Skip to comments.
US, Russian Navies Exchange Accusations After Near-Collision In East China Sea
Hotair ^
| 06/07/2019
| Ed Morrissey
Posted on 06/07/2019 7:44:13 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The brinksmanship between Russian and US militaries has expanded from the air to the sea — and it nearly created a collision today near the Philippines. Just a few days after a mid-air confrontation over the Mediterranean Sea made headlines, the two navies are pointing the finger at each other as well. This time, the US Navy says it will declassify images to show the “unsafe and unprofessional” practices of the Russian navy:
“A Russian destroyer …. made an unsafe maneuver against USS Chancellorsville, closing to 50-100 feet, putting the safety of her crew and ship at risk,” US Navy spokesman Cmdr. Clayton Doss told CNN in a statement.
“This unsafe action forced Chancellorsville to execute all engines back full and to maneuver to avoid collision,” Doss said.
The US guided-missile cruiser was traveling in a straight line and trying to recover its helicopter when the incident occurred, he said.
“We consider Russia’s actions during this interaction as unsafe and unprofessional,” Doss said.
Not at all, Russia claimed in a rebuttal. Their ship was on a steady course and it was the Chancellorsville that swerved unprofessionally:
They cited a Russian Pacific Fleet statement as saying the incident took place in the early hours of Friday morning in the eastern part of the East China Sea at a time when a group of Russian warships was on a parallel course with a U.S. naval strike group.
The U.S guided-missile cruiser Chancellorsville suddenly changed course and cut across the path of the destroyer Admiral Vinogradov coming within 50 meters of the ship, the statement said.
A protest over the international radio frequency was made to the commanders of the American ship who were warned about the unacceptable nature of such actions, it said.
So who’s right? The US Navy says that the Chancellorsville was on a mission to recover a helicopter, which would require as straight a course as possible, as CNN’s Barbara Starr notes in her first report. If that was the mission, it wouldn’t make much sense for the ship to change course dramatically, especially with a hostile force tracking it in parallel.
It didn’t take long for the US to declassify a portion of the video, which is a measure of just how angry the Pentagon is over this incident. Here’s Starr again, pointing out the wake of the Russian ship as it appears to come within feet of the Chancellorsville — in what looks like wide-open waters:
Put simply, either the Russian captain is an absolute moron or the Russian military is engaging in deliberately provocative behavior. Perhaps they didn’t expect the US to release this video, or to release it this quickly, but it paints a pretty clear picture. No one got hurt this time, but these provocations will eventually cause an escalation at some point, especially if it results in collisions or a more serious response. That’s a bad path when one considers what an armed conflict could mean, and one hopes that cooler heads in Moscow will prevail to dial down these provocations in the future.
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Russia
KEYWORDS: chinasea; cnn; collision; dictatorship; navy; philippinessea; putinsbuttboys; russia; ussr; vladtheimploder
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-75 last
To: USCG SimTech
So probably our ship did not want to turn, since it was recovering a helicopter. The Russians then later errored by not aggressively avoiding an elevated situation. Chicken.
61
posted on
06/07/2019 11:19:58 AM PDT
by
justa-hairyape
(The user name is sarcastic. Although at times it may not appear that way.)
To: null and void
Weather and lack of supplies defeated the Germans in the east.
62
posted on
06/07/2019 11:48:00 AM PDT
by
rrrod
(just an old guy with a gun in his pocket)
To: Logical me
we are at war ... War is on the horizon
Not very logical, Logical me.
63
posted on
06/07/2019 11:51:16 AM PDT
by
sparklite2
(Don't mind me. I'm just a contrarian.)
To: rrrod
You are absolutely correct. The Soviets had exactly nothing to do with it.
64
posted on
06/07/2019 11:55:27 AM PDT
by
null and void
(Stamp out philately!)
To: gandalftb; Billthedrill
Once, while at a BBQ on Steel Beach, the Russian Cruiser that was shadowing us pulled up slowly along side.
The skipper got on the 1MC and ordered us to moon them as they were somewhere between 50 and 100ft away.
Certainly they could see the hair on our asses.
They collectively lifted their glasses and yelled in unison: SALUT!
They ran along side us for about an hour as each crew waved and held up their various food and beverages, the music blaring from each ship.
It was a Sunday afternoon after all.
By nightfall we were back to the standard fun and games of radiating, shifting course, emcon etc.
For that one moment in time, we shared the common lament of sailors throughout time and there was no difference between us.
7,000 miles from home and nothing but water as far as the eye could see.
65
posted on
06/07/2019 12:04:04 PM PDT
by
Mariner
(War Criminal #18)
To: 2CAVTrooper
Give the B-52 the capability to launch nuclear armed cruise missiles. The ALCM was designed to fit in a rotary launchers that are mounted in a B-52. A B-52 could carry 20 of these missiles.
It is thermo-nuclear capable.
AFAIK, there are still 500 in active inventory.
66
posted on
06/07/2019 12:07:51 PM PDT
by
null and void
(Stamp out philately!)
To: Starboard
“Russia is becoming ever more brazen. “
Nonsense.
In the 1980s they were FAR, FAR more aggressive at sea and in the air.
They’ve actually mellowed quite a bit.
67
posted on
06/07/2019 12:16:19 PM PDT
by
Mariner
(War Criminal #18)
To: USCG SimTech
I yield to your CG experience, but I’m confused by the video...
It appeared to me to be an “overtaking” situation rather than a “crossing”, in which, to my lubberly understanding, any vessel overtaking (Russian) any other shall keep out of the way of the vessel being overtaken (the US).
Since courses apparently weren’t parallel, does the course converging make it a crossing? Courtesy might dictate the bridge of a vessel overtaking another recovering a helo would give way out of safety to deck and aircrew considerations...
Just curious what a Coastie thinks...
68
posted on
06/07/2019 12:42:17 PM PDT
by
elteemike
(Light travels faster than sound...That's why so many people appear bright until you hear them speak)
To: null and void
IIRC, with the retirement of the B-52G, the B-52 fleet is no longer certified to carry the ALCM.
The G model was required by SALT II to have the wing glove extensions for satellite verification due to their ability to carry the ALCM.
“Under the provisions of the SALT II treaty, aircraft carrying cruise missiles must be readily identifiable as such by reconnaissance satellites, so the AGM-86B-equipped B-52G was provided with non-functional wing root fairings known as “strakelets”. The modification had to be visible from above so that spy satellites could confirm the number of cruise missile-capable aircraft, and it had to be made aerodynamically and structurally integral with the aircraft so that the change could not be quickly altered or moved from one aircraft to another.”
http://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_bombers/b52_15.html
69
posted on
06/07/2019 2:23:43 PM PDT
by
2CAVTrooper
(I survive on Caffeine & Hate & sometimes Whiskey.)
To: 2CAVTrooper
I thought Reagan recognized that SALT II was no longer in effect way back in 1986?
70
posted on
06/07/2019 7:49:50 PM PDT
by
null and void
(Stamp out philately!)
To: rlmorel
71
posted on
06/07/2019 8:40:29 PM PDT
by
Chode
( WeÂ’re America, Bitch!)
To: Chode
72
posted on
06/07/2019 9:22:58 PM PDT
by
rlmorel
(Trump to China: This Capitalist Will Not Sell You the Rope with Which You Will Hang Us.)
To: rlmorel
73
posted on
06/07/2019 9:41:54 PM PDT
by
Chode
( WeÂ’re America, Bitch!)
To: Mariner
I like that sea story...:)
74
posted on
06/07/2019 9:43:46 PM PDT
by
rlmorel
(Trump to China: This Capitalist Will Not Sell You the Rope with Which You Will Hang Us.)
To: Grampa Dave
The last thing you wanted to hear on the bridge underway was, This the Captain and I have the Conn!,Hard Right or Hard Left Rudder and All Back Full! Brace yourselves!USN diesel sub, 1951, cruising on the surface, serving the mid-watch. Rotate between helm, radar, port/starboard lookout every hour.
I'm on the conning tower radar and pick up a blip some miles away. Notify the deck officer, who is a newbie ensign and a real screw-up. (On one routine dive he hit the collision alarm instead of the klaxon and scared the yell out of all of us.)
My dad was in the merchant service and told me if the bearing of another ship was constant, you were on a collision course. The bearing of this blip stayed constant.
I speeded up reporting the bearing and range, repeatedly stating the bearing was constant (hint, hint) as the blip closed. At 1,000 yards, I was eyeballing the hatch to topside and figuring out how much time I had to make it. FINALLY, the officer calls the Captain with something like, "Captain, I have a contact at 1,000 yards . . ." and so help me, at that point the skipper was halfway up the ladder.
IIRC, "Right full rudder, starboard back full, port ahead flank . . ." Engine bells ringing in response, deck shaking under your feet, getting re-acquainted with Jesus. It was an interesting watch. The ensign soon disappeared.
75
posted on
06/08/2019 11:23:45 AM PDT
by
Oatka
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-75 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson