US Military Releases Video Of Russian Su-27 Fighter Jet Intercepting US Navy EP-3 ARIES II Spy Plane

Donate

US Military Releases Video Of Russian Su-27 Fighter Jet Intercepting US Navy EP-3 ARIES II Spy Plane

A screenshot from the video

On January 29, a Su-27 fighter jet of the Russian Aerospace Forces intercepted a US Navy EP-3E Aries II spy plane over the Black Sea.

“On Jan. 29, 2018, a U.S. EP-3 Aries aircraft flying in international airspace over the Black Sea was intercepted by a Russian Su-27. This interaction was determined to be unsafe due to the Su-27 closing to within five feet and crossing directly through the EP-3’s flight path, causing the EP-3 to fly through the Su-27’s jet wash. The duration of the intercept lasted two hours and 40 minutes,” the Navy said in a statement.

At some moment, the distance between the SU-27 and the EP-3 was about 1.5m.

The Russian Defense Ministry said the flight path of its warplane was “in accordance with the international rules for the use of airspace” and the move was aimed at preventing the EP-3 from violating Russian air space.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • as

    As usual not the full video. Or is there a longer version of this?

    • Graeme Rymill

      Are you looking for something that will justify the dangerous flying of the Russian pilot? Keep looking!

      • as

        Lol they have the right to turn them away from their territorial airspace. Was that dangerous? Sure but why they are there in the first place?

        • Graeme Rymill

          If th eUS plane crosses into Russian territory the Russian can shoot it down. Remember Gary Powers and the U-2 shootdown?

          • as

            Why they have to let them into the airspace again?

            Note: Intercept lasted 2 hours 40 mins.

          • Graeme Rymill

            Like so much that you write this question of yours makes no sense to me. Who let who back into what airspace again?

          • as

            Your idea. “if they let them into their airspace they can shoot it down”. Why the Russian Air Force should let a military spy plane violate their airspace?

            Note: Intercept lasts 2 hours 40 mins.

          • Graeme Rymill

            “By international law, the notion of a country’s sovereign airspace
            corresponds with the maritime definition of territorial waters as being
            12 nautical miles (22.2 km) out from a nation’s coastline.”

            By international law you must allow an aircraft to fly anywhere it wants in international airspace. Merely because and aircraft is flying near Russian airspace gives the Russians no additional rights under international law. Further to that there is an agreement in place between the US and Russia to prevent dangerous flying of the kind seen in the video because of acccidents in the past.

          • as

            Air Defense Identification Zone.
            You know nothing.

          • Graeme Rymill

            “The concept of an ADIZ is not defined in any international treaty and is not regulated by any international body”

        • Graeme Rymill

          “Lol they have the right to turn them away from their territorial airspace”…

          if the US aircraft crossed into Russian airspace yes….turn it away or shoot it down. If in international airspace ther eis no such right.

          • as

            “to turn them away from their airspace ”

            Note : They’re heading into Russian airspace. Interception lasts 2 hours 40 mins.

          • Graeme Rymill

            There is no maybe.. they are either in Russian airspace and all bets are off or they are in international airspace and they can fly where they want. It doesn’t matter what direction, what height, what speed, international airspace is international airspace and is protected by international agreements.

          • as

            Then the same law apply to Su27 flanker. They can buzz the spy plane, painting jetwash on it among other things since there’s no if ‘it’s endanger’ other being the spy plane itself because it doesn’t matter what direction, speed, or height international airspace is international airspace and is protected by international agreement.

          • Graeme Rymill

            International agreement says you can fly dangerously close????

            I just know you will be able to find that agreement online and share the link with us… please don’t keep me waiting!!!! :-)

          • as

            Oh there’s no ‘if’ they are dangerous since the pilots know what they were doing. After all they’re only guilty if they collides.

          • Graeme Rymill

            lol…..wow that is some international agreement!!!!! Do whatever you want just don’t collide. You really have no idea what you are are talking about do you? But somehow that never stops you. I admire your tenacity….. your intellect – not so much.

          • as

            Sure.

            Note: Interception lasts 2 hours 40 mins.

          • Tudor Miron

            Graeme, you sound like Russians shot them down :) in international airspace. You say “and they can fly where they want.” – that’s exactly what Su-27 did.

          • as

            It’s quite funny how he insists on winning this one especially when the US is on horribly indefensible position.
            We only need to asks why there’s a US military spy plane cruising into direction of Russian airspace.
            I keep noting that intercept lasts 2 hours 40 mins as well.

          • Graeme Rymill

            I know you keep noting ” that intercept lasts 2 hours 40 mins as well.” But what is the point you are trying to make about the length of time this interception took?

          • as

            Then that’s pretty much sums up everything you’ve understand about the situation.

          • Graeme Rymill

            oh… sorry… what a fool I am…. you are trying so hard to tell me that…{drumroll….} the interception lasted 2 hours 40 minutes!!!!!

            lol…. at last it all becomes clear…..160 minutes……9600 seconds!!!!!

            Why didn’t you say so!!!!

            “as” it is time you gave up commenting here and took up watch repairing as a hobby.

          • Graeme Rymill

            “We only need to asks why there’s a US military spy plane cruising into direction of Russian airspace.” Because they are permitted to just as the Russians are permitted to fly towards British or even American airspace:

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/15/raf-typhoon-jets-scrambled-intercept-russian-bombers-less-35/

            There is nothing in international law or in any international agreements that says you can’t fly surveillance flights in international airspace.

      • Please take a map and look for “Black Sea”. Then look for Russian territory and then for the US territory. So who was threatened?

        • Graeme Rymill

          If you are flying in international airspace you shouldn’t encounter dangerous flying like this. If you are in Russian airspace then by all means shoot the US plane down.

          • Tudor Miron

            To me it looks like Su-27 pilot being responsible human being that respects human life was doing its best to prevent EP-3 from doing harm to itself i.e. from entering Ru airspace and being shot down.

          • Graeme Rymill

            now that is positive spin!!!!

      • Tudor Miron

        Graeme, please clarify:
        Do you mean that Su-27’s action were indeed dangerous?
        Do you mean that US spy plane approaching Ru airspace was a peaceful action?
        Do you mean that Russians should not take action to prevent USAF planes approaching Ru airspace?
        To sum it up – do you mean that US spy plane where the “good guys” doing the “right thing” in this event and RuAF Su-27 was the bad guy?
        Last question – what was the distance to Russian border and to US border when this incident happened?
        Thanks.

        • Rodger

          Based on the coordinates in the video the distance at the time was some 70-80 miles of the Russian mainland. But the US plane is flying mostly south.

        • Graeme Rymill

          Everyone… Russians, Americans and Eskimos are entitled to fly in international airspace.

          • Tudor Miron

            Graeme… problem answering my questions? At list last one? If that’s the only only one you’ve got than OK…

          • Graeme Rymill

            I realise English isn’t your first language Tudor. My meaning is fairly clear but I will spell it out for you if it helps:

            “Do you mean that Su-27’s action were indeed dangerous?” of course that is obvious from my comments

            “Do you mean that US spy plane approaching Ru airspace was a peaceful action?” Of course it was – all activity that takes place within international airspace is deemed peaceful. International airspace can be flown by anyone, anywhere, in armed aircraft or unarmed aircraft. Surveillance outside territorial borders and airspace isn’t regarded as warlike by international convention. Indeed it is regarded as the opposite of warlike – by building mutual confidence that warlike preparations aren’t taking place. In fact the Treaty on Open Skies takes this a step further and permits surveillance flights over participating countries for this very reason. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/russia-military-observation-flight-over-uk-sergei-rhzhkov-an-30b-a7736276.html

            “To sum it up – do you mean that US spy plane where the ‘good guys’ doing
            the ‘right thing’ in this event and RuAF Su-27 was the ‘bad guy’.” Both sides were ‘good guys’ right up until the point the Russian pilot flew dangerously close to the EP-3. The US is entitled to fly anywhere in international airspace and the Russians are entitled to monitor these flights and vice versa. Flying dangerously close makes that Russian pilot a ‘bad guy’ as you term due to his in flight behaviour. The Chinese collision with an EP-3 makes the consequences of dangerous flying clear. It is both unsafe airmanship and a breach of the 1972 agreement between the USSR and the US designed to prevent accidents on the sea or in mid-air.

          • Tudor Miron

            OK, you managed to answer some of my questions but how about last one in that post? Here it is – if someone climbs on the tree (outside your property) and starts filming what you do in your bedroom. Would you see it as neutral or even friendly action?
            Also, this is your and Pentagon’s version that what Su-27 did was dangerous – may be it is so but only by your low standards. If our plane did have to cross EP-3’s path that was only because EP-3 was refusing to turn away from heading in the dangerous (for his life) direction. I would guess that EP-3 pilots were thinking “we’re exceptional nation. We can do what ever we want” – they were shown that may be they are but not near Russian borders.

          • Graeme Rymill

            lol… you are just like “as” – you think Russia can do what it wants in international airspace just because a plane approaches Russian airspace. “dangerous direction” – what on earth does that mean? “Dangerous direction” has no meaning in international law. The US and Russia and all nations are entitled to fly wherever they want in international airspace. They are not entitled, without permission to intrude into other countries’ sovereign airspace. It is black and white. There is no grey zone.

            As to your voyeur filming through the window hoping to see your wife naked… this analogy doesn’t apply to international geopolitics. Surveillance is surveillance – it doesn’t have a set of moral values attached to it as perving through a window does.. If a country is planning to attack or has already attacked another country than clearly this surveillance is hostile.

            More common though is surveillance that is intended to simply keep an eye on other countries that are military and political rivals. Both Russia and the US (and China and India and Pakistan) do this sort of surveillance. It may not be “friendly” but to the extent to which it reassures rivals that no hostilities are intended or imminent it is definitely beneficial and contributes to international stability. The fact that Russia is a party to the Treaty on Open Skies is evidence that Russia supports my interpretation that surveillance isn’t inherently hostile or “bad” as you might like to frame it.

      • MikeH

        The HUD overlay looks deceptive. It is clearly intended to give the impression that the Su crossed in front of the other aircraft but did it really?

        It is a 4 second clip and you can see the clouds moving slightly from left to right. If this was a video from the right side of the aircraft, it is an unremarkable maneuver.

        • as

          I think it’s from the side.

          Otherwise they’d get a little shaky when it passes so close right up their front.

  • Graeme Rymill
  • cortisol

    That’s a lot more than 1.5m. Retarded yanks.

  • Cool

    • Margaret

      Gℴℴgle paying to new employee $98 per-hr to do some small tasks from the comfort of home .. Work Some just few hours daily & enjoy greater time together with your relatives … Anyone can avail this special offer…on Sunday I got a top of the range Saab 99 Turbo after just making $17523 this five weeks .it’s certainly the most comfortable work but you may not forgive yourself if you don’t learn it.!re41o: http://GoogleDailyConsumerCoNetJobsOpportunity/simple/work ♥♥♥b♥♥♥u♥♥w♥r♥♥♥w♥♥s♥♥♥u♥♥k♥x♥♥♥w♥o♥♥♥x♥♥♥x♥♥♥s♥♥p♥♥a♥♥♥u♥♥z♥♥w♥♥y♥l♥♥t♥♥♥u♥♥♥j♥♥♥k:::::!vw033f:lhu

  • Baudouin Jérusalem
  • chris chuba

    Boo-hoo. How close was it to the Crimean coastline?

    Back in December they were flying about 15 miles within their territorial air space, how close were they pushing it this time?

    All the Pentagon says is ‘international air space’ which is technically true even if they are 100 yds within territorial air space. FOX has a fit if the Russians fly within 200 miles of Alaska in ‘international air space’.
    https://twitter.com/AircraftSpots/status/938010285066956800/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Frussia-insider.com%2Fen%2Fnode%2F21869

    • Graeme Rymill

      “Technically true”? lol…absolutely true… even if they were 1 inch from Russia territory they are still in international airspace and not in Russian territory. What is it about this simple concept that makes it so hard for you to grasp?

  • Starlight

    Most ‘FAKE’ ‘news’ is of the “dog bites man” variety- ie., worthless stories of no value that seek to DISTRACT from the real news- just like this Southfront report. Meanwhile Southfront completely misses another round of Putin licking the backside of the chief of the terrorist jews, immediately followed by the SAME tribe directing America to demonise every leading Russian in that recent ‘corruption’ list.

    The jewish tribe throughout history weaponises societal mechanisms to aid some despot, and benefit themselves of course. Every demonic act against Russia over the last five years has had jewish ‘brains’ behind the planning. Russia booted from the olympics. Leading Russians formally demonised. Terror right on Russia’s borders. The Syria fiasco. and so on and so on.

    But where’s Southfront’s coverage of these facts? Well Southfront goes where RT goes, and the pro-jewish bent of RT is obvious for all to see. The jewish take-over of Russia, commonly known as the ‘revolutions’ never ended- despite jews being a tiny fraction of the Russian population.

    Empire powers ‘intercepting’ each others major war machines is “dog bites man” ‘news’, except under exceptional circumstances (like a few years back when China forced down the US spy plane and took possession of it, to warn America to stop trying to over-fly China territory). Otherwise it signifies literally NOTHING.

    So why would Southfront waste presious money reporting on this non-news, while ignoring the story of Ahed Tamami in Palestine, and her treatment by the infinitely vile neo-nazi jews? But then again only a few days ago a hyper-zionist from Ireland was given space on RT to berate “anti-semitism” of pro-Russian sites- by which he meant any person who dared to question the organised terror planning of the ‘tribe’. Pro-Israeli pseudo-journalists are as common as flies on mainstream and fake indy outlets.

    Anyway, even by jewish standards, the current regime in Israel is unthinkably currupt and racist- yet Putin cannot stop praising it. All because the jews there give Russia useless ‘intelligence’ about the West – info the Deep State KNOWS is leaked to Russia. Israel grooms Russia to a terrible dependence, so Putin bends the knee to those who stab Russia in the back again and again and again.

  • John

    If ya don’t like the real rules of the sandbox, then go home to mommy and stay safe there. The US is violating only God knows how many international norms on the daily. The US Coalition played games with 2 SU-25s in Syria recently. Now they literally get burned messing around near Crimea and are crying the blues, because the Russians canx’d the mission in air and probably damaged some very expensive equipment. Boo Hoo.

    This stuff went on all the time in my day and it hardly ever made the papers. If CENTCOM wants to demonstrate how much a bunch of pansies they are to the world, that is their choice. My two cents is shut your mouths, run your missions, take your licks like professionals and maintain your decorum. I wish well to all and a bit more intestinal fortitude to US Command.

  • John William

    I got mad respect for the Russians. Pound for pound I think they have the most effective military on earth. However I find these fly bys dangerous and un profession .I’m fact I believe these flybys r given the go ahead by Putin personally and the pilots are hand picked to do intercept. Highly skilled n such

  • John William

    Should USA just stand by ? And do nothing ? No.First of all the West needs to grow some balls and actually have a conversation with Russia on this issue.Now if talks go no where….Blow them birches out the sky! Jk that would be insane and incerpeted aircraft would be blown out of the sky.We should tho increase patrols for every incident like this. Do we have Virginia class subs in the black sea yet?What about the upgraded Ohio class tomahawk boats?

    • outer_rl

      You don’t have to do nothing. You could recall your spy planes.

      • John William

        What is spy ? Information gathering ?Who doesn’t do it ?Where is the line ?

        • outer_rl

          When you’re not discrete, it’s spying.

        • Bob

          Flying a massive, loud and slow, turboprop Naval electronic surveillance aircraft right up to very edges of a foreign state; that you are also constantly calling your primary adversary, yet is also your nearest peer independent military rival, is either, an act of sheer arrogance, a deliberate provocation, or Naval aviation incompetence.

    • Bob

      Does Russia fly electronic surveillance planes in Gulf of Mexico? Because US military aircraft and ships are constantly spying right on Russian boundaries. If approaching to Russian boundaries with military espionage hardware then expect to be waived off – this is very well understood and standard response. The Black Sea is a Russian sphere of influence – it has nothing to do with the United States that is located very, very far away.
      The aggression you demand reflects an infantile and primarily reactive mindset. Any such aggression would be both locally countered and open up recourse in other locations – ie US servicemen would be exposed to targeting in other zones like Syria. You are the sort of armchair warrior whose ideas are based entirely on emotional and ego reaction, and in reality would just get your own military personnel killed very quickly. Fortunately for your fellow countrymen you are in charge of zilch.

    • Tudor Miron

      Jonny, why you dislike your serviceman so much? Why do you wish death to them? Or do you really think they are invincible?

  • Toxicus Mechanicus

    1.5 m? Sure. 15m would more be believable but it’s Russians afterall it can even be 1.5cm