nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

russian-bombers

darkpagandeath

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/passenger-planes-dodged-russian-bombers-315623.html

Sabre rattling again, Putting civilians in possible danger. What's the reason, they don't have stealth the British can track them intercept and if needed take down. Was this one carrying Nuclear weapons again ?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

BlaasForRafa

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Why would Russia waste a nuke for Shannon Airport when you could destroy it effectively with standard bombing?

Stand-off cruise missiles are less risky than going over and hitting it with dumb bombs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdjfsRd0HLI

Film of a Bear intercept off Alaska back in the 80's, it was routine stuff back then too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMb9OmXDj4g

BlaasForRafa

darkpagandeath wrote: »

The last lot did, And you use Reconnaissance planes to re-con not bombers.

Ugh...bombers can perform reconnaissance missions too you know. And do. No matter how many times you repeat it to yourself, it doesn't change the fact that these missions are nothing to get ones knickers in a twist over.

Iwasfrozen

black powder colt wrote: »

Explain please why a modern super power would be carrying nuclear weapons around in a 50s bomber when they have 16000 ICBMS

A modern superpower wouldn't. But Russia is a modern great power.

BlaasForRafa

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

A modern superpower wouldn't. But Russia is a modern great power.

The Bear is a very effective platform and performs the role that the Russians want it to perform. They have more "modern" jet bombers like the Tu-22M and the Tu-160 but the Bear has a longer range and can perform these missions in a much more cost-effective manner.

The idea from some that just because if has propellers that makes it somehow inferior is....lets just call it ill-informed.

razorblunt

This will sort them out

Streetwalker

If Russia really wanted to destroy Ireland they should financially back the FF political party in the hope they get back into power. FF, worse than an atom bomb.

Donkey Oaty

Streetwalker wrote: »

If Russia really wanted to destroy Ireland they should financially back the FF political party in the hope they get back into power. FF, worse than an atom bomb.

tl;dr: In Russia's Ireland, soldiers are destiny of we.

josip

Streetwalker wrote: »

If Russia really wanted to destroy Ireland they should financially back the FF political party in the hope they get back into power. FF, worse than an atom bomb.

The opposite has actually happened.
In 2011, we deployed our sleeper, Conor Lenihan to Moscow.
He installed the FF economic time bomb of focusing on one element of the economy to the exclusion of all others.
What has happened to Russia in the last 12 months was inevitable since 2011.

The One Doctor

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Yup International airport used by the USA Shannon has a nuke pointed at it does it not.

Nuking Shannon won't really damage Ireland. It's in the middle of nowhere.

darkpagandeath

The One Doctor wrote: »

Nuking Shannon won't really damage Ireland. It's in the middle of nowhere.

If only the Radiation stayed at the impact site.

nocoverart

StereoSound wrote: »

What military capability does Ireland have to defend the state from monstrous nuclear bombers?

RTE, it would depress them to death.

Skylinehead

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

A modern superpower wouldn't.

What do you think the B-52 is?

darkpagandeath

Skylinehead wrote: »

What do you think the B-52 is?

To be fair I really have no idea why people think Prop/turboprop is antiquated. Look at the American troop transport V-22 they started to roll out. The weapons system that brought down MH was 30 odd years old too. Old does not necessarily mean bad.

Yes b-52 is jet powered but is subsonic.

dubscottie

Pick a spot and drop a bomb..

If there was a nuclear war it would use 100's of smaller yields as the are easier to get on target and can do more damage than a large bomb like the Tsar.

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

Captain Chaos

Look at the Hercules Gunships infamous for their FLIR videos over Iraq and Afganistan.

darkpagandeath

dubscottie wrote: »

Pick a spot and drop a bomb..

If there was a nuclear war it would use 100's of smaller yields as the are easier to get on target and can do more damage than a large bomb like the Tsar.

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

Ye that's why most are MIRV. Tsar was a balls showing exercise. Is the largest nuclear explosion possible without loosing explosive energy outside the atmosphere.

Captain Chaos

dubscottie wrote: »

Pick a spot and drop a bomb..

If there was a nuclear war it would use 100's of smaller yields as the are easier to get on target and can do more damage than a large bomb like the Tsar.

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

That's why all of todays ICBMs have about 5-10 warheads each, each missile can hit as many targets as it has warheads 100s of miles apart. Tactical nukes.

Captain Chaos

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Ye that's why most are MIRV. Tsar was a balls showing exercise. Is the largest nuclear explosion possible without loosing explosive energy outside the atmosphere.

TSAR was actually scaled down so the launch aircraft could escape the blast area in time. Even at that the aircraft that dropped that bomb suffered significant external heat blast and shockwave damage.

SEPT 23 1989

Perfect excuse for a proper cold war if a fully loaded passenger jet flies blind into one of these

dubscottie

A Hiroshima bomb would be like a bad Guinness fart over Dublin compared to the Tsar..

Hiroshima bomb on Dublin effects -

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/?&kt=20&lat=53.3498053&lng=-6.2603097&hob_opt=2&hob_psi=5&hob_ft=1650&fallout=1&zm=13

Tsar Bomb effects -

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/?&kt=50000&lat=53.3498053&lng=-6.2603097&hob_opt=2&hob_psi=5&hob_ft=13000&fallout=1&ff=3&zm=9

Smiles35

dubscottie wrote: »

Tsar Bomb effects -

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/?&kt=50000&lat=53.3498053&lng=-6.2603097&hob_opt=2&hob_psi=5&hob_ft=13000&fallout=1&ff=3&zm=9

Damn. Half of my lovely Tallaght gone with the Tsar bomb.

lakesider

Vote sinn fein in the next election..at least they had ground to air capability!

DavidSullivan

Just found this happened once again, what's the story?

03/03/2015 : - breakingnews.ie

''Commercial jets carrying hundreds of people had to be diverted in mid-air or else prevented from taking off to avoid potential collisions with two Russian bear bombers which “cloaked” their presence during their latest incursion into Irish-controlled airspace.''

''The IAA said its air traffic controllers were notified by British counterparts that they needed to take action to ensure the safety of commercial aircraft, because yet again the Russian bombers had entered our area of airspace control with their transponders turned off. ''

''The first Russian incursion into Irish-controlled airspace was 88km off the coast. The second was much nearer, just 19km outside our sovereign airspace and the incursion lasted from 3pm to 7pm. ''

srsly78

Firstly, it's international airspace. Secondly, military aircraft do not have to use transponders.

Cookie_Monster

Cloaked, lol

Manic Moran

srsly78 wrote: »

Firstly, it's international airspace. Secondly, military aircraft do not have to use transponders.

Actually, I suspect that within limits (eg Below FL 180) civilian aircraft don't need to use transponders either.

[ETA: That said, apparently the Bears were a bit higher than that]

G_R

Threads Merged - OP in future, have a quick check to see if there's already a thread.

Cheers

Eugene Norman

black powder colt wrote: »

The Russians are just testing the western response time and causing a bit of a nuisance for the RAF in response to NATO sabre rattling THE idea that the Russians were going to nuke anyone let alone Ireland with a 1950s bomber is extreme tin foil hat magic mushroom territory Firstly because thats what ICBMS are for and secondly because of mutually assured destruction

mutally assured destruction would demand both sides have bombs.

Eugene Norman

The Soviet Union had dozens of nukes targeting ireland. All airports, ports, cities and the occasional village. They had tens of thousands of ordinance to target, everywhere got a look in

Lone Stone

I for one welcome our new Russian over lords