck transport non-paper rolls of paper?
      2. vilenich
        +1
        April 8 2013 15: 15
        Quote: aksakal
        Well, just a little troll amers on this topic

        Yes, it probably won’t stop muscles from playing!
      3. +4
        April 8 2013 15: 27
        aksakal

        It was necessary to fly past them throwing plush toys on them Yes That would be citizens s not spoiled laughing
        1. +1
          April 10 2013 11: 33
          Greetings to all, for Krapovoy32, thank you, laughed laughing
  7. Melchakov
    +1
    April 8 2013 13: 36
    Something recently often began to repeat articles. what
  8. Logician
    +2
    April 8 2013 13: 46
    that is, we carried out this "bombing" during the period of their full combat readiness?
    1. Bashkaus
      +1
      April 8 2013 20: 41
      I realized that YES. No, of course, ours can also be taken aback, but still it’s especially nice here
  9. edge731
    +1
    April 8 2013 13: 48
    Air Force Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney. - You need to understand that they look at the "reboot" not like us.
    General, let's call a spade a spade - not "reloading" - but OVERLOADING ... How do you call a boat - so it will float ...
  10. +1
    April 8 2013 13: 49
    ))))) The retired general issued a "pearl". Probably I learned from Eun!)))))))
    1. SSR
      +3
      April 8 2013 14: 06
      “Russia continues aggressive offensive exercises in the Pacific against the United States and its allies,” says retired Air Force Lieutenant General Tom McInerney. - You need to understand that they look at the "reboot" not like us.

      Really Pearl)))
      But they are all vector people .. and everyone gives out their pearl ..
  11. Logician
    +1
    April 8 2013 14: 06
    as they say obosratushki-pryatryushki !!! laughing
  12. vmnss
    +4
    April 8 2013 14: 08
    How long has the Tu-22M become strategic?
    1. Bashkaus
      +1
      April 8 2013 20: 42
      In general, let’s say this, he ceased to be it when they cut down the dose adjustment system ((
  13. +1
    April 8 2013 14: 17
    Quote: vmnss
    How long has the Tu-22M become strategic?

    From this morning.
  14. +2
    April 8 2013 14: 17
    Quote: vmnss
    How long has the Tu-22M become strategic?

    From this morning.
  15. +2
    April 8 2013 14: 26
    Another thing is interesting. What is the likelihood that the Tu-22M3 will be able to really deliver such attacks, given that even in Georgia it was shot down?
    1. +1
      April 8 2013 14: 37
      Quote: 1976AG
      that even in Georgia was shot down?

      Yes, even Macedonia or Albania ..... if there is an air defense system and trained people, then you can’t do without losses in the air (unless of course you destroy super precision bombs or missiles, or with a sabotage group.) The percentage of losses is even put into the exercises.
      1. +1
        April 8 2013 15: 12
        Percent loss? If Georgia’s air defense was shot down, then it seems that not a single one will break through NATO’s air defense.
        1. +3
          April 8 2013 15: 29
          Quote: 1976AG
          then it seems like no one will break through NATO’s air defense.

          God forbid, bring the situation to such an extent that it breaks through NATO air defense, and yes, if a situation like this happens, then most likely the NATO air force will break through Russia’s air defense, rather than vice versa sad
  16. +3
    April 8 2013 14: 30
    We must also "screech" smile raise, for example: about the exercises of the Georgian army - they are rehearsing a blow to Moscow, or an increase in the military budget of the Balts is interpreted as preparation for the seizure of the Pskov region. Let them justify themselves. Although they c ... s in the eyes, everything is "God's dew".
    But seriously - everything is correct. Sweat is better than blood. The readiness of the Armed Forces should be such that any aggressor, even more powerful, having estimated the possible results, immediately abandons the desire to stick to someone else’s pie.
  17. 0
    April 8 2013 14: 31
    Yes, what are they pissed off. Discussed at each of our teachings.
    1. 0
      April 8 2013 14: 55
      to the joy of the proctel and gamble company with their diapers ...
    2. +1
      April 8 2013 15: 26
      Yes, they are not pissed off, but you are the standard of naivety.
  18. +2
    April 8 2013 14: 53
    And when did the Tu-22M become a strategic bomber? The article is unprofessional.
  19. +2
    April 8 2013 14: 58
    If the Tu-22 really simulated attacks on missile defense bases and ships, then the Americans are silent about it and not screaming all over the world. Because it turns out their missile defense is not able to respond to the plane, because they needed to collect and analyze intelligence. data to establish the fact of simulated attacks. And if there wasn’t any imitation, then there shouldn’t be any conversations. The fact of this statement is another shot in the information war.
    In October 2000, on October 17, 2 Russian SU-24 reconnaissance aircraft were photographed by the American Kitty Hawk strike peacekeeper with such detail that welds were visible on his deck, not to mention the admiral resting in a chaise lounge. One of the aircraft even made an imitation landing. And our pilots sent pictures to the site of this carrier of democracy with untranslatable expressions. So about this Americans are not much spread.
    1. +1
      April 8 2013 15: 03
      Quote: Canep
      If the Tu-22 really simulated attacks on missile defense bases and ships, then the Americans are silent about it and not screaming all over the world. Because it turns out their missile defense is not able to respond to the plane, because they needed to collect and analyze intelligence. data to establish the fact of simulated attacks.


      TU 22 could not do absolutely anything with a missile defense if he wanted to. Yes, and he is not a strategist (TU 22)
      1. 0
        April 8 2013 15: 21
        and who then? Front-line attack aircraft? and why can’t they destroy the missile defense? A supersonic long-range bomber-missile bomber ------ will it work like that?
      2. 0
        April 8 2013 15: 33
        According to Wikipedia, how else can
        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D5-15
      3. +4
        April 8 2013 21: 05
        Quote: Manager
        TU 22 could not do absolutely anything with a missile defense if he wanted to. Yes, and he is not a strategist (TU 22)

        And on the ultra small? lol

        1. VAF
          VAF
          0
          April 9 2013 01: 06
          Quote: Ascetic
          And on the ultra small?



          Stanislav, these are the Volchary passages in Soltsy, it was beautiful ... it was actually 8-10 meters, but nothing can be dropped from this height (the X-22 has a drawdown after the cordon of 300-400 meters until the starting engine reaches the mode, well and the bombs .. you understand ... even with the TR will not work, but just with a slowdown, so it will jump like a frog or a pebble like a pancake and will fly back into the bomb bay "!

          This film is completely ... how he prepared and came out ... without cuts. It is more interesting here, because. clearly all the moments with missiles and in the ranks and under ... "control and support"!

          [media=ТУ-22М3.%20ПОЛЁТЫ%20НА%20ПМВ%20(%20ПРЕСТУПНО%20-%20МАЛОЙ%20ВЫСОТЕ%20)]
        2. VAF
          VAF
          0
          April 9 2013 01: 10
          Stanislav, these are the Volchary passages in Soltsy, it was beautiful ... it was actually 8-10 meters, but nothing can be dropped from such a height (the X-22 has a drawdown after the cordon of 300-400 meters until the starting engine reaches the mode, well and the bombs .. you understand ... even with the TR will not work, but just with a slowdown, so it will jump like a frog or a pebble like a pancake and will fly back into the bomb bay "!

          This film is completely ... how he prepared and came out ... without cuts. It is more interesting here, because. clearly all the moments with missiles and in the ranks and under ... "control and support"!

        3. VAF
          VAF
          0
          April 9 2013 01: 15
          [media=http://video.yandex.ru/#search?text=Ютуб%20Ту-22М3%20полёты%20на%20ПМВ%20
          (crime-low% 20 high) & filmId = 269CTQoc8gE]
    2. 0
      April 8 2013 20: 46
      Quote: Canep
      In October 2000, on October 17, two Russian SU-2 reconnaissance aircraft were photographed for the American Kitty Hawk strike peacekeeper

      And so what ? If it had a combat alert and all the planes were raised, and Su 24 broke through, then I understand that it was damn hard to do. And there is nothing outstanding to fly over a peacefully marching aircraft carrier in peacetime, something that fellows found.
    3. stjrm
      0
      April 10 2013 12: 32
      Uv. Sainer! According to the agreements signed between us and the Americans, it seems in the 70s, the agreement "On measures to prevent ... at sea ..." Forgive me the full name ... It is forbidden for aircraft to descend when passing over ships below 600 meters, hover over the deck, simulate an attack, cross the ship's course in close proximity at low altitudes ... and there is more and more ...
      If, as you say, there would be an emulation of a landing or something like that, I assure you that there would always be a note of their State Department to our Foreign Ministry .... smile

      Well, the fact that they took place in the immediate vicinity of the aircraft carrier took pictures, even the fact that the Americans seemed to have missed the approach of air reconnaissance - maybe .....
  20. 0
    April 8 2013 14: 59
    Air Force Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney. - You need to understand that they look at the "reboot" not like us. They perceived it as a return to the former status of a superpower, as under the USSR, and our administration is striving for unilateral disarmament ”

    We need to call a spade a spade, "we ran out of money and the budget is bursting at the seams, a dollar is just a piece of paper, we can’t compete with you" This is how it should sound, otherwise it cures about a reset.
  21. ABV
    +1
    April 8 2013 15: 12
    what a news! super! the news, of course, is good, it’s been going on for 3 days all over the Internet ...
    with the efficiency of US fans of the site!
    this is not trolling, this is sadness ...
  22. 0
    April 8 2013 15: 14
    It was a hint. Such a thick hint. The X-55 is certainly good, but the Russian Federation has a cooler device. And when the generals are asked what we can oppose to a potential enemy, these generals begin to bitterly complain about underfunding and so on, but at the same time, somehow In general, I personally got the impression that lately, when the military begins to sob about the lack of weapons, this suggests that a new deadly toy has appeared with which it is very desirable to play with. In fact, Mr. VVP once proclaimed the concept of asymmetric responses. As noted one of the respected members of the forum can not get Iskander missiles everywhere, and I completely agree. But I draw his attention to the Russian complex "club k" and its derivatives koi just easily solve the problem of breaking any missile defense system and not only. But this is my personal opinion and not the fact that it is true.
  23. +1
    April 8 2013 15: 52
    In general, where is the infa from? Is there evidence from official sources?
  24. 0
    April 8 2013 16: 25
    Well, I took this Old from Interfax, after googling North American news. Here is my link http://www.interfax.ru/world/news.asp?id=299846
  25. irka_65. irina
    0
    April 8 2013 16: 44
    lol Well, nothing, it’s useful to pee amers and boiling water, otherwise they feel very invincible.
  26. e-froloff
    0
    April 8 2013 16: 51
    There is nothing wrong with that. We need such teachings as air. Everything is within the bounds of generally accepted rules.
  27. +4
    April 8 2013 16: 52
    “Russia continues aggressive offensive exercises in the Pacific against the United States and its allies,” said retired Air Force Lieutenant General Tom McInerney. - You need to understand that they look at the "reset" is not the way we do. They perceived it as the return of the former status of a superpower, as under the USSR, and our administration is striving for unilateral disarmament. ”


    - Is it really WE who are looking at a reboot not like us?
    - Is it WE DO NOT comply with all UN conventions?
    “Is it really WE putting missile defense systems near their borders?”
    - Is it really WE who are trying to constantly destabilize the political, economic and other situations in the USA and other countries?
    - Is it really WE trying to impose our policies on other states?
    - Is it WE arrange local conflicts around the globe?

    - Guys! I can not vouch for myself, in which case =))
    - You always give such teachings !!!
  28. WS
    +3
    April 8 2013 17: 07
    Study, study and study again ! Let them practice.
  29. redwar6
    +1
    April 8 2013 18: 02
    Quote: LaGlobal
    “Russia continues aggressive offensive exercises in the Pacific against the United States and its allies,” said retired Air Force Lieutenant General Tom McInerney. - You need to understand that they look at the "reset" is not the way we do. They perceived it as the return of the former status of a superpower, as under the USSR, and our administration is striving for unilateral disarmament. ”


    - Is it really WE who are looking at a reboot not like us?
    - Is it WE DO NOT comply with all UN conventions?
    “Is it really WE putting missile defense systems near their borders?”
    - Is it really WE who are trying to constantly destabilize the political, economic and other situations in the USA and other countries?
    - Is it really WE trying to impose our policies on other states?
    - Is it WE arrange local conflicts around the globe?

    - Guys! I can not vouch for myself, in which case =))
    - You always give such teachings !!!
    I totally agree, it's never too late to learn!)
  30. +2
    April 8 2013 19: 17
    And interestingly, in a real war, would the American missile defense system allow a real strike, not a training strike by enemy aircraft against its own system? Could these aircraft be able to fly at least within the range of their missile launch? You can imitate anything you want and then laugh wildly at the "stupid Americans". Himself somehow participated in the imitation of the enemy air attack on the exercises West 81 and observed the dashing actions of real fighter aircraft and air defense systems to repel this simulated raid. She was already shivering. True, it was noticed that 3/4 / of the control systems of air defense and air defense units simply "stuck" at the most interesting moment, and the control of the air force and air defense units was carried out via voice communication according to the "hear-control" principle. It didn't work to see. So imitation is a good thing, of course, so that the enemy doesn’t click and watch for nothing, you know. Still, to be ready for real. I, of course, wildly apologize for some of the negative in my comment, but it's better negative now, and positive later than vice versa.
    1. 0
      April 8 2013 20: 31
      Quote: gregor6549
      But would it be interesting in a real war that the American missile defense would allow delivering a real, rather than training, strike by enemy planes in its system?

      You big + All of these imitations are complete nonsense. I also want to imagine how the Tu-22M passes air defense and enemy fighters, when the Avax (track everything in a radius of 400 km) in the air or what they have there in service to control airspace, I think there will be a sad outcome for this venture (
      1. 0
        April 9 2013 09: 06
        In addition to AWACS, the United States and its allies have a host of other means of early detection and warning of an air attack, including over-the-horizon radars, satellite detection systems, fighter radars capable of exchanging data on the network, and much more, which allows the Americans to build a multilayer air defense / missile defense system and carry out interception lines at a considerable distance from the protected objects. So, for AUG, such boundaries can be carried out at a distance of up to 1500 km and more from the AUG core (aircraft carrier). In addition, it is necessary to distinguish between the degree of readiness of air defense and missile defense systems in peacetime and in a threatened or wartime period. An example of this is the current events on the Korean Peninsula, when even the not entirely justified threats of North Korea to deliver a nuclear strike against US military bases in the Pacific region "put on the ears" of everyone involved in the US air defense and missile defense and its allies in this region. One can recall the recent conflict between Israel and the Palestinians from the Gaza Strip, when all Israel's air defense and missile defense systems were in a state of full combat readiness and, in principle, coped with their task quite well.
        And detecting, tracking and intercepting small targets such as Katyusha shells is still a much more difficult task for air defense / missile defense than intercepting strategic bombers with a full load. You can also give other examples of how the American and Soviet soldiers fooled each other and what came of it. And it came out in different ways and with varying success. It also came to the "ramming" strikes of the USSR nuclear submarines on the US aircraft carrier due to the mutual carelessness of their crews. They are people and people in Africa and it will be difficult for them to "watch" all the time. According to my observations, a person is only enough for a couple of hours of intense "vigil" after which he is drawn to sleep or to beer and cigarettes. And automatics are not yet able to completely replace a person in air defense / missile defense systems, and they do not allow it to be replaced. A person makes decisions at all stages of detection, tracking and interception of air targets in such systems. This is an axiom. Departure from this rule of death is like
    2. Don
      0
      April 10 2013 13: 17
      Quote: gregor6549
      But would it be interesting in a real war that the American missile defense would allow delivering a real, rather than training, strike by enemy planes in its system? Would you be able to fly these planes at least to the range of their missiles?

      If you mean the attack of a missile cruiser of the type "Ticonderoga" or "Arly Burke" then you really could, in principle, as well as missile defense in Poland. Only with accompaniment.
  31. +5
    April 8 2013 20: 33
    A bit of humor
    This story happened during the time of the ardent friendship of the USSR and Cuba.
    Then, our long-range strategic Tu-95 bombers regularly circled around Cuba and did aerial photography of everything that is possible, and what is impossible, too. By the way, the Americans in this area kept their warships, including several aircraft carriers.
    So, one Tu-95 flies over the ocean (By the way, who does not know what the Tu-95 is: it is a huge colossus, with a wingspan of about 50 meters - wider than the deck of an aircraft carrier, with 4-healthy engines and 8-th 3-meter screws), flies nobody touches, and an American interceptor flies up to him from the side (just at the Tu-95 course there was a state aircraft carrier).
    The pilot showed the signs “open the bomb gate” (you never know, suddenly there is a bomb near the carcass and he flies to sink his airfield). Our pilots opened him a bomb gate. The pilot flew up from below, seeing that there was nothing there except for the camera, calmed down. Again, catching up with the carcass, he smiled, winked, and then showed the belly of his plane along with air-to-air missiles, to which the carcass menacingly turned its 8 guns (exchange of courtesies, so to speak). But the pilot did not calm down and decided to joke - he showed the command "Sit down!".
    Our asked again:
    “Sit down ?!”
    - “Yes!”
    - “to an aircraft carrier ?!”
    - “Yes!”
    “Ok,” the Russians said, and on approaching the aircraft carrier they went to land ...
    But how did they go on landing ... ..
    Reduced altitude and speed ... put forward all their flaps and slats .... They lifted their nose ....
    They even released the chassis !!!
    So the American sailors, seeing that now this colossus will sit on them and leave the deck from the deck, planes, people and buildings, started to jump into the water !! And the height is unpleasant - from about 9-story building. Ours of course did not sit down, and at the last moment turned to the side and flew at the minimum height to hide from enemy locators.
    1. 0
      April 8 2013 21: 03
      Hurray to our pilots!
    2. mamba
      0
      April 9 2013 10: 13
      Quote: SVL23
      But how did they go on landing ... ..
      Reduced altitude and speed ... put forward all their flaps and slats .... They lifted their nose ....
      They even released the chassis !!!

      Like this:

      But aerial hooliganism sometimes ends badly:
    3. +2
      April 10 2013 06: 10
      Nice anecdote. But this could not be by definition, since outside the borders of the US airspace or their bases in other countries, American pilots had no right to force foreign aircraft to land. Fly next to me please. Demonstrate your weapons as much as you like, but no more. since during such "joint flights" everyone tried not to cross a certain line beyond which a completely real, and not simulated, battle could begin, followed by escalation to a full-scale war. Moreover, if the attack was simulated on a nuclear weapon carrier, which was TU95. Well, the invitation to board an aircraft carrier and the acceptance of such an invitation testifies to the complete moronism of both the American and Soviet pilots, and they did not suffer from this then and are unlikely to suffer now. And the last thing. Even if the TU95 had started landing, it would hardly have flown to the landing deck, because aircraft carriers and other warships have the so-called. "NO GO" zone, violation of the boundaries of which is considered as the fact of attack, followed by the immediate use of all possible means of destruction. And both the aircraft carrier and the accompanying ships have more than enough of them, especially against such a "fat" and low-speed "carcass", into which only the lazy will not fall during its landing approach.
  32. demon
    0
    April 9 2013 09: 27
    Bravo! Bravo! Bravo!
  33. stjrm
    0
    April 10 2013 12: 12
    Yeah, but Washington conditionally repelled these same blows ....... smile
  34. Stalinist
    0
    April 16 2013 12: 11
    All the dots above the "I" have already been placed and we need to learn to smile dazzlingly (and more often am ) Yankees with a decent club behind their back so that diarrhea becomes chronic.
  35. WOTP
    0
    April 18 2013 19: 25
    Quote: evgenii67
    Quote: 1976AG
    then it seems like no one will break through NATO’s air defense.

    God forbid, bring the situation to such an extent that it breaks through NATO air defense, and yes, if a situation like this happens, then most likely the NATO air force will break through Russia’s air defense, rather than vice versa sad

    Quote: iblis
    Bravo! Bravo! Bravo!

    Amateurs, stop writing nonsense! ...

"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"