Russian Flyby of USS Donald Cook in Baltic Sea Alarms Experts

[jimmy olsen]

You'd think the Russians would have learned their lesson after their plane was shot down by the Turks.

Videos and photos within
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russian-flyby-uss-donald-cook-baltic-sea-alarms-experts-n555921

Russian Flyby of USS Donald Cook in Baltic Sea Alarms Experts

A series of extremely low passes by two Russian jets over a U.S. destroyer this week was a dangerous example of brinkmanship by Moscow in what has become an increasingly worrying trend, according to Western analysts.

With the jets coming as close as 30 feet, just one mechanical failure, a pilot error, or a patch of freak turbulence could have caused catastrophe — both for the American sailors and the fragile geopolitical situation, experts warned.

Here's a look at the potential fallout.

What happened?

Two Russian Sukhoi Su-24 fighter jets flew at extremely low altitude over the American guided-missile destroyer USS Donald Cook in the international waters of the Baltic Sea.

Monday's and Tuesday's incidents happened around 70 miles from the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad, which features a city of around 500,000 people near a key military base.


Known as "buzzing" the technique of low flybys was a staple of the Cold War, but this week's maneuvers were so close that even the experts were startled.

"Certainly this is the closest I have seen on video," Keir Giles, an associate fellow at the London-based Chatham House think tank, told NBC News on Thursday. "One of the jets was actually lower than the ship's superstructure."

The ensuing U.S. outcry was dismissed by Russia later on Thursday, with an official saying that "we don't understand such a painful reaction from our American colleagues."

How dangerous was it?

The jets came close enough for the U.S. sailors to see that the aircraft appeared to be unarmed. Nevertheless, flying so close to a warship was still extremely risky.

"Say they had an engine failure or a hydraulic failure, and the Russian jet had barreled into the side of the destroyer, you would have had multiple U.S. Navy casualties and possibly even the loss of a ship," said Justin Bronk, a research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, a British security-research organization.


"That's the sort of thing that starts wars," he added.

Accidents can happen even with modern military technology. But the Russian-built Su-24 came into production more than 40 years ago and the last one rolled off the production line in 1993.

Bronk estimates that the jet came as close as 30 feet to the destroyer, an altitude that was "undeniably extremely aggressive."

For comparison, Federal Aviation Administration regulations say that planes should not fly closer than 500 feet to "any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure" except when landing or taking off.

"The military pushes this closer," according to Bronk, "But you see just how close they got and you think, 'Oh my gosh, that's outrageous.'"

Has it happened before?

The U.S., Russia, and their allies had several similar run-ins during the Cold War.

While relations improved following the fall of the Berlin Wall, a return to hostilities sparked by 2014's political upheaval in Ukraine saw a corresponding spike in military encounters.

A report by the European Leadership Network in Nov. 2014 recorded 40 "sensitive incidents" in the eight months after Ukraine erupted — including Russia conducting mock bombing on the U.S. off the Canadian coast and forcing a Boeing 737 airliner to take evasive action after it came within 300 feet of a spy plane.

"This is an escalating trend," according to Chatham House's Giles. "There have been lots of provocative actions by Russian aircraft, but they have been getting more provocative, more dangerous, and more in breach of safety regulations at sea."

What could the consequences be?

Although it is highly unlikely that either side would open fire, there is scope for the situation to spiral out of control.

Like many of Russia's hair-raising maneuvers, the jets this week appeared to be in breach of the Agreement on the Prevention of Incidents On and Over the High Seas, signed in 1972 by the United States and the Soviet Union.

Among other things, this agreement says that both sides should "use the greatest caution and prudence" when approaching each other, and bans the "performance of various aerobatics over ships."

Not only could ignoring these rules inflame international relations, if anything went wrong it could escalate matters further.

"If you're operating with no margin for error in an extremely tense geopolitical situation, and any error could result in the deaths of lots of sailors, then that's obviously a huge problem," according to Bronk.

Related: NATO, Russia Lock Eyes as Rivals Flex Military Muscle

Short of such an accident, however, it's unlikely that this narrow miss would be enough to spark an exchange of fire between two nations who are not at war, Capt. Rick Hoffman, a retired Navy commanding officer, told the Navy Times.

"Only in 'Top Gun' does a war suddenly break out between two airplanes that is completely not related to something going on ashore," he added. "You don't get to kill people just because they're being annoying."

Does the U.S. bear any responsibility?

The USS Donald Cook was stationed outside Kaliningrad, a Russian exclave sandwiched between NATO members Lithuania and Poland where Moscow deployed state-of-the art Iskander missiles last year

Its proximity was no coincidence, according to Bronk, who said it was "just as calculated by the Americans" as the Russian jet flyby — albeit far less immediately dangerous.

"The Russians do not like the Aegis system anywhere near its airbase," he said, referring to a combat system carried by the Donald Cook that its manufacturer describes as the "world's most advanced combat system."

This all comes against the backdrop of Russian President Vladmir Putin being unhappy about what he sees as a gradual creep by NATO, which in 2004 enveloped the former Soviet republics of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania.

Not everyone agrees.

"The Russians like to equate NATO's defensive maneuvers on a tiny scale to their own enormous preparations for conflict," Giles said. "It's completely disingenuous."

[CountDeMoney]

Alarms experts?  Really? 
And the lesson the Russians are supposed to learn is what, exactly?

Jesus H. Morgenthau Christ...why, it's almost as if the United States Navy hasn't been practicing professional brinksmanship on the open seas since 1947.

[CountDeMoney]

[jimmy olsen]

Alarms experts?  Really? 
And the lesson the Russians are supposed to learn is what, exactly?

That their planes will eventually get shot down if they keep pulling this shit.

[CountDeMoney]

They've been pulling this shit for decades, numbnuts.  And there's no grounds to shoot them down.

Plenty of grounds to beat you with a full colostomy bag, though.

[citizen k]

  And there's no grounds to shoot them down.

Just need to jam their hotdogging asses.

[MadImmortalMan]

You can't kill somebody for just flying by. The jet was clearly unarmed too.

[citizen k]

You can't kill somebody for just flying by. The jet was clearly unarmed too.

They'll think twice if you just jam their electronics.

[Razgovory]

Alarms experts?  Really? 
And the lesson the Russians are supposed to learn is what, exactly?

That their planes will eventually get shot down if they keep pulling this shit.

We've had a thread on this kind of thing before.  Russia does it, China does it, the US does it.  It made headlines yesterday because the Russian miscalculated and nearly hit the ship.  Remember 15 years ago when a Chinese plane played this game with a US spy plane?  The Chinese pilot also miscalculated and ran into the US plane. The American plane was forced to land in China, and the Chinese plane crashed.

[Admiral Yi]

Locking radar might be an appropriate response.

[CountDeMoney]

You can't kill somebody for just flying by. The jet was clearly unarmed too.

They'll think twice if you just jam their electronics.

We'll just go take it out on one of their subs somewhere, and ping the fuck out of it until the crew gets migraines.  Or we'll buzz one of their shitball fire hazards, if they can find one that's ocean-going.  Or we'll sonic boom the shit out of one of their choppers in Syria.

Circle of Life and all that.

[lustindarkness]

That's quite close:

An U.S. Navy picture shows what appears to be a Russian Sukhoi SU-24 attack aircraft making a very low pass close to the U.S. guided missile destroyer USS Donald Cook in the Baltic Sea in this picture taken April 12, 2016 and released April 13, 2016.

Article here:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-simulatedattack-idUSKCN0XA1UW?utm_source=twitter

Tim has not started a thread on this. Yet.

[MadImmortalMan]

One sonic boom only, Yevgeni.

[citizen k]

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/apr/14/john-kerry-russian-military-incident-us-warship-baltic-sea

"We condemn this kind of behavior. It is reckless. It is provocative. It is dangerous. And under the rules of engagement that could have been a shoot-down,"

[derspiess]

See, that's what should have been said in the first place. Not that limp-wristed statement the White House made.