Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

"Russian jet collides with US drone over Black Sea"

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

"Russian jet collides with US drone over Black Sea"

Old 14th Mar 2023, 18:43
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Washington.
Age: 73
Posts: 954
Received 58 Likes on 26 Posts
Originally Posted by atakacs
Does anyone know if the Su-27 has fuel dump capability ?

Well, the MQ-9 operator certainly thought so, and they probably have recorded video of the attempt.
GlobalNav is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 18:43
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 29,891
Received 1,332 Likes on 603 Posts
Originally Posted by Timmy Tomkins
And who will do that & how?
Russia, they recovered items off the Moskva, so why not if there is intelligence to be gleaned from it.


​​​​​​…

Last edited by NutLoose; 14th Mar 2023 at 21:45.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 18:50
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 6,531
Received 65 Likes on 41 Posts
Originally Posted by BEagle
USS Pueblo again?
No. There are no aircrew in a drone.
Not surprised that the Russians are doing this, but this does make me wonder at when the next raising of the ante will come.
Aside: back in the Cold War we had the INCSEA agreements as a buffer to try and prevent some of the more risky bits of posturing on the high seas, but a few nudges here and there still came about. (Crazy Ivan!)

Back to airborne stuff: back in the Cold War there were Laser events, MIJI aplenty, and other shenanigans.

Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 14th Mar 2023 at 21:34.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 18:52
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Age: 57
Posts: 1,852
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by GlobalNav
Well, the MQ-9 operator certainly thought so, and they probably have recorded video of the attempt.
Not saying it didn't happen (although, as in any war, reliable information is hard to come by) but could have been some purpose built device ?

Dumping fuel - assuming there is such a capability - seems really far fetched. But I guess anything's possible.

Last edited by atakacs; 14th Mar 2023 at 19:08.
atakacs is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 19:12
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK/OZ
Posts: 1,863
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Dumping fuel could be journo mis-speak for engaging afterburners?

In the last 36 hours, did the two B52s fly closer to the Kaliningrad coast than ever before? Into Russian airspace? If so, was this the Russian response?
Mjb

mickjoebill is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 19:17
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 272
Received 84 Likes on 17 Posts
It would seem the Americans are down playing the event with their diplomatic language and not wanting to escalate the situation.
Surely agreement to do this must have come from a seriously high level in Moscow.

Makes me wonder what the back channel conversations are like at the moment - probably quite sporting.

Also wouldn't surprise me if this doesn't herald in the transfer of F16s, something that could clear the Black Sea of Russian Aircraft and Ships, that would be a delicious own goal.
Spunky Monkey is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 19:29
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 2,274
Received 203 Likes on 88 Posts
If it is international airspace over the Black Sea for the US, it is international airspace for all. You cannot start clearing it of Russian aircraft any more that they can clear it of Western aircraft without a risking kicking off a full blown shooting war. Giving the ac to the Ukrainians will not alter that.
Ninthace is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 14th Mar 2023, 19:32
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Den Haag
Age: 56
Posts: 5,909
Received 204 Likes on 116 Posts
It would seem the Americans are down playing the event with their diplomatic language and not wanting to escalate the situation.
​​​​​​​In contrast with the storm over a balloon!
212man is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 19:36
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2022
Location: Sydney
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
No fighter jet can match the Reaper's endurance of 22000km. So you'd need a fleet of KC10s as well....
For goodness sake is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 19:38
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 64
Posts: 6,531
Received 65 Likes on 41 Posts
Originally Posted by arf23
So Russia has intentionally attacked and destroyed a NATO asset.
No, that's an American drone. American owned and operated, not like the NATO AWACS...
Is this was a manned fighter the reaction would.be unequivocal,
Actually, the manned fighter would have been able to maneuver and avoid.
and I don't see much distinction between that and a drone..
Really? You don't see much distinction between a manned aircraft and a drone?
Orville wept.

For Thrust Augmentation:
I second your motion on the dumbassity of that statement.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 19:40
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Central UK
Posts: 1,343
Received 45 Likes on 30 Posts
Originally Posted by Thrust Augmentation
Intercepted in an "environmentally unsound" manner - with all that's going on that's a quality statement, dumb a** quality.
Yes but nowadays every silly trigger has to be pushed.
In view of all the ecological catastrophes committed all over the region it does indeed seem petty and trite in the extreme.
The US would be well advised not to trivialise such events so transparently, it is not a good look.
Imagine the "envionmentally unsound" outrage you could invent over chucking tons and tons of phosphorous over the Ukranian countryside!
meleagertoo is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 19:59
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Den Haag
Age: 56
Posts: 5,909
Received 204 Likes on 116 Posts
Originally Posted by Ninthace
If it is international airspace over the Black Sea for the US, it is international airspace for all. You cannot start clearing it of Russian aircraft any more that they can clear it of Western aircraft without a risking kicking off a full blown shooting war. Giving the ac to the Ukrainians will not alter that.
Even if itís International Airspace, itís certainly in somebodyís FIR - most likely Romanian. I havenít seen any FR24 tracks yet.
212man is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 20:10
  #33 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Ayrshire
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Ninthace
l think you might be missing the point here. If a US aircraft is in international airspace, no one has any right to mess with it. I don't think anyone is suggesting that the Russians should be denied access to international airspace or that the Black Sea should be 'cleared' of Russians. The important thing is that if the Russians want to be there they should be bound by the same rules as everyone else. They can't just behave like the rules don't apply to them.
134brat is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 14th Mar 2023, 20:11
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 75
Posts: 18,053
Received 327 Likes on 126 Posts
The US State Department has "Summoned". the Russian Ambassador.....which no doubt has put Putin all atremble!
SASless is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 20:13
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Glorious Devon
Posts: 2,274
Received 203 Likes on 88 Posts
Originally Posted by 134brat
Ninthace
l think you might be missing the point here. If a US aircraft is in international airspace, no one has any right to mess with it. I don't think anyone is suggesting that the Russians should be denied access to international airspace or that the Black Sea should be 'cleared' of Russians. The important thing is that if the Russians want to be there they should be bound by the same rules as everyone else. They can't just behave like the rules don't apply to them.
On the contrary, I was making the point that in international airspace, nobody has the right to mess with anyone's ac.
Ninthace is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 20:21
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2021
Location: Noumea
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It's not an aircraft going down, it's just a big model with nobody in it. There is no need to make such a fuss about it.
The Americans laughed with bravado when they shot down a motionless balloon, now it's their turn to lose some costly device.

Important thing is that those long-range drones - which they have been flying without authoristation over countless countries - are now proved to be vulnerable.

There is nothing unprofesssionnal in this story, actually I find it quite smart, like the Spitfires unsettling the V1s with their wingtips in 1944.
JeanKhul is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 20:48
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: washington dc
Posts: 44
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by JeanKhul
... nothing unprofesssionnal in this story, actually I find it quite smart, like the Spitfires unsettling the V1s with their wingtips in 1944.
... in a time of war, perhaps.
But causing the deliberate destruction of another nation's military asset in international airspace is an 'act of war' by the agressors, in this instance, the Russians. Doesn't matter if it was shot down or its flight was so interfered with (like the Spits and the V1s) that it crashed.


voyageur9 is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 20:50
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 368
Received 10 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by tdracer
Sort of defeats the purpose of an unmanned surveillance drone...
Not if you have a US Stealth shadowing the drone and can lock onto the SU without being seen ? That would wake them up if they thought the drone was locking onto them.

Didnt the US have F35's shadowing drones near Iran to keep the locals from misbehaving ?
GrahamO is offline  
Old 14th Mar 2023, 20:58
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sussex
Posts: 23
Received 54 Likes on 8 Posts
Originally Posted by uxb99
Bbc news reporting Russian jets dumped fuel in front of the drone and damaged its prop forcing it down.

Are the Russians planning something? US Escorts for the drones?
Fighter escorts are costly with that many UCAV and other assets flying ISTAR 24/7 and skimming the Ukraine and occupied international borders. Still the Americans will have to respond and most likely it will increase escort missions.

I note the Pentagon language is coded and saying the Reaper was in 'international airspace'.

Question to be asked: is that the Pentagon definition of international airspace according to international law, or, was it flying in the unrecognised illegally annexed Ukraine airspace claimed by Russia? Seems like the Russkies don't want the peninsula probed for weakness and intelligence given to the Ukraine Defence Ministry.

Indeed, perhaps the Americans were on to something. Or perhaps the Russians did not want to shoot it down for the adverse propaganda it would most certainly attract.
In that case, the attack would be seen as an attempt by the Kremlin to test the response of the US.

Honestly though, it's far more likely the Russian pilot made a serious judgement error. Colliding with the Reaper's prop could so very easily have ended in the loss of the fighter as well as the UCAV.

Last edited by Uberteknik; 14th Mar 2023 at 21:25.
Uberteknik is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Old 14th Mar 2023, 21:00
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Age: 58
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by JeanKhul
It's not an aircraft going down, it's just a big model with nobody in it. There is no need to make such a fuss about it.
The Americans laughed with bravado when they shot down a motionless balloon, now it's their turn to lose some costly device.

Important thing is that those long-range drones - which they have been flying without authoristation over countless countries - are now proved to be vulnerable.

There is nothing unprofesssionnal in this story, actually I find it quite smart, like the Spitfires unsettling the V1s with their wingtips in 1944.
What makes you think they're flying without authorisation? Ove the Black Sea, as stated above, it's not in anyone's airspace.
alfaman is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.