"Russian jet collides with US drone over Black Sea"
How is SU-27 Guy supposed to be filming this? Helmet-cam? Rear-seat occupant of a 2-seater?
Just wondering about the practicalities of fly-the-airplane and pan-the-camera on a very close flyby. The recent U-2/balloon air-to-air selfie was with the target to the right, so stick in the right hand, camera in the left, and a good deal of separation between interceptor/target.
Just wondering about the practicalities of fly-the-airplane and pan-the-camera on a very close flyby. The recent U-2/balloon air-to-air selfie was with the target to the right, so stick in the right hand, camera in the left, and a good deal of separation between interceptor/target.
Gary Power's U2 was brought down because with the U2 in those days he only had about 10 knots to play with, probably less.
Last edited by chevvron; 15th Mar 2023 at 15:05.
Do we know if the drone has any inbuilt evasive, defence measures? Surprised the drone didn't just evade the jets. It must be considerably slower and more nimble.
As an aside I remember hearing a commentator remark about the F111 dump and burn "can't think of any valid combat reason for that manouver". Now we know.
As an aside I remember hearing a commentator remark about the F111 dump and burn "can't think of any valid combat reason for that manouver". Now we know.
There should have been much more severe sanctions imposed in Russia months ago, but since they haven’t I can only presume they have gone as far as they will go. This will change nothing.
Guest
What? By what stretch of warped imagination do you work that out? Downed? The US says that it was downed by them following a collision, the Russians say that it came down after maneuvering near the sea. It was in international airspace, there was no combat, and all that Russia seems to have demonstrated is yet another example of their ineffective and incompetent armed forces.
There were drones up there before, there are drones up there now, there will be drones up there tomorrow.
There were drones up there before, there are drones up there now, there will be drones up there tomorrow.
Lots of talk about an 'act of war'. This was not an act of war, and I shall tell you why - because the 'victim' decided it was not. It does not matter what Russia does to the USA, it will only be an act of war if the US says it is, and indeed vice-versa.
This is important. The US is absolutely terrified of confrontation with Russia, and not because the US would lose, but because they would most likely very quickly start to win. The fear is what Putin would then do, with the obvious spectre of use of nuclear weapons. To that end, the US will, quite understandably, do everything they can to avoid such a scenario. However, the logical path of this argument tells us that even if the offence by Russia is more egregious, such as firing weapons on a manned US aircraft, and killing the crew, then the US will do everything it can to avoid it being seen as an 'act of war' which it could not allow to go unanswered by a military response.
My personal view is that in such a circumstance, the US would call it an 'accident', 'the actions of a rogue pilot', 'a weapons malfunction'... etc - they would deny that an overt act of war was indeed such, so terrified are they of the potential armageddon that could follow, and maybe they would have a valid point. I believe that Russia can do a lot worse that bringing down a drone, and that the US will find any excuse to not retaliate. Just my personal view.
This is important. The US is absolutely terrified of confrontation with Russia, and not because the US would lose, but because they would most likely very quickly start to win. The fear is what Putin would then do, with the obvious spectre of use of nuclear weapons. To that end, the US will, quite understandably, do everything they can to avoid such a scenario. However, the logical path of this argument tells us that even if the offence by Russia is more egregious, such as firing weapons on a manned US aircraft, and killing the crew, then the US will do everything it can to avoid it being seen as an 'act of war' which it could not allow to go unanswered by a military response.
My personal view is that in such a circumstance, the US would call it an 'accident', 'the actions of a rogue pilot', 'a weapons malfunction'... etc - they would deny that an overt act of war was indeed such, so terrified are they of the potential armageddon that could follow, and maybe they would have a valid point. I believe that Russia can do a lot worse that bringing down a drone, and that the US will find any excuse to not retaliate. Just my personal view.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 29,891
Received 1,332 Likes
on
603 Posts
As I believe they have a self destruct on board, perhaps next time fire it as the Russian aircraft does its slow close pass. then blame it on the Russian. 
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
My, my, what short memories we all have. The Russians took down Korean 007 with the loss of 269 lives, and still only got a strongly worded memo from the State Department. Quite the hysteria being being generated by the media here. Try not to help them.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: S W France
Age: 79
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heidhurtin # 109
Fuel dumping in front of the Reaper could easily cause a flameout. It has happened (inadvertently) during AAR when the
AAR equipment has malfunctioned. We did it to a Vulcan at night over the Bay of Biscay returning from ASI in May 1982.
The Probe Nozzle/ Drogue failed to operate correctly while disconnecting and dumping fuel down the intakes.
Does the Reaper have relight capability?.
Fuel dumping in front of the Reaper could easily cause a flameout. It has happened (inadvertently) during AAR when the
AAR equipment has malfunctioned. We did it to a Vulcan at night over the Bay of Biscay returning from ASI in May 1982.
The Probe Nozzle/ Drogue failed to operate correctly while disconnecting and dumping fuel down the intakes.
Does the Reaper have relight capability?.
Guest
These Russian jets were obviously harassing the drone. I suspect deliberately trying to bring it down (they succeeded).
What would be the ramifications of downing the drone with gunfire? Result is still the same.
What would be the ramifications of downing the drone with gunfire? Result is still the same.
