Video Shows Russian Fighter Hitting USAF Drone | Hacker News Reader

Video Shows Russian Fighter Hitting USAF Drone

youtube.com

30 pointsjustin6646 comments

I don't understand the purpose of dumping fuel on the drone. Were the expecting to kill its motor? Go out of control and crash? Catch fire?

I was guessing that the goal was to smear the lenses with something greasy, thereby reducing its ability to do long range surveillance. Jet fuel is essentially kerosene, which usually leaves a waxy residue. But maybe there's a better explanation?

I'm pretty sure they were attempting to cover it with fuel and then ignite it with their afterburners. They wanted to take the drone down but also be able to say that they never fired upon it. I think the idea was to get the US to respond militarily in some way so they can further portray the US as aggressors. Basically the Russian military acting like the scum they are.

With all the discussion of “AI”, someone at the DoD is now asking how to add more intelligence to drones

Five years from now the drone will be constantly evaluating collision probabilities: “Probability of collision 80%. Take evasive maneuvers.”

I would be surprised if it wasn't already capable of that (doesn't even require AI, basic heuristics would be enough), but I guess that outside of a full-on war, they'd rather not disclose that capability even if it means losing a few units here and there.

A better strategy is for it to self destruct immediately and violently with a continuous rod warhead.

I saw this video earlier today. I'm not versed in flying machines, but how certain of a collision is it? From my layman's viewpoint I've only heard the people on CNN calling it a collision, and now this guy, but honestly I can't tell.

After the second, closer, approach of the Russian fighter, a blade on the drone’s propeller is badly bent.

What else could have caused that magnitude of propeller damage to the drone? From what I could see, it was bent out of shape pretty badly immediately after that second pass.

I don't know how rapidly those fighters dump fuel, but it doesn't seem impossible to me that just getting whacked with a literal ton of jet fuel might do a propeller a lot of harm.

How is this not an act of war? This is 100%, no doubts whatsoever, a deliberate approach and fuel dump. Did the Russians go completely insane now?

Yes, this was obviously a deliberate attempt to disable or at least disrupt the drone. But the drone was almost certainly conducting surveillance to benefit Ukraine. As such, the Russian actions are not necessarily an act of war against the US. The US seems to be reacting as the Russians expected, hence the Russians may not be insane.

See the closing paragraph of this article:

Mary Ellen O’Connell, a Notre Dame Law School professor and expert on international law and the use of force, noted that by dumping fuel and downing the drone, the Russian pilot was “further polluting the fragile Black Sea”, but she noted the US had not called the interception “unlawful”.

“In all likelihood the Reaper was conducting surveillance for Ukraine. Under the laws of armed conflict Russia may disrupt such assistance,” O’Connell said.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/14/russian-figh....

Nobody is going to go to war over a drone, even an expensive one. They were clearly intending to take it down or at least render it useless, though the collision was probably unintentional.

Just to play devil's advocate. The video does not show an actual collision. Also, how do we know the video of the bent propeller was from the same drone soon after the Russian jet got close and dumped the fuel? I can't tell whether the background of the clouds and so forth is identical or close enough to the same background to know whether it is old stock video or not. How can one tell? The drone needs to be enhanced to show the actual collision; a camera from underneath probably is not going to show the collision.

Unless I am missing something, these drones seem very weak in regards to combat with a typical jet fighter. I assume that the drone is slow , so pretty much any jet fighter can catch up to it. I assume that it can't go to such a high elevation that a typical fighter can go to the same elevation. So, seems like pretty much any fighter jet could take it out; whether that be with ordinanace, dumping of fuel or an "accidental" collision. Perhaps the US needs to escort the drone with a fighter jet or 2 to protect it or at least modify the drone to show an actual collision. (Not sure whether Russia would care whether the actual collision could be captured. I suspect that they will keep doing this to drones in the area. Curious what is capture by the drone that can't be captured from satellite. Perhaps radio waves.

I am curious whether even with a bent propellor the drone could have gotten farther away from the conflict zone to be easier to recover by the US. Perhaps, they felt it was risky because it would have to go over or near populated areas. I would think Russia is likely to recover the drone, which seems like a loss.

The best evidence for a collision is that Russia said there wasn't a collision

the "bent propellor" could just be an optical illusion due to camera FPS vs reality.

The bent propeller blade at for example 1:39 is significantly different in appearance than other propeller blades around the same time, indicating that it's not a camera artifact.

definitely, I simply wasn't able to see the video until now.

The propeller looks intact after the first approach and looks bent after the second approach. Pretty clear ot was a result of a collision.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com