Late yesterday evening, the Royal Air Force deployed Typhoon fighter jets and a Voyager tanker from RAF Coningsby to conduct air defence patrols over eastern Poland, in direct response to mounting Russian airspace violations along NATO’s eastern flank.

The mission, carried out under NATO’s new Eastern Sentry activity, saw British jets launch from Lincolnshire at short notice before flying eastward into Polish airspace. According to tracking services, the Typhoons completed several hours of patrols before returning to the UK in the early hours of this morning.

The deployment comes after three Russian MiG-31 fighters breached Estonian airspace on Friday in what Tallinn described as an “unprecedentedly brazen” incursion. Earlier this month, Russian drones also crossed into Poland and Romania, prompting Warsaw to invoke Article 4 of the NATO Treaty and triggering alliance consultations.

Eastern Sentry was activated last week following Poland’s request for support. It involves a multi-national package of aircraft and forces positioned to reinforce NATO’s eastern flank, with Germany, Denmark, France and the United States already contributing. The UK pledged to send Typhoons and Voyagers as part of its response.

By conducting last night’s sortie, Britain has underlined its role as one of NATO’s frontline contributors. The flights also signal London’s intent to meet Russian testing of allied airspace with immediate military presence.

Moscow has repeatedly dismissed NATO’s concerns and accused the alliance of “escalating tensions.”

The Ministry of Defence has not yet released official details of the sortie, but the deployment fits a wider pattern of rapid reinforcement across the eastern flank. NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe, Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, recently described Eastern Sentry as a demonstration of the alliance’s ability to react “quickly and decisively” to threats.

Lisa West
Lisa West
Lisa has a degree in Media & Communication from Glasgow Caledonian University and works with industry news, sifting through press releases in addition to moderating website comments.

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

76 COMMENTS

  1. Launching CAP from the UK over Poland is not an optimal use of our limited jets. We need to forward base these aircraft in Germany or Poland. The problem, as always, is we simply do not have enough aircraft. having just 6 Typhoon and 2 F35B operational Sqns is about half of what is required.

      • Of course it’s a token, what else would it be at this stage? Forward basing is very expensive… at least everyone sleep gets to sleep in their own bed… a lot cheaper!

        • Poland reçoive « free Loan » for 40bn € to reinforce it’s defense. This help avoid forward basing.
          The gesture of allies is a sign of solidarity. It also prepares pilotes and troups on this theatre for the coming times.

  2. ‘quickly and decisively’ as long as you wait while the get there, assuming the Germans refuel and we fly supersonic all the way over there it’s probably going to be an hour at least before we get there.

  3. I have a hard time understanding what’s going on with operation Eastern Sentry. It’s been made very clear to me mostly by commentators on this website that the US is solely responsible for defending Europe and that most European counties are completely defenceless and can do next to nothing useful without uncle Sam carrying them.

    Yet all the aircraft defending NATO against Russia seem to be European.

    I can’t find much if any mention of the worlds greatest military providing anything beyond administrative support while The Netherlands, Italy, UK, France and Germany all seem to be actually providing hard assets.

    Am I missing something here? Perhaps one of our MAGA commentators could point out all the major US defence contributions I am missing.

    This may help to clear up the perennial misunderstanding of how 70,000 US personnel in Europe can provide more security than the 1.8 million European NATO personnel actually based on the continent.

      • Bit of both 😀

        Just wondering why when there are Russian incursions into NATO air space there have been no US forces deployed or engaging yet i am constantly told Europe is defenceless and America defends Europe.

        I just can’t equate the rhetoric with the actual reality. The two brigades and four squadrons the US has in Europe don’t seem to be much of a defence. Most of the smaller NATO members have more force than that guarding Europe.

        The US does an arming job keep the North Atlantic area safe from any incursion by Mexico I just don’t see there forces doing much defending anywhere but Alaska.

        Or am I missing something.

        • I don’t think you are, Trump clearly doesn’t want to get actively involved while Putin is absolutely testing US will to get involved here, that is a very dangerous combination that could get us progressively into a shooting war at some point by Russian miscalculation. Let’s see where the next test is, interesting that the Alaska meeting has only encouraged Putin to be ever more provocative, as the visuals we saw suggested he clearly saw nothing in Trump to fear, it certainly seems he only gets tough with friends and the weak, or those who don’t have incriminating evidence on him perhaps.

          • Just to add the old term ‘Paper Tiger’ has never been more true than when describing Trump who is a weak bully thrashing around aimlessly and coming up short apart from the delusional rhetoric almost everywhere. Sadly despite his falling popularity and influence far too many are still listening to it enabling this idiot to survive.

        • I’ve never disparaged NATO’s non-US capabilities, but to your question the US Aegis ashore sites in Romania and Poland are probably helping with surveillance, and the Gerald R. Ford carrier strike group is in the North Sea/Baltic area right now if needed.

        • Hello Jim, I got to ask who are all these people telling you Europe is defeneless ?

          Sounds like you are listening to a bunch of Halfwits, I should stop bothering with them and engage with the vast majority who don’t say such rubbish.

        • Okay, baisically didn’t want to go through explaining this if you weren’t gen asking:

          Essentially it’s a game of two halves. Europe has historically provided the ground based “mass” against Russia, like even at the height of the cold War West Germany alone provided more ground forces to NATO than America did. And that continues. As you pointed out ENATO has nearly 2 million active duty soldiers, while America only has 70,000 stationed, even rotationally, in Europe, and the US Army is only about 500k. In theory this sounds great, what do we need America for.

          The problem is that since it was created NATO has been structured around the US. Europe might have 30 divisions of ground forces, but it’s always been assumed they slot into American command structures. The logistical and command, as well as specialist formations that need to exist to enable 2 million soldiers to do their jobs do not exist in European inventory, that has always been provided by the US. Europe occasionally has started moving towards rectifying this, but every time it did the US complained that that meant undermining NATO. In video game terms, ENATO without the US is like having a shit tonne of DLC without the base game. Yes you might have in theory more gameplay value in the DLC, but if you don’t own the basegame it just sort of sits there on your hard-drive.

          The US maintains the lift to move a large amount of material and personnel from the US to, as well as keeping material forward positioned in, Europe. Nobody, not China, nor Russia can force project like the US can. So the American defence of Europe in a lot of ways isn’t so much about how much US stuff is actually based in Europe, but how much stuff the US can realistically rock up in Europe with after a few weeks of fighting. This was even the case during the cold war, where the US kept about 4 divisions in Germany, but has 6 on stand-by to reinforce through Re-forger, and another 5 at high readyness but not specifically assigned to reforger.

          (There is also whole industrial support thing, which I won’t get too much into, but much of Europe’s defence rests on an American industrial base, so obviously if you want to keep supporting a war that industrial base has to be onside, but that’s a seperate thing.)

          Point being in a real way, Europe needs the US as it stands, just because European defence is build around the US, and the challenge going forward is very much how to we build Europe’s military in a way that doesn’t rely on the US to provide the framework everything else slots into, without driving the US away.

          Then there’s the Rhetoric side; the US does pay a stupid amount for defence, and the idea that European nations need to spend more has been a drum that a few presidents have hammered on, but none so heavily as Trump. But it’s worth remembering that is largely for home consumption “Vote for me and I’ll make NATO pay it’s way.” Without mentioning that Europe spends a lot on defence as well, it’s just spending it in a very wasteful way. Aggregated the EU is like the the 3rd or 4th highest defence spender globally (depending on source, it’s usually behind the US and China, and then it depends on how estimates of Russia’s post 22 wartime budget are weighted, either ahead of or just behind Russia), but it’s spending gets duplicated a lot (31 departments of defence have 31 ministers of defence that have 31 procurment programs, that buy 31 different rifles, and have 31 different infantry training schools, and 31 different engineering schools and 31 bootcamps, as opposed to the US that has one of each). US politicians also tend not to mention how much US defence spending goes on the Middle East, or Indo-Pacific, rather than NATO, where most European spending, by default since most European nations don’t spend on Expeditionary capabilities, is NATO spending.

          So two sides in brief:

          European NATO has a lot of forces, but they are disjointed, disorganised, and have no coherent command structure. The US provides that as well as a large force that it can actually bring to Europe.

          American rhetoric about European under-spending, has some basis in truth, but is largely for popular consumption at home, and if the US was going for maximising European fighting power and minimizing reliance on the US defending it, there are other areas to tackle than spending.

          • Issues with Europe de industrial base will remain because nations still exist and all of them want’s appropriate industrial returns. But some equipments become standards. This is not so bad.

            • The point was that the European military does not have enough of a sovereign industrial base and is very reliant on the US for things like Mk41, HIMARS etc.
              That issue remaining has nothing to do with industrial returns, and everything to do with short termism, lack of joined up thinking and political pressure from the US.

        • I’ve read that the Migs were intercepted by Finnish aircraft over the Gulf of Finland, which handed over to Estonian based Italian F35s at the appropriate point. If that is correct, the migs were only overflying Estonia because NATO let them.
          Why NATO let them, none of us really know, but hopefully they have a cunning plan.

              • No, but still a fav film of mine.
                My fav bits were involving General Vladimirov!
                Firefox down, the second book, would have made a great film.
                The Mig31 references and inspiration for the book were I think due to Victor Belenko defecting in a Mig25 to Japan in the late 70s and mentioning there was a super Foxbat in development, which became the Mig31 Foxhound, involved in this incident.
                I’m curious they used it for this incursion it’s usually a long range interceptor designed to counter SAC Bombers coming in from over the North pole.

                  • Possibly. They’re based in that region as well, a couple of Regiments on the Kola and south of it around the lakes near Finland.
                    As Russian planes go, a fine aircraft I believe.

        • Trump is either a Russian asset or Putin has something on him, whatever the case Europe is on its own here. I struggle to understand why the UK/France/Germany/Italy haven’t done a large exercise on NATO eastern border to send a message.

        • I’m convinced this is just trolling.

          Surely any intelligent person can understand that a defense treaty with the US is a very significant deterrent, and that the US can reposition forces if and when it is needed, and doesn’t need to permanently base a thousand jets to maintain deterrence when they are capable of moving huge numbers on theatre within 24 hours.

          • The assumption there is the US would intervene if a eastern block country was attacked, which looks insanely unlikely right now.

            • Trump’s biggest reluctance is due to the “free loaders” who are well below nato spend targets. The Eastern Bloc aren’t the problem, so I disagree with your assessment.

              • Hard disagree with that, he just sees defense as a economic transaction, he wants Europe to buy more US gear and has nothing to do with freeloading.

                Realitiy it’s the reverse, the US historic investment in European defence has been highly profitable for them. It has never been anything about doing the right thing, always been about economic /trade influence.

        • Just like Putin, Donald can make up any Facts he wants & then bully & browbeat anyone who dares disagree. Land of the free no more.
          We do need to expand our negligable forces though & be ready & willing to engage russian forces where they overstep rather than just issuing protests & warnings that grow lame.

        • You say the USA is busy defending its airspace from Mexico , to be honest the USA does have its far north that pretty much borders Russia to defend so they often get Russian aircraft bothering them up there but yes a lot is made by the media about how defenceless Europe is and how it piggy backs on the USA when infact Europe is incredibly powerful (just not very coordinated )

    • Since you mentioned “all the nato aircraft”, understand this article is bragging about one sortie that put aircraft into Polish airspace for “a few hours”. Bravo, medals for everyone /sarcasm.

      Meanwhile, I read elsewhere France’s contribution is an impressive 3 Rafaels. I’m sure Russia is trembling, especially with this single tourist sortie.

      As for the US contribution, did you know the US has more than 63,000 troops stationed in continental Europe, with significant presences in the Baltics, Poland, Germany, Hungary, and Romania? This is an expeditionary force almost the size of the entire UK army, from a country an ocean away. But yes, let’s insult these allies who should be able to rely upon an allied continent of 500m people to defend against 140m Russians, while they rightfully prioritize the much bigger threat of China, Iran, and North Korea — among others, while still providing a greater deterrent to Russia than Europeans do themselves.

      And your attitude is why Americans are increasingly fed up with what seems to broadly be a continent of people who are simultaneously ungrateful and loathing of America, while also demanding this sovereign nation to do more for them.

      • There are USAF F-35’s in Poland right now, deployed from the continental USA. That’s on top of all the USAF assets permanently stationed at Lakenheath, Aviano, Spangdalhham, Incirlik ..

        I agree 100%, If the US pulls support Europe will fold like a cheap blanket.

        • I think you’re being pessimistic. If the s..t was spraying around liberally, surely ENATO at short notice could between them put up at least 50 fighters, maybe more. Ditto one carrier group. It just needs the political will to do so, which is where my theory might fall.

          • Sadly, even if you’re right, 50 fighters isn’t enough in this hypothetical scenario where Russia intentionally launches a preemptive strike against ENATO. If for no other reason than these fighters would have to be distributed across the entirety of the border to anticipate the secondary movements of the assault.

            Not enough to establish air superiority except in specific areas of concentration.

  4. I read there are also serious incursions over Estonia, rebuffed by Italian F-35s, far more brazen than the normal testing of boundaries. Given that British forces in Poland and Estonia are supposedly deployed as a “trigger”, it does make me wonder, what will it trigger? Is there a spear behind the tip?

  5. I am by no means a Green Party member, but I have flown in a Hawk out of Valley and am no stranger to flight sims from WW1 to Present. Here is my Q, why do these super-cruise capable aircraft need full reheat to get airborne on a lengthy runway? When you do the math, thrust-weight etc. max dry-thrust is plenty. My only guess is cutting down and tyre rubber 🙂 at the expense of fuel that could extend a mission another 5-10mins (reheat dumps fuel at a hell of a rate).

    • It’s probably a stock image. RAF Typhoons takeoff using dry power only on a very regular basis. But they also do plenty of performance departures. Endurance doesn’t seem to be an issue, especially when you have Voyager support. Its all very carefully planned out. Even when reheat is used, it’s cancelled very quickly, as speed builds very rapidly.

  6. I felt enormously let down on reading that the 3 Mig31’s were not immediately engaged and destroyed. Typical of what we have to put up with these days; likewise Ukraine has been consistently given sufficient help to resist, but never sufficient to win. Ridiculous!

    • My guess is that it’s NATO’s plan to try and suck the life out of the Russian military and economy by keeping them bogged down for years in Ukraine, nobody winning nobody losing, whilst slowly strengthening NATO forces in the area. And use Russian money to pay for it all.

      • Dmitry Kozak, Kremlin Deputy Chief of Staff ‘resigned’ last week. He lost favour with Putin for objecting to the war in Ukraine. NATO will be hoping that his ‘resignation’ will be the first of many. It’s a case of who will blink first without being provoked into a direct exchange of fire between NATO and Russian forces, which is what Putin is trying to engineer.

    • I think NATO would have fallen for Putin’s trap had they shot those jets down. His narrative over the last few years has been that Russia is at war with NATO and shooting those jets down would vindicate him and give him a much needed propaganda win at home with little chance of further escalation.

    • Good morning Halfwit.
      I apologise, I missed your last question when talking before.
      Not Kurd, Tatar. Father Russian, mother Kazakhstan, or when they marry both Soviet citizen.
      Astrakhan next door to Kazakhstan so easy travel to see family.
      Horses still important for those who follow traditions and more fun on steppe

      • Hello, Oh, I was not very close then !
        Horses are ace, I loved riding them in my youth, I’m more a Bike fan now though, just bought another today It goes Vroom Vroom, none of this silly lecky noises.

    • I agree with you, this government will never stop interfering and getting involved with the politics and wars that have nothing to do with the UK, their historic meddling has proved to be a disaster Syria just one example civil unrest against democratically elected president Asad the only reason to send in the military and its supply of military firepower to the rebels aka Islamic state terrorists to depose president Asad and the Russian alliance. The country would have been better off the war would have ended. And the country united had we kept out of the conflict Iraq Afghanistan all left in a worse state

  9. All the headlines over just two RAF Typhoon’s. Hard to know whether its a clever tripwire approach, or simply a token force that is the maximum the RAF can manage at short notice. I fear the later. Those 36 foolishly scrapped Typhoon Tranche 1’s are a huge loss. It would have been a big challenge, but establishing two flying squadrons of the Royal Auxiliary Air Force equipped with those would have been an invaluable strengthening of the UK’s air defences.

    • I think it was more likely a symbolic gesture. There are plenty of ENATO aircraft out on the eastern front at the moment, there’s no point in sending four or five when two is enough to make the point. As I’ve said elsewhere on UKDJ, those Migs were well covered by Finnish and Italian jets, and wouldn’t have lasted 5 minutes if NATO had thought lethal action was necessary. But things don’t seem to be going well for Russia at the moment, so why rock the boat by over-reacting and giving Putin an excuse to say ‘I told you so, NATO. want to kill Russia.’
      I would have liked to be a fly on the wall when the Mig pilots were briefed with their task. “You want me to do f…..g what?!”

      • Given the parlous state of the UK military, symbolic is about all that it can muster against a peer state.
        .
        .
        Otherwise, I disagree. Cool heads or lacking a spine is what has led to the present situations in the world where states like russia, china and others are enabled to conduct their own agenda.
        .
        .
        It could be agued at junctions in the past if the West had acted more assertively for the right reasons – Taiwan Naughty korea Ukraine The East/West Seas (depending ‘relevant’ country 🙃) tonnage but a few – the world would not be in the state it is in now and in all likelihood the calibre of politicians world-wide would be much higher than the world presently puts up with.

    • Maybe we should flip this on its head and ask ourselves what the Average Russian military pundit thinks about them ‘only’ sending 3 Migs to the border?

    • An Royal Auxiliary Air Force, would look like they are flowed by Civil Servants!
      Better to establish a Royal Territorial Air Corps(Air TA). Order some Gripon E/F’s and F-50’s from S.K. for Ait TA

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

By submitting this comment, you agree to the storage and handling of your data by this website in accordance with our Privacy Policy.