U.S. releases video of Russian jet dumping fuel on its drone

They left open the possibility of trying to recover portions of the downed $32 million aircraft, which they said crashed into waters that were 4,000 to 5,000 feet (1,200 to 1,500 meters) deep, although the U.S. does not have any ships in the area.

Afraid to send ships to avoid another encounter on the sea.

said the drone was operating in international airspace.

International space but in near distance away from sovereign country border that can be considered as a threat.

International space but in near distance away from sovereign country border that can be considered as a threat.

Just like the Russian refueling plane near Estonian airspace in the report yesterday.

The released video shows the Russian fighter striking the drone and damaging the propeller.

International space but in near distance away from sovereign country border that can be considered as a threat.

There have been so many incursions by the both the Chinese and the Russians in US airspace and waters and Subs as close to the California pacific, none were shot down or sank and that’s incidents were considered a threat as well because they were already deep within US sovereign territory. There was no justification at that precise point to do what they did given the history of these nations coming very close and being in US territory.

International space but in near distance away from sovereign country border that can be considered as a threat.

Hell an ICBM sitting in North Dakota is considered a threat by your "logic"

International space but in near distance away from sovereign country border that can be considered as a threat.

Sovereign country airspace in which Russia wasn't invited. Nowhere near Russian airspace.

Not surprising. Luckily it was a drone and not a manned plane of some kind.

from whence was the video taken? was there another drone i wonder? or what?

Sovereign country airspace in which Russia wasn't invited. Nowhere near Russian airspace.

Which countries sovereign airspace was that?

The video was taken by the drone which was struck by the fighter jet. The software was wiped before it crashed.

Which countries sovereign airspace was that?

Not Russia's, that's for sure.

His redemption was complete and he died, a Russian hero fighting fascism,

Wrong. He died fighting for fascism.

The Russian defense minister commented that he more than redeemed himself.

Why would anyone believe anything the defense minister would say?

And you believed it...

A former Russian deputy minister from the Dnepropetrovsk region of still existing Ukraine, disgraced and jailed for accepting bribes and volunteered for Wager. His redemption was complete and he died, a Russian hero fighting fascism, staring at the blue sky just over the horizon from his motherland. The Russian defense minister commented that he more than redeemed himself.

Russia screwed up and downed an aircraft in international airspace.

Perhaps they should learn more about flying their planes. This is how escalations start.

The Russians said they would deal with spy drones over the Black sea back in January.

US response...

White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said. “We have made clear on many occasions, we do not seek a conflict with Russia.”

Proxy war only.

The Russians said they would deal with spy drones over the Black sea back in January.

Explains why they went into full denial over this.

This is what awaits invaders, traitors, and collaborators in the occupied Oblasts of Ukraine. The partisans are being courteous by providing them reminders to think about what they are doing and if the Rubles are worth roasting in one's car.

https://twitter.com/LvivJournal/status/1635984252557729794

I would like to apologize for doubting USA claims. But in my defense, the the drone was sending real time intelligence to Ukrainian so they can target Russian speaking Ukrainians and Russians soldiers trying to protect them...so justified.

so DOES anyone know how the video was taken? where from? another aircraft? or what?

I would like to apologize for doubting USA claims. But in my defense, the the drone was sending real time intelligence to Ukrainian so they can target Russian speaking Ukrainians and Russians soldiers trying to protect them...so justified.

The purpose of the Russian refueling plane in airspace near Estonia was to expand the war range of Russian fighter planes. Justification…

Send a bill for $32 million to the Russian embassy in DC.

It was taken by the drone itself.

so DOES anyone know how the video was taken? where from? another aircraft? or what?

International space but in near distance away from sovereign country border 

Oh, the Russian side is concerned about the sanctity of sovereign borders now, is it?

Great news. I look forward to them promptly withdrawing what is left of their army to their side of it.

No defense for what?

For the actions of the Russians regarding the incident this article is about… Obviously.

In other news, the Russian economy is rapidly failing.

Really? Not sure about that. I do know there are ominous signs re economy and banks coming from USA and Western Europe.

It's obvious from the photo that the next drone that goes up in that area needs to have a remote controlled Bic lighter.

According to international law

Lol. Russia invaded Ukraine. They decided a long time ago they don’t care about international law.

@mrukiplinq Proxy war only.

Based on lies from Putin and the Kremlin, Russia's military invaded a sovereign nation, after using the Wagner Group and others to foment violence in Donbas many years before. This war is on Russia, and on Putin and the Kremlin's inability to accept the reality that Russia's neighboring countries have little interest in once again being under Moscow's jackboots.

After Russian forces return to Russia there may be peace in Eastern Europe. Unless the Kremlin launch another invasion.Let sovereign nations determine for themselves which nations to side with.

Why was the GPS Coordinates not ,it would of verified everything,they got them

Russia invaded Ukraine. They decided a long time ago they don’t care about international law.

If that were so, would Russian be alone in that?

Back in 1983, then Soviet airfirce shot down a South Korean airliner KAL007 killing 269 people.Then Soviet leader Andropov did not apologize but stepup the defence status. Now this is a drone, nobody dies, so don't listen to America's provocative languages, they are stupid!

According to international law, the US and all it's lackey states except for South Korea (which only send weapons Poland bought) are party to the conflict. The Russians should have taken much more aggressive measures long ago.

Exactly.

US go and fight directly with Russia not via Ukraine.

Lucas - I agree. The Russian media tries to elevate their clumsy attempt at a land and resource grab in Ukraine as some kind of civilizational war against the 'Decadent West' / USD Hegemony / NATO / Nazis, etc, but if that's the case, why mess around in Ukraine? Come at us properly if you're feeling it, otherwise everyone knows it's just a land and resource grab from your smaller neighbor.

If that were so, would Russian be alone in that?

Of course the Russians are not alone in their disregard for international law. They certainly don’t care for international law though, so using that in your argument means nothing.

Just like the Russian refueling plane near Estonian airspace in the report yesterday.

Was the refueling plane armed with lazer guidance missiles and bombs and designed to be a killer predator spy plane remotely controlled ?

I think not !

Your comparison has issues !

Of course the Russians are not alone in their disregard for international law.

For a stellar example of disregard for international law you need look no further than the USA.

Perhaps they should learn more about flying their planes. This is how escalations start.

And so now what? What’s Biden going to do?

Was the refueling plane armed with lazer guidance missiles and bombs and designed to be a killer predator spy plane remotely controlled ?

Oh, did the drone fire on the planes? I missed that part.

@Haaa: Back in 2003 ,round the world told US/UK/Aus not to invade Iraq, including calls from the United Nations.

When did they ever respect of international law?

russians did what is expected from them.

protect own country security,safety,borders and interests.

if russian drone will fly from Cuba to Florida us air force will do SAME THING.

kanec filma.

Which countries sovereign airspace was that?

Not Russia's, that's for sure.

It was at 50 thousand ft so nobody's airspace !

bass4funk

   Perhaps they should learn more about flying their planes. This is how escalations start.

> And so now what? What’s Biden going to do

What would you want him to do?

The software was wiped before it crashed.

Or so we've become told ?

Or perhaps you have found time to recover the drone and personally can verify the software was wiped ?

@Haaa: Back in 2003 ,round the world told US/UK/Aus not to invade Iraq, including calls from the United Nations.

I was against the invasion of Iraq too. And I’m against the invasion of Ukraine. You’re right about America, but bringing international law into the argument to support the nation that has broken international law in the manner it was done here is just dumb.

And so now what? What’s Biden going to do?

Do you think he should escalate?

Great news. I look forward to them promptly withdrawing what is left of their army to their side of it.

as Russia has only used 8 hypersonic multiple glide missiles so far in one year, not deployed its s-500, S-550 missile defense systems, and only deployed around 600,000 military compared to Ukraine’s basically, half the male population over 18, I don’t understand “what is left”.

As Donbass and two other provinces are now officially part of Russia, and the USA tore up the Nuclear treaty, Russia can now position medium range nuclear warheads that can target any area from the new territories that can destroy any city in EU or UK. These missiles can’t be shot down. Luckily Russia only has over 3000 nuclear warheads so some small remote islands may be spared.

Russia also has the technology to destroy USA GPS system, making allied weapon response difficult. Hypersonic ICBM can hit any city or base belonging to the US. Argis cannot, at this time, stop these high tech missiles.

for the sake of the whole world, Ukraine should accept that borders change, and Russia should respect Ukraine as a sovereign independent state.

regarding reconciliation. After Ukraine purges the neo-Nazis, Russia and Ukraine could strengthen relations. Together they could rebuild Ukraine and provide jobs and economic stimulus. I went to East Berlin before the wall came down, and after. Germany is now the strongest country in EU.

there is hope.

so Russia just supposed to let the USA spy on them from 200m outside “international waters”? Especially during a war where the US is actively helping the other side?

The jet dumping something behind it while approaching the drone from even further behind.

so Russia just supposed to let the USA spy on them from 200m outside “international waters”?

Yes. They are international waters.

Especially during a war where the US is actively helping the other side?

Yes, because they are international waters, and attacking another nation in international waters can start a world war.

Will Putin now claim that drone attacked its pilots? Or will he pull a Chinese excuse out of his hat and redraw the territorial borders like has been attempting to do with Ukraine?

So you attack things that you are behind by attacking behind yourself where nothing is.

interesting approach. Sounds like a conispiracy to me.

Fly another drone in international airspace.

And so now what? What’s Biden going to do?

Especially during a war where the US is actively helping the other side?

But it's a 'proxy war', right? The US is 'the other side'.

Russian assets in international waters & air space are now fair game for the US to destroy them. They can even destroy their satellites.

This is what you want.

I don't think Black understands the concept of international waters.

Imagine the situation over Russian waters. Then his comments make sense.

But that didn't happen.

the jet is behind the drone in the picture.

Or is it coming at the drone?

I don't think Black understands the concept of international waters.

Nah I was just in the military for like a decade operating underway in…………wait for it…..”international waters”

so there is that.

Blacklabel - have you seen the video?

The fighter jet covers the drone in fuel and on the second fly-by hits the propeller.

https://youtu.be/5fHw6FN9m3w

There is no rule that I have to allow you to spy on me to help my opponent when I am at war. Why would I allow that?

and if you aren’t part of the war (like the IS supposedly isnt) you shouldn’t be instigating like that. You might find yourself in the war too.

Blacklabel - have you seen the video?

yep the jet was climbing to try to avoid hitting the drone. Didn’t work.

There is no rule that I have to allow you to spy on me to help my opponent when I am at war. Why would I allow that?

You clearly don't understand how international waters work.

Blacklabel

lack of concern for an America aircraft downed in international air space.

You clearly don't understand how international waters work.

I clearly do as I operated in them for over a decade.

ask general Milley. He saw all the videos available even the secret ones and he said he can’t even determine if it was intentional or not.

what do you think happened?

Blacklabel - Countries are allowed to spy on other countries as long as they do it from international waters (or space). You should know this. Russia f'ed up.

Regarding the video, the jet started dumping fuel when it was coming up from behind and continued dumping after it had overtaken the much slower drone.

lack of concern for an America aircraft 

It’s an unmanned drone what would I be concerned about? All the people who were not on board?

Was the drone’s feelings hurt?

collision that it can’t he determined if it was intentional or not. Anything more than that?

Countries are allowed to spy on other countries as long as they do it from international waters (or space).

Yep that’s what you thought up until now.

yet seems that’s not the case anymore is it?

Yep that’s what you thought up until now.

yet seems that’s not the case anymore is it?

How is it not?

Of course.

so Russia just supposed to let the USA spy on them from 200m outside “international waters”? Especially during a war where the US is actively helping the other side?

How is it not?

By the fact that the US was not “allowed” to just spy on other countries this time from right inside international waters like supposedly always happens.

something intentional happened to their spy drone didn’t it? Or was all this just an accident?

What do you think?

Russia overreacted.

It’s just a US weather drone!

but nothing is stopping them

their spy drone now being at the bottom of the ocean and soon to belong to Russia stopped them, no?

Was the refueling plane armed with lazer guidance missiles and bombs and designed to be a killer predator spy plane remotely controlled ?

Oh, did the drone fire on the planes? I missed that part.

You also missed answering the first question before asking a question of something that obviously didn't happen.

No the wimpy little drone got bullied and sent to deep 6.

And why didn't the almighty USA send fighter jets to intervene ?

A true presentation of US air superiority.

Bravo !

You also missed answering the first question before asking a question of something that obviously didn't happen.

So where was the direct that you are trying to imply? There is as much a direct threat from the drone as there was from the refueling plane designed to extend the range of Russian war planes. That is the relevant comparison.

So where was the direct that

direct threat.

Yep that’s what you thought up until now.

yet seems that’s not the case anymore is it?

Do you mean that we should start targeting Russian assets in international waters or airspace (or space) that may be spying on the US? Do you not agree with the concept of international waters?

Do you mean that we should start targeting Russian assets in international waters or airspace (or space) that may be spying on the US?

well we obviously wouldnt just "allow" it, right?

We would scramble some jets and maybe one of our jets might collide with the Russian asset, thats possible isnt it?

By the fact that the US was not “allowed” to just spy on other countries this time from right inside international waters like supposedly always happens.

You mean international airspace ?

lesson for US dont do that again.

this conflict dont need be escalated more.so much damage already done for all.

time to calm down take seat and start talk about peace.

Of course we allow it. We may not like it, but those are the rules.

Are you thinking that this was just an accident? If so, then Russia should acknowledge and apologize, but I won't hold my breath. If not an accident, then they should expect a proportional response, and maybe they have, in which case, that's fine. We got responses.

Eastman - We will fly anywhere we are legally allowed. You can take that to the bank.

Do you mean that we should start targeting Russian assets in international waters or airspace (or space) that may be spying on the US? Do you not agree with the concept of international waters?

Not to butt in - but the drone was traveling at 10 thousand feet which is 3 kilometers and outerspace /Karman line starts at 100km according to the outerspace constitution.

However the US military and NASA both define outerspace as starting 12 miles below the Karman line.

Awa - thanks for butting in. The drone was over international waters. The Black Sea does not belong to Russia, much as they would like it to.

Of course we allow it. We may not like it, but those are the rules.

do we really "allow" it?

https://www.reuters.com/world/russian-bomber-jets-intercepted-by-norad-near-alaska-2023-02-15/

"Several Russian strategic bombers and fighter jets were intercepted by North American air defence forces as they flew over international airspace near Alaska..."

Yes, we intercept them, which we are legally allowed to do. Can't shoot at them or touch them.

Probably not allowed to dump fuel on them either, but I will have to look that up to confirm this.

even in international air space where they have every right to be, spying on us?

Why would we intercept them if they have the right to be there?

You also missed answering the first question before asking a question of something that obviously didn't happen.

So where was the direct that you are trying to imply? There is as much a direct threat from the drone as there was from the refueling plane designed to extend the range of Russian war planes. That is the relevant comparison.

Oh no no no definitely not!

The comparison in question is was the refueling plane unmanned and being remotely controlled and armed with lazer guided missiles and bombs and designed for the sole purpose of being a hunter killer spy drone.

And don't try to say it was unarmed drone just being used for surveillance.

To say that a refuling plane that isnt armed with the same capabilities as the drone as being equally a direct threat is ridiculous.

To keep an eye on them and to spy on them back, which we are legally allowed to do, just as they are allowed to be there as well.

Desert Tortoise actually had some informative posts on the subject yesterday. I will try to find them. Thought you were on that thread yesterday, but maybe not.

I believe he is capable of understanding it. We just have to be patient and not give up.

Why would we intercept them if they have the right to be there?

Because you also have the right to be there.

Is the concept of a shared space that difficult for you to comprehend? Do you attack people for walking on the same street as you?

Blacklabel - DT had some good commentary regarding international waters/airspace yesterday on this article:

https://japantoday.com/category/world/uk-german-fighter-jets-intercept-russian-plane-near-estonia

To say that a refuling plane that isnt armed with the same capabilities as the drone as being equally a direct threat is ridiculous.

When it’s designed to expand the range of craft that are armed with the same and more then it is still a direct threat. Should the drone have been firing on or targeting Russian craft or territory you might have a point. So did that happen?

yeah I was in the same military he was.

but thanks.

To say that a refuling plane that isnt armed with the same capabilities as the drone as being equally a direct threat is ridiculous.

All aircraft are payload limited. There is only so much weight an aircraft can lift off the ground. For tactical jets there are limits on the weight each weapons station can carry. In practice aircraft outfitted as tankers do not carry ordnance. The weight of the fuel in one of those buddy tanks with the hose reel and basket is so much that the aircraft is maxed out for payload. There is also a consideration of underwing turbulence. Bombs hanging from pylons create huge turbulence and that doesn't work well with a refueling situation.

I think Black's concept of international airspace goes something like this:

"You are allowed to fly in international airspace, but if you are spying on another country, then that country takes ownership of the airspace and have the right to down aircraft."

When you look at his comments in that light they make complete sense.

Btw, many sensors a recce aircraft carries are incompatible with ordnance. The electronic emissions can set them off. Some ordnance is ok depending on what it is, like anti radiation missiles that are designed for use with jammer pods sitting next to them like they do on an EA-18G or the old EA-6, but a lot of ordnance would detonate when subject to high powered electronic emissions. That is why, for example, in certain spaces on the ship we could not use battery powered fork lifts but instead had to have a few forklifts powered by CNG. Even a battery powered electric motor risks detonating some ordnance.

It is capable of carrying munitions, but Air Force Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder, a Pentagon spokesperson, would not say whether the ditched drone had been armed.

Of course he refused to clarify that.

Blacklabel

so Russia just supposed to let the USA spy on them from 200m outside “international waters”? Especially during a war where the US is actively helping the other side?

Yes and yes. Not without actually declaring war on the U.S. because we are a non-combatant and because that's what the Laws of War dictate. It's a little surprising that you don't understand this after ten plus years of naval service.

Here's the released video for some posters who clearly haven't seen it...

https://www.dvidshub.net/video/876667/us-air-force-mq-9-camera-footage-russian-su-27-black-sea-intercept

Awa - thanks for butting in. The drone was over international waters. The Black Sea does not belong to Russia, much as they would like it to.

Yes exactly over international waters not in the water .

At 10 thousand feet personally would say airspace and was very close to Crimea.

How close to Crimea ?

Looks like a complete misunderstanding. Nothing to be concerned about.

It is capable of carrying munitions, but Air Force Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder, a Pentagon spokesperson, would not say whether the ditched drone had been armed.

Of course he refused to clarify that

Let's not be naive.

The killer drone was more than likely armed.

I sincerely doubt it wasn't.

Perhaps we will find out

In practice aircraft outfitted as tankers do not carry ordnance.

Yes i know that !

Hence my lack of agreement the refueling plane presented and equal direct threat as the remotely controlled unmanned armed killer spy drone

Awa - the 12 nm distance is for both international waters and airspace.

To say that a refuling plane that isnt armed with the same capabilities as the drone as being equally a direct threat is ridiculous.

When it’s designed to expand the range of craft that are armed with the same and more then it is still a direct threat. Should the drone have been firing on or targeting Russian craft or territory you might have a point. So did that happen?

The drone was targeting the Russian forces by gathering intel for the sole purpose of supporting the Ukraine resistance extremely close to Crimea.

The unarmed refuling plane and the killer drone are separate incidents at different locations.

Or do you expect me to assume - that specific refuling plane was there to refule the jets that downed the spy attack drone.

In comparison i would say the refuling plane posed a threat with its ability to assist the fighter jets , however not a direct threat no !

And it was near Estonia not Crimea anyway

The drone was targeting the Russian forces by gathering intel for the sole purpose of supporting the Ukraine resistance extremely close to Crimea.

Which is perfectly legal to do.

so Russia just supposed to let the USA spy on them from 200m outside “international waters”? Especially during a war where the US is actively helping the other side?

What is the difference between that RQ-9 flying over international waters in the Black Seda and a Russian electronic intelligence ship sitting 24 nautical miles off the entrance to San Diego Bay?

The killer drone was more than likely armed.

The "killer drone" has a cruising speed of around 170 knots and carries maybe four short range Hellfire or a pair of 220kg bombs. But I would suspect that it had sensor pods on it and not bombs. You can't do both on the meager payload of an RQ-9.

RKL

Looks like a complete misunderstanding. Nothing to be concerned about.

How so? The downing of a $30 million aircraft?

The drone was targeting the Russian forces by gathering intel for the sole purpose of supporting the Ukraine resistance extremely close to Crimea.

The US has been conducting recce flights over the Black Sea for decades keeping an eye on Soviet and later Russian forces in the region. It is perfectly legal to do so.

It is perfectly legal to do so.

Why don't some people here understand this? It doesn't seem that hard of a concept to grasp.

Unintended consequence of this: Turkey is allowing US warships into the Black Sea. Probably not what Putin wanted.

Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that by providing weapons to Ukraine and sharing intelligence information with Kyiv, the U.S. and its allies have effectively become engaged in the war, now in its 13th month.

Exactly. That drone was there to help Ukraine attack Russia, so they got what they deserved.

And now Russia will be able to study this advanced drone, something the US really wanted to avoid.

Awa no Gaijin: The drone was targeting the Russian forces by gathering intel for the sole purpose of supporting the Ukraine resistance extremely close to Crimea.

Great. As long as it's in international airspace we have the right to do that.

If I'm wrong, shoot down our aircraft with malace. Tell us we can't fly in international airspace. Tell us where and when we can fly.

Sound good?

Russia has attacked a member of NATO.