WI Soviet spy overflights.

[Riain]

The US and Britain conducted recon overflights of the Soviet Union during the Cold War, often using stripped down special recon planes. Some were mock nuclear attacks, testing defences along actual routes and over actual targets.

WI the Soviets did the same in reverse, presumably on a smaller scale due to basing and aircraft limitations?
I imagine this could be a job for the first versions of new aircraft, a stripped down Bison bomber overflying Scotland or Alaska in 1954-5 and new Mig25s overflying Florida from Cuba in 1970-1, before the defences adjusted to the new capability.

Would the US become more beligerant and order an escalation of its overflights, or more defensive and order all overflights shot down or conciliatory and over a cesation of overflights?

[Kome]

Woah are you serious? Can you point me to sources i totally want to hear about that. Its funny enough when you hear about the major Cold War flash points, but the British actually actively going and saying "Nuclear Attack! Go to hell! JK! JK!" has so much lol potential.

[Amerigo Vespucci]

But they did overfly Alaska ...

[Georgepatton]

Originally Posted by Amerigo Vespucci

But they did overfly Alaska ...

Yes, it was a fairly common thing for, say, the Norwegian Air Force to scramble a few planes to go up and remind a Soviet 'Bear' just where their airspace started and ended.

[Riain]

Spyflight is a good website for this sort of thing.

Did the Soviets overfly great portions of Alaska, complete with military bases etc, or just zip over peripheral bits? Because the US and Brits were flying to Kasputin Yar space launch facility and all sorts of other very fancy places.

[Bakenellan]

US had special long range recon planes. I don't think USSR ever produced something like that. So any limited overflights by Soviet airforces would serve no purpose exept to provoke WWIII.

The story I've heard from an older friend is not strictly related and happened in late 1970-s but still demonstrates how Cold War worked. There were patrol flights near Norvegian-Soviet border from both sides. It was done on schedule, so both sides knew well when to expect arrival of visitors. Planes met, flew for a while almost side to side and then returned home. Such meetings were almost friendly. And then one day Norvegians shifted usual flights to some ten minutes earlier. It triggered major alert on Soviet side, and all planes took off in a few minutes. Nothing happened of course, but panic was profound.

So considering very tense mood, any overflight by actual combat planes without possible strategic recon purpose could provoke likely overreaction from US. It could be possible tactical recon before strike after all.

On the other hand, if Soviets actually developed long range recon plane of their own, nothing much changes. US could try to shoot them down, maybe succeed, Soviets protest, but make no other move. It would add to mutual tension, and US may develop some defence crafts in responce.

[FlyingDutchman]

Originally Posted by Bakenellan

US had special long range recon planes. I don't think USSR ever produced something like that. So any limited overflights by Soviet airforces would serve no purpose exept to provoke WWIII.

If anything the Soviets were worldleaders in the long range (recon)/maritime strike department. Examples are the Tu-95, the Tu-142 or the Tu-22M.

Originally Posted by Bakenellan

The story I've heard from an older friend is not strictly related and happened in late 1970-s but still demonstrates how Cold War worked. There were patrol flights near Norvegian-Soviet border from both sides. It was done on schedule, so both sides knew well when to expect arrival of visitors. Planes met, flew for a while almost side to side and then returned home. Such meetings were almost friendly. And then one day Norvegians shifted usual flights to some ten minutes earlier. It triggered major alert on Soviet side, and all planes took off in a few minutes. Nothing happened of course, but panic was profound.

So considering very tense mood, any overflight by actual combat planes without possible strategic recon purpose could provoke likely overreaction from US. It could be possible tactical recon before strike after all.

On the other hand, if Soviets actually developed long range recon plane of their own, nothing much changes. US could try to shoot them down, maybe succeed, Soviets protest, but make no other move. It would add to mutual tension, and US may develop some defence crafts in responce.

AFAIK these flights were never announced beforehand and there is no obligation to do so.
http://www.nederlandseluchtvaart.nl/...erschept-9879/

Originally Posted by Georgepatton

Yes, it was a fairly common thing for, say, the Norwegian Air Force to scramble a few planes to go up and remind a Soviet 'Bear' just where their airspace started and ended.

QFT.

Not just for the Norwegians or the Brits, the Dutch and the Danes too had regular encounters.

IIRC last time this happened was last November when Dutch F-16s intercepted a Tu-95. http://www.depers.nl/binnenland/3563...uchtmacht.html


As the OP stated, one of the reasons for the Soviets to do so was to time responses, although one difference with the original question is that the Bears and such usually stay over international waters.

See here for a radio transcript:
http://www.milspotters.nl/opnames/204/
As you can hear, they stay a few miles inside international waters.

So Riain, what is exactly your question?

[Riain]

The big difference is that while the Soviet regularly probed NATO defences and vice versa over and above this the Brits and US flew deep into Soviet territory in planes that were difficult to intercept. This did not provoke WW3 so I don't see how the reverse would.

My question is how would the Cold War have played out if the shoe was on the other foot to an extent, the Soviets did the odd overflight deep into US or NATO territory?

If a Mig 25 detachment went to Cuba in 1971 like one did in Egypt would the USAF be able to shoot it down on the first couple of missions?

[Amerigo Vespucci]

How deep? They came pretty close to Anchorage a few times, and went over Southwest more than once. And that's not counting runs at the DEWLine to test its effectiveness. I've never heard of anything crazy over the Lower 48, but I wouldn't be surprised if a few of those UFOs that kept popping up in the early 1950s didn't have the red star on them.

[corditeman]

Russia has a U2 clone called the Myasischev M-55 (see Wiki) but with little more than half the endurance and a lower service ceiling. I am inclined to doubt that the M-55 could avoid interception and being ushered away by the RAF.

As for the U-2, here's a quote from Wiki :-
In 1984, during a major NATO exercise, Royal Air Force Flight Lieutenant Mike Hale intercepted a U-2 at a height of 66,000 feet (20,000 m), where the aircraft had previously been considered safe from interception. Hale climbed to 88,000 feet (27,000 m) in his Lightning F3.[16]

[MerryPrankster]

The Soviets overflew the American Southwest? That's interesting.

Got more info?

[simonbp]

The US only really did overflights of Soviet territory before Powers' U-2 got shot down. After that, they moved to satellite-based intelligence of the Soviets (indeed, that was Ike's motive for funding satellite recon in the first place), and just did overflights of Vietnam, China, Cuba, etc.

After the show trial the USSR gave Powers, the Soviets knew they would be seen as massive hypocrites if they tried overflights, so they also resorted to satellites. The PoD, therefore, would require that no American is shoot down over the USSR prior to the Soviet flights...

[BlairWitch749]

it depends who was president when they tried it... Nixon was pretty paranoid I don't think he would take kindly too it

[Old Airman]

But they did overfly Alaska ...

Alaska or some area of territorial waters?

Yes, it was a fairly common thing for, say, the Norwegian Air Force to scramble a few planes to go up and remind a Soviet 'Bear' just where their airspace started and ended.

To the best of my knowledge, it happened over neutral waters of Barents sea, not even Norwegian territorial waters. And Americans flew over Soviet heartland (Powers had been shot down over Southern Urals, equivalent of Soviet spy planes flying over Pittsburgh or Los Alamos).

any overflight by actual combat planes without possible strategic recon purpose could provoke likely overreaction from US.

I think that any Soviet overflight would be considered a Casus Belli by Americans. Remember, they almost started WWIII over Soviets doing exactly the same thing they considered their natural right for decades (deploying nukes next to adversary's border).

If a Mig 25 detachment went to Cuba in 1971 like one did in Egypt would the USAF be able to shoot it down on the first couple of missions?

Not without technical violation of international laws (not that Americans ever considered themselves bound by this silly "law" thing). If MIG-25 zips across Florida and Americans shoot it down, it would most likely fall into international waters on other side of the peninsula, which would be considered "an American attack over international waters". That is exatly the reason why Russians and Cubans didn't shoot at U2s which regularly overflew Cuba in 1970s latitudally.

IIRC last time this happened was last November when Dutch F-16s intercepted a Tu-95.

It doesn't say anywhere that Russians ever crossed Dutch maritime border (most likely they did not).

[Riain]

Originally Posted by MerryPrankster

The Soviets overflew the American Southwest? That's interesting.

Got more info?

No, its a possibility I'm musing on based on the forward basing available to the Soviets and the capability of the Mig 25.

[Bill Cameron]

Originally Posted by Old Airman

I think that any Soviet overflight would be considered a Casus Belli by Americans.

Old Airman,

Eisenhower proposed an "open skies" treaty in 1955 during a Geneva summit with Bulganin. Khruschev immediately rejected the proposal when he was informed of it. An open sky treaty was finally negotiated between US, NATO members, Russia, former Warsaw Pact members, and a few other states in 1992.

Seeing as mutual aerial surveillance of each superpower by the other in order to reduce tensions and detect preparations for an attack was originally a US idea, I don't believe USSR surveillance overflights of CONUS would result in a war.

Remember, they almost started WWIII over Soviets doing exactly the same thing they considered their natural right for decades (deploying nukes next to adversary's border ).

Not without technical violation of international laws (not that Americans ever considered themselves bound by this silly "law" thing).

You can park your Ameri-phobia at the door.


Bill

[corditeman]

A key point is whether the Russian aircraft would be able to penetrate American overland airspace and I'm fairly sure that would have been difficult. It would have been more effective to charter commercial aircraft for clandestine overflights near key points of interest. After all, why risk an international incident or over-use critical air assets when you don't have to?

Remember that 9-11 depended on clandestine abuse of ordinary airliners, changing course at the last moment. If it had occurred near Moscow, I've a nasty feeling that an AA missile would have shot each jet down when it deviated from the filed course.

[FlyingDutchman]

Originally Posted by Old Airman

Alaska or some area of territorial waters?
To the best of my knowledge, it happened over neutral waters of Barents sea, not even Norwegian territorial waters. And Americans flew over Soviet heartland (Powers had been shot down over Southern Urals, equivalent of Soviet spy planes flying over Pittsburgh or Los Alamos).
I think that any Soviet overflight would be considered a Casus Belli by Americans. Remember, they almost started WWIII over Soviets doing exactly the same thing they considered their natural right for decades (deploying nukes next to adversary's border).
Not without technical violation of international laws (not that Americans ever considered themselves bound by this silly "law" thing). If MIG-25 zips across Florida and Americans shoot it down, it would most likely fall into international waters on other side of the peninsula, which would be considered "an American attack over international waters". That is exatly the reason why Russians and Cubans didn't shoot at U2s which regularly overflew Cuba in 1970s latitudally.
It doesn't say anywhere that Russians ever crossed Dutch maritime border (most likely they did not).

Perhaps you should read better before you respond?

If it's the crossing of borders you mind so much, could you explain what those Soviet subs that got caught were doing in Swedish waters?
http://www.jstor.org/pss/1045133

Originally Posted by FlyingDutchman

IIRC last time this happened was last November when Dutch F-16s intercepted a Tu-95. http://www.depers.nl/binnenland/3563...uchtmacht.html


As the OP stated, one of the reasons for the Soviets to do so was to time responses, although one difference with the original question is that the Bears and such usually stay over international waters.

See here for a radio transcript:
http://www.milspotters.nl/opnames/204/
As you can hear, they stay a few miles inside international waters.

(made bold to aid your reading, as apparently it's needed )

[Bill Cameron]

Originally Posted by corditeman

It would have been more effective to charter commercial aircraft for clandestine overflights near key points of interest.

Corditeman,

Which, strangely enough, is exactly what the USSR did.

Transatlantic Aeroflot flights out of NYC routinely "drifted" over New London, CT for example.


Bill

[feanor512]

Originally Posted by Old Airman

If MIG-25 zips across Florida and Americans shoot it down

What does the US have in 1971 that could shoot down a Mig-25?