Originally Posted by
mahogany bob
GUESS - what MIGHT have happened ?
2 Flankers intercept Drone
Spent 20 mins + ( a long time )fooling around it intercepts/ formation / passes
Difficult because of speed difference )
Got bored so perhaps tried to dump fuel on it ?
(ROE stopped them shooting it down. ?)
Tried low speed intercept ( with fuel dump ?) from rear raised nose and put on full power (afterburner ?)
to perhaps try to blow it off course with jet wash ?
Sunk a few feet by mistake and accidentally nicked prop with tailplane ? - as discussed earlier lucky not hit Drone tailplane causing more damage.
Drone loses power and ditches.
The Flanker pilots would be tempted to take much more risks with a Drone than with a manned aircraft - ROE ?
Qs
What altitude were they at ?
What is the minimum speed of the Drone and the Flanker at that altitude? - the Drone’s would be much lower - 150- 170 kts ?
Why did the Flanker not use flap to lower stall speed?
Would the drone manoeuvre to make life difficult?
Would fuel soak worry the Drone and stop the turbo prop ( seen lots of fuel spillage during AAR but never a problem )
PS if US ships enter the Black Sea ( authorised by Turkey ? )to search for wreckage is there a risk of confrontation with Russian Navy?
Quite a few ideas here. Firstly, AEGIS cruisers and Type 45s r perfect for Black Sea AD, depends upon political signalling-I’d stick an NFZ over Crimea and ‘politically intend to extend’ in view of this ‘tactical aberration.’ Probably FL300_FL500, lower from the colour of the video. Speed 220kts so well achievable by SU27. He was too busy losing visual and dumping fuel to dump flap; drone was not (and can never be) aggressive c/w what SU27 can do. Highly likely fuel was to interfere with sensors - did a nice flyby of a Type 42 in the 80s with fuel dump; did not like the paint bill after the fact. ROE has nothing to do with risk at the tactical level; almost certain ROE on both sides is to prevent WW3.