This could have gotten out of hand fast!

[Dr. Pain]

Bloody lucky it didn't, stupid Russians buzzing USS Donald Cook.

[wobblysauce]

I am sure they would of liked to 'test' the Anti-Air.

[smithcorp]

Here's a time when it did get out of hand.

http://theaviationist.com/2016/04/14/th ... t-carrier/

[Dr. Pain]

She does have 2 20mm Phalanx CIWS so could have shredded those SU -24

[J.D.]

The Phalanx is only a last resort. Air defence destroyers - of which I think this is one - carry missiles with much greater range and accuracy. Which reminds, me; here's another example of where it went wrong:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

[smithcorp]

I'm pretty sure the Yanks have done this to the Russians on many occasions too.

[smithcorp]

The Phalanx is only a last resort. Air defence destroyers - of which I think this is one - carry missiles with much greater range and accuracy. Which reminds, me; here's another example of where it went wrong:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

I was in Iran almost a decade after this and it was remarkable just how angry Iranian people still were over this (in my view they were right to be angry).

[Dr. Pain]

The Phalanx is only a last resort. Air defence destroyers - of which I think this is one - carry missiles with much greater range and accuracy. Which reminds, me; here's another example of where it went wrong:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

Yeah Phalanx is only good for 2.5 to 3 kms if I remember, just in case something does get past the missile defence. But it would be interesting to know if the Phalanx can turn at speed with something so close.

[J.D.]

The Phalanx is only a last resort. Air defence destroyers - of which I think this is one - carry missiles with much greater range and accuracy. Which reminds, me; here's another example of where it went wrong:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

I was in Iran almost a decade after this and it was remarkable just how angry Iranian people still were over this (in my view they were right to be angry).

It's worth reading the follow up story. The captain of the Vincennes, who had shown signs of being hyper aggressive when prudence was needed, did not end up going out in the style he might have expected. Despite the findings of a number of inquiries, he was publicly lauded but privately humiliated. On his return from duty, h was given some sort of decoration but then transferred to a training unit and not promoted, as is the norm. Most Captains get to retire as a Rear Admiral and collect the appropriate pension but I think he actually retired as a captain.

[J.D.]

There is an unsubstantiated rumour that these jets were unarmed but equipped with a system called Khibini, an electronic warfare weapon, basically an advanced jammer. The system has been mooted for quite a while now and there was a rumour that a similar series of passes against a US ship in 2014 left them totally blinded. Those who want to believe it will do so and those who don't won't. The Pentagon is saying very little, the rumour mill is in full swing and there is a fair bit of dick wagging on both sides. The official sources have said next to nothing and the bloggers are putting it out there and blaming the mainstream media (who showed little interest in it). Official sources have left it for the bloggers to argue out and the bravado and machismo on this is beyond childish. The US fanbois say nothing happened or it doesn't do anything and they would have made good target practice (except that everyone was on deck watching) and the Russia fanbois are claiming everyone was shitting themselves (except that everyone was on deck watching). After the 2014 incident, it was reported that the ship immediately went to port and a number of sailors requested long term leave.

[c.j]

It would be enough to dent morale. If you're exclusion zone is supposed to be "set distance" miles and you get buzzed by a foreign super power and your military does nothing then it would certainly make the common sailor ask "what the fuck?". They should have lazed the aircraft with every system available. Not shoot at it unless they felt they were in absolute danger but that is pretty much crossing the limit.

On the ground, we have an exclusion. It is advertised, it is common knowledge. You have to use your judgement, but there is an exclusion zone from our vehicles and especially the comms/oc car. If you want to come inside that space your are putting your life at risk. If the common goat herder can understand that, surely the pilot of a jet aircraft would understand the set of rules.

I'd have blown Ivan out of the sky if he encroached on my boat.

[Dr. Pain]

But if that aircraft did carrying jamming equipment and it worked, then some of the AA defence would not be able to track it. Missiles need guidance when they launch.

It was smart thinking by the captain not to engage though.

[Jamo]

This stuff has gone on constantly since the Korean War. Definitely nothing new here. Christ I remember seeing footage of a couple of Tomcats doing simultaneous slow rolls around a Bear. Fucking hell that could of ended in disaster.

[c.j]

But if that aircraft did carrying jamming equipment and it worked, then some of the AA defence would not be able to track it. Missiles need guidance when they launch.

It was smart thinking by the captain not to engage though.

I get that, but they still have a manual fire capability. Not with missiles, the aircraft looked within range of AA direct fire.

I disagree. I understand when restraint is in order. Been there done that. In this instance I would have dropped him, unless the order came from above.

[J.D.]

I suppose it depends on whether or not the crew believed the Su's were flying an attack profile.

[c.j]

For sure. So what was the intent? Even Jamming a warship is an act of aggression. You are intentionally removing a defensive capability of a war ship. It could be the measure of the captain that he did not fire on the aircraft because he understood the intent better than anybody else. But this isn't tiddly winks or checkers.

But what it says is that Russia has the flex to move in and act on US Navy/NATO forces, however they see fit.

My point is the Navy and just about every other force has a no go zone. And they need to enforce it to the letter. The moment there is grey area in that intent is when things go bad quickly. Doubt in your subordinates about when to and when not to act is a very bad thing to encourage in a military force.

I stand by my comment. I would have blown him away. Not for pride or for to measure the shadow of my dick in the afternoon sunlight. But to protect the people and the asset.

Luckily I guess for the US Navy, I was never employed by them in that capacity.