It looks like the rebels have destroyed one of the Russian rescue helicopters - using a TOW missile.
This is going to get very messy quickly!

 

luckily I am too old for conscription

 

All (old) hands to the pumps!!!

 

The Antony Beevor book "Stalingrad" is an epic read while the estimates for this battle alone are staggering. Vasily Zaysev was a famous propaganda tool used at the time.

It estimates the Russians lost 40% killed/missing and 60% casualties from the 1.2 million troops and civilains involved. The Germany lost about 850,000 from themselves and allied Hungarians, Romanians and Italians soldiers. This was from the complete offencive through the city battle to the end.

Pretty small fry compared to Assad and his cronies.

 

i'll second Stalingrad - epic book

btw it is zaitsev or zaytsev :-)

 

Pretty sure this is genuine footage of the US backed rebels destroying one of the Russian rescue helicopters. Russian military confirm one was destroyed with 1 soldier killed

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=27a_1448375727

 

That depends on using a translation of Cyrillic or english characters.

 

UN have no said it was in turkish airspace

 

Paris was a response to French bombing of Isis targets. I wonder what the Russian reaction would be if Paris were to be repeated in Moscow?

 

Ah OK,

I read his Berlin and D-Day books, but although good reads they do not match Stalingrad for sheer drama

A clash of two immovable objects - brilliantly told

 

Does it actually matter though, we're all supposed to be on the same side (even if it is still a bit informal).

 

Could you give some examples of this? I am sure that the Ruskies haven't entered UK airpace in quite a while (which "encroached" implies)!

mb

 

How 'sure' are you?

 

...so if we take that diagram at face value, even though we don't know who created it or where it came from, there has been a single suspected aircraft incursion into UK air space in the last year and a bit by the Russians.

Not quite doing "it to the UK all the time"?

mb

 

I am no military expert

(and reserve the right to invoke Dunning Kruger :-))

but the target in that video has the rotors stationary

would a search and rescue helicopter landing in extremely hazardous conditions switch off its motor/rotor blades?

 

Maybe the crew were getting cold

 

The Ministry of Defence says the Russian bombers have never violated Britain's sovereign airspace, which extends 12 nautical miles from the coast, and publicly regards them as more of a routine nuisance than a threat.

That map shows our airspace extends to more than 12 miles so doesn't show anything. On a similar vain, didn't a Russian carrier travel down the North Sea and through the English Channel earlier this year, something they are perfectly entitled to do?

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

 

Would you expect the MoD to voluntarily and publicly declare such an intrusion has happened, and thereby cast doubt on our National Defence capability?

Whatever search you use to determine UK air space limits, I haven't found anything that deviates greatly from the map I posted earlier.
As for control of an extended area beyond 12 nautical miles, the WIKI link you have provided carries this definition:
"However, a country may, by international agreement, assume responsibility for controlling parts of international airspace, such as those over the oceans."
I can only assume this has been applied to our definition of UK air space.

 

Posted something about this few months ago,

https://www.scoobynet.com/non-scooby...n-near-uk.html

They do seem to be doing it pretty regularly and it doesn't seem to be too much of a concern.

 

I think there is a very big difference in current state though, that area is pretty much a warzone, our isnt.

In all truth I don't think russia will do anything against turkey in a military sence, turkey isn't some backwater country using spears to defend itself. They have a modern military force a with an airforce of similar, if not technology better than most of russia's.

 

I've been wondering what Putin would do or if he would do anything. He does seem to be back tracking a bit and playing the whole thing down.

 

prob two reasons, one he isnt gonna get anywhere tryign to bully turkey and two i suspect the jet was over turkey so hes been telling porky pies

 

Turkey have the one of the biggest / best equipped armies in the world

 

An interesting backdrop.... http://raedwald.blogspot.co.uk/2015/...y-russian.html

 

Yup, i remember that post - justa chance for the UK pilots to "stretch their legs" and the Ruskies to check that we are on our toes

mb

 

It comes down to what you class as an intrusion again, I'll stick with my 12 miles limit. If anything flies within that, then it could be shot down. As for the airspace that the UK 'controls' that is something entirely different to sovereign airspace and is the responsibility of ensuring aeroplanes don't crash in to each other. I'd give this as an example:

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

But anybody can fly in it, if the Russians wanted to, they can, we can ask them not to, we can ask them to turn on their transponders, but they don't have to.

Happy to be shot down in flames (pardon the pun), but that is my understanding and I've not seen or found anything to suggest otherwise.

 

Essentially I think you're right. My statement about frequent Russian encroachment was based on a chat with a friend of mine who has access to such information due to his job. Basically what he said was that 'I wouldn't want to know how often it happens'.
Maybe my deduction was a bit strong, but you get the idea I'm sure. And apart from that what official sources can be relied upon to tell the truth about such matters?

 

It's usually quite obvious/well reported with planes because people tend to notice the jets going supersonic. The ones you want to worry about are the submarines.

 

It's okay we can track the sub's with our MPA........oh wait, we scrapped those because we didn't need them..........oh wait.............yes we do, lets order some new ones at a cost which is substantially more than it would have cost to finish MRA4.

 

that a bit like the harrier was scrapped with **** all to replaced bar an aircraft years away from being a viable military aircraft if it ever will be?

not to mention its jack of all trades and master of non, or that we have several billion in carriers that have **** all to go on em.

anyway rant over lol