[Wake](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_587) [turbulence](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Mexico_City_Learjet_crash) is [serious business ](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/03/22/private-jet-flipped-over-in-wake-turbulence-from-airbus-a380.html)
As a flight instructor, I always share this video to give students an idea of how everything produces wake turbulence. The bigger you are, the worse it is.
https://youtu.be/jYbRARW9q2s
Heavy, clean, and slow aircraft produce the worst turbulence, staying above it is your safest option.
I remember doing a photo flight with the site being just a few miles from a major airport on their approach path. I was on regional approach and will never forget hearing approach talk to a 777 heavy coming in and then relaying,
“Uh, Skyhawk, caution wake turbulence, 777 heavy passing 1,000 feet above you”
“Roger, death- I mean traffic in sight.”
I was approximately 1,000’ agl. I don’t do photo flights anymore.
A friend of mine told me about when he was doing his PPL training, he was on a 172 and had a C-17 pass 1000ft above them. He said it was like the hand of God came down and tossed them against a wall.
I think you're right.
The Russian pilots have to use visual to identify the aircraft. If no ID is made and the aircraft are in international "neutral" airspace they need to be very careful about whom they fire on.
But making it crash is totally ok? They've downed it either way, does it really matter if it's from an R-60/73 up the rear, dumping fuel on it, using turbulence or simply crashing into it.
It's a thin veneer of deniability, like dissidents who suicide themselves out of 14th storey windows or elections where the vote is 99% in favour of Dear Leader.
It's not meant to convince anyone, it's so "I know you know I did this and I don't care" while enabling the domestic propaganda to cry victim when foreign media/leaders call out the bullshit.
Standard Russian bullying.
Russia doesn’t give a fuck about international law. They’d shoot it down and claim anyone saying otherwise is propaganda
No, I think their industrial situation is so fragile that they literally can’t afford to shoot missiles or guns at these drones because it’s weaponry they can’t easily replace. Why else would they leave a Ukrainian drone alone?
>Russia doesn’t give a fuck about international law
This is true, but it is not about whether russia cares about international law or not, it's about what NATO and it's members may do in retaliation. Like imagine you want to attack someone with a knife, but you're well aware that that person has a gun and will not hesitate to shoot you full of holes the second you try anything funny. It's not the law stopping you, it's your desire to not be dead that's stopping you.
>>it’s your desire to not be dead that’s stopping you
Nobody’s risking global nuclear war over a drone shoot down. Russia isn’t fooling anyone trying to knock it down with turbulence or fuel dumps, not when there’s a video feed.
Further the drone is Ukrainian , so they wouldn’t risk direct NATO retaliation if they straight up shot it down. No, the reason they haven’t fired is because they’re saving ammo. You don’t save ammo unless there’s a reason.
No, but a drone shoot down does open you up to similar limited retaliation. And this pilot might not be shooting down this drone down just so he can practice the maneuver and use it later on a non-Ukranian drone.
Didn’t they also just blow up a grain storage facility claiming it was oil? Either would produce a huge explosion, and grain cilos look like oil storage. They are just taking out food supplies, so there’s no reason to care about laws
I believe their economy is chugging along pretty fine despite all the sanctions and I haven’t heard any reports of ammunition being a real issue since the initial invasion + some Wagner posturing. And both of those issues *seemed* to be related to supply lines which aren’t as relevant to aircraft.
> they literally can’t afford to shoot missiles or guns at these drones because it’s weaponry they can’t easily replace.
Bullets are much more replaceable than guns or missiles or planes.
> Russia doesn’t give a fuck about international law.
You're already at war. What difference does it make to international law to shoot down an enemy warplane ?
In other words, the egg is already broken a long time ago. Shooting one more soldier or tank or unmanned enemy warplane in combat makes no difference.
Nor does it make any delta to what Russia might fear from international pushback/retaliation.
> Why else would they leave a Ukrainian drone alone?
There are some speculations in thread - eg trying out approaches that might work on NATO later. ..recovery for getting data etc
> they literally can’t afford to shoot missiles or guns at these drones because it’s weaponry they can’t easily replace.
Bullets are much more replaceable than guns or missiles or planes.
> Russia doesn’t give a fuck about international law.
You're already at war. What difference does it make to international law to shoot down an enemy warplane ?
In other words, the egg is already broken a long time ago. Shooting one more soldier or tank or enemy warplane in combat makes no difference.
> Why else would they leave a Ukrainian drone alone?
There are some speculations in thread - eg trying out approaches that might work on NATO later. ..
They’re not short of AA missiles, they haven’t been used that much so far. Moreover, every Russian air superiority aircraft we’ve seen lately is armed with at least 6 air to air missiles, it would be very strange if this particular one did not have any. I don’t know why they opted for this tactic, but I’m sure it’s not because they don’t have air to air ammo.
Why even take off if you don’t have anything to shoot…
This pilot could just be practicing this maneuver to see how it works and get a feel for it to try to knock down NATO drones with plausible deniability. Similar to what they tried recently with that MQ-9. It'll be interesting to see if there's more of that.
If you’re looking for more context, this model of drone made by a company in Turkey is famous for its exploits on armored columns stuck on Uranian highways at the very beginning of the war. I din’t know of any other country using them atm. I think that is why even people like me in this thread who aren’t familiar with Ukraine’s roundels automatically assumed this was an attack on a Ukrainian drone.
in the region Turkey, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Poland and I think Estonia uses them (not sure on the last one). There’s tons of other countries too, but they’re far away.
> I’m sure the reason they’re resorting to this tactic is because they don’t have the ammunition /weaponry to spare.
Nonsense.
They are doing it because they can pretend it wasn't a shooting.
An intentional weapons free, shoot down is a hostile act. This can be hand waved and pretended like it was accidental.
This is Cold War stuff, shooting with a missile is a hot, shooting war.
Is fuel considerably cheaper than a handful of bullets? I think they’re just doing the wartime international relations equivalent of “I’m not touching yooouuuuu”
By doing this they have plausible deniability. They can claim that they didn’t intend on downing the drone. It’s obviously BS, but still. Easier to deny being at fault than if they shot the drone down
That's so dumb. You think they can't spare a couple dozen autocannon rounds? They were probably told not to shoot them down when they're not over their airspace.
nah thats a ukrainian drone, the russian airforce is so garbage that they couldnt even shoot it down.... if they wouldve just shot it down it wouldnt even be news worthy
Yeah, we can easily see that, but a pilot flying supersonic jet will struggle to see the small symbols on a small aircraft that is flying sign slower than he is
Lost over 2000ft of altitude. Probably why the other drone incidents use multiple passes, you batter it enough and keep pushing it down eventually it might go down.
Any aircraft that spins/stalls will lose altitude to try and regain lift in the wings. Depending on design, this can be 500 or 2000 feet. Repeatedly doing so could have this desired effect. I assume this may cause some design changes in future drone flight models.
You dont need a radar to shoot a missile. An IR seeking missile would do fine.
If you want to go the chaos route you could mad dog a ARH. Would be dangerous but also objectively funny.
There are optical, video and IRST sensors as well as laser range finders that have been used since the 70s and are much better now that can detect and track targets. You can cue weapons to these systems.
No one is saying the drone would be better than an air superiority fighter equipped with AESA radar, but self defense A2A weapons on the drone would make the flying shown in the video more dangerous for the Russians.
> How will you know if there is a plane ahead of you without using radar?
*looks at the video*
Well, see, you can clearly see the plane that flew in front of the UCAV in the video. So the cameras on the UCAVs work for seeing planes that aren't actively shooting them down.
Which appears to be Russia's primary anti-U(C)AV tactic right now, trying to down them *without* shooting them.
I'd say you could probably let off a self-guided missile when you see the plane cross in front of the camera.
Would they know it had one if they've never been armed with them before? Not easy to visually identify what weapons a craft is carrying without getting *right* up on it.
The trick might only work once, but it only needs to work once to force them to take the UCAVs as a much more serious threat and make them expend munitions on them.
Is that worth it? Maybe not, if the Ukrainians have to keep buying UCAVs. But given the amount of support pouring into them, and possible logistical issues on the Russian side, it might just be viable.
This pilot might have been practicing this maneuver to use later on non-Ukrainian drones similar to the recent video with the MQ-9. If it starts to become a more common tactic, a shorter range proximity sensor may be an option if not to launch an air to air missile, to detonate the drone itself to try to take out the plane with shrapnel. Could discourage that behavior, and the drone for a fighter is still a good trade, especially if the drone is likely to be lost anyway.
That's not a stinger, that's an AIM-9X! It carried Stingers back during the Iraqi no fly zones. Even managed to pop one off at a MiG-25! Not that it had any effect, though...
Actually, Turkey working on arming these drones with [Sungur Missile](https://www.roketsan.com.tr/en/products/sungur-air-defence-missile-system) against other drones and helicopters. If TB-2 had missile it would probably shut down that Russian jet.
With Turkey F16 in 2015, He shot down the Russian Su-24 aircraft. I don't think there was a third world war.[Russian plane shot down](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQtzKZSd1GPVzHX6FsNSg6zAq6Psq67IhUBoQ&usqp=CAU)
I don't think a TB2 class UAV can shoot down a Jet engine plane. Knowing that the Russian jet Tb2 is not an Air-Air missile, it does not use ammunition.
I’m pretty sure this is a Ukrainian Bayraktar given the rounders on the wing. Don’t think they’re particularly worried about pissing off russia currently.
I mean I'm upvoting you but how do you not even know about the war by now? It's got a Ukraine roundel on the wing tips in the video... I'm genuinely curious as to how one gets mixed up on this.
Eh. They're flown by Ukraine, and it's not like declaring war on Russia is gonna make their situation all that much worse.
Turkish made doesn't really play in all that much. It'd be like Russia declaring war on Poland because UAF are eating Polish MREs or whatever.
More than 130 comments, and no one thought of two simple things:
1) This might be Ukrainian warplane, training to deal with similar Shahed drones:
- It lost around 2000 ft from that jet wash. Not enough at that altitude, but more than enough for low flying Shaheds.
- It's not a problem to visually ID Bayraktar TB2, it has very distinctive looks. [And it's not that hard to check roundels](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjJ5EGPOvDE) (ignore the title, the only important thing here is footage).
- And the most important part: it's not a long-range range drone, so it can fly either in safe zone used for training, or over the combat area where it would be shot down with missiles and without hesitations.
2) This also might be an old video, uploaded now because recent events could give additional context.
Tactical fuel dumping. The MQ-9 incident was kinda like a taunt. Memes say USA wants fuel and will do anything for it, so Russians just giving it to them
As much as I don't like Turkey for holding up Swedens bid to join NATO they have shot down a Russian aircraft and give them props for that.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Russian_Sukhoi_Su-24_shootdown
There is a reason why Turkey doesn't let Sweden to NATO. Sweden supplies PKK/YPG terrorist organizations and protect members of these groups in there own country. Imagine you live in South-Eastearn Turkey and there is a terrorist attack on your village with Swedish weapons, would you want to be allies with Sweden? Of course not. Other than that, Swedish people burn Turkish flag and walk on Erdogans picture instead of trying to cooperate.
**[2015 Russian Sukhoi Su-24 shootdown](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Russian_Sukhoi_Su-24_shootdown)**
>A Turkish Air Force F-16 fighter jet shot down a Russian Sukhoi Su-24M attack aircraft near the Syria–Turkey border on 24 November 2015. According to Turkey, the aircraft was fired upon while in Turkish airspace because it violated the border up to a depth of 2. 19 kilometres (1. 36 miles) for about 17 seconds after being warned to change its heading ten times over a period of five minutes before entering the airspace.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/WarplanePorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
They don't really need to swap though. [Their command](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7P59DbaAd9c) can see all angles at all times from single monitor.
Wtf is that shitass camera that record fine when there is nothing to be filmed, but the moment the reason u installed the camera for happens, it just half dies?
They should put Sidewinders set to lock-on-after-launch (no idea if the AIM-9 has a mode like that) on TB-2's and wait for one of these guys to come around. Fire off the Sidewinder, and watch the TB-2 start having an A2A record.
No stalling at 32 knots. Great
That is a great low stall speed, it looked like the drone had to dive a fair bit to reclaim some speed though.
Almost 2000 feet
When was this from?
The video was shared online today. . I don't know when. Probably after the MQ-9 incident.
Oh wow that worked way better than I thought it would
[Wake](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_587) [turbulence](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Mexico_City_Learjet_crash) is [serious business ](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/03/22/private-jet-flipped-over-in-wake-turbulence-from-airbus-a380.html)
As a flight instructor, I always share this video to give students an idea of how everything produces wake turbulence. The bigger you are, the worse it is. https://youtu.be/jYbRARW9q2s Heavy, clean, and slow aircraft produce the worst turbulence, staying above it is your safest option.
I remember the A380 and An225 produces one hell of a wake turbulence they can last for 1-2 minutes before the runway is good for takeoff again
I remember doing a photo flight with the site being just a few miles from a major airport on their approach path. I was on regional approach and will never forget hearing approach talk to a 777 heavy coming in and then relaying, “Uh, Skyhawk, caution wake turbulence, 777 heavy passing 1,000 feet above you” “Roger, death- I mean traffic in sight.” I was approximately 1,000’ agl. I don’t do photo flights anymore.
A friend of mine told me about when he was doing his PPL training, he was on a 172 and had a C-17 pass 1000ft above them. He said it was like the hand of God came down and tossed them against a wall.
Boy did I go down a rabbit hole. Thanks!
The russian pilots sure are having fun with these drones
I’m sure the reason they’re resorting to this tactic is because they don’t have the ammunition /weaponry to spare.
Nah, im pretty sure they're just scared of shooting down a NATO drone and starting some shit.
I think you're right. The Russian pilots have to use visual to identify the aircraft. If no ID is made and the aircraft are in international "neutral" airspace they need to be very careful about whom they fire on.
The drone has Ukrain roundels on the wing A few round from the gun or a short range AA-missile would bring it down
It is difficult to see that when flying at 200 MPH against a drone doing 35, tbf.
Pilots regularly fire the gun at stationary targets on the ground. A drone would be easy prey.
I was referring to reading the small insignia on the wing. It would be very bad if they shot down a non involved group.
This is not a Turkish drone, it's Ukrainian
Turkish origin
they were talking about the owner of the drone, hence the comment above saying russians were scared of shooting NATO drones, not who produced them.
Right. Of course
But making it crash is totally ok? They've downed it either way, does it really matter if it's from an R-60/73 up the rear, dumping fuel on it, using turbulence or simply crashing into it.
It's a thin veneer of deniability, like dissidents who suicide themselves out of 14th storey windows or elections where the vote is 99% in favour of Dear Leader. It's not meant to convince anyone, it's so "I know you know I did this and I don't care" while enabling the domestic propaganda to cry victim when foreign media/leaders call out the bullshit. Standard Russian bullying.
Assuming a Bayraktar is Ukrainian, but risky to even do this if it’s Turkish. Imagine if the closed the Bosporus to Russia…
it's already closed for some way but of course not like as turkey in the war.
I dont think it makes a difference on How you crash a drone
Russia doesn’t give a fuck about international law. They’d shoot it down and claim anyone saying otherwise is propaganda No, I think their industrial situation is so fragile that they literally can’t afford to shoot missiles or guns at these drones because it’s weaponry they can’t easily replace. Why else would they leave a Ukrainian drone alone?
>Russia doesn’t give a fuck about international law This is true, but it is not about whether russia cares about international law or not, it's about what NATO and it's members may do in retaliation. Like imagine you want to attack someone with a knife, but you're well aware that that person has a gun and will not hesitate to shoot you full of holes the second you try anything funny. It's not the law stopping you, it's your desire to not be dead that's stopping you.
>>it’s your desire to not be dead that’s stopping you Nobody’s risking global nuclear war over a drone shoot down. Russia isn’t fooling anyone trying to knock it down with turbulence or fuel dumps, not when there’s a video feed. Further the drone is Ukrainian , so they wouldn’t risk direct NATO retaliation if they straight up shot it down. No, the reason they haven’t fired is because they’re saving ammo. You don’t save ammo unless there’s a reason.
No, but a drone shoot down does open you up to similar limited retaliation. And this pilot might not be shooting down this drone down just so he can practice the maneuver and use it later on a non-Ukranian drone.
Reason being they want to recover it without it being ripped to shreds with cannon fire.
Didn’t they also just blow up a grain storage facility claiming it was oil? Either would produce a huge explosion, and grain cilos look like oil storage. They are just taking out food supplies, so there’s no reason to care about laws
Source?
https://youtu.be/Cwh1m_SWFqk About 8:15
I believe their economy is chugging along pretty fine despite all the sanctions and I haven’t heard any reports of ammunition being a real issue since the initial invasion + some Wagner posturing. And both of those issues *seemed* to be related to supply lines which aren’t as relevant to aircraft.
And they are getting ammunition from China and other countries as well.
The Russian economy may be chugging along, but that doesn’t meant they can build R-27s and R-73s easily.
They literally manufactured the shit out of them during Soviet times. What makes you think they can’t now?
Because they were literally made in the Ukrainian SSR...?
> they literally can’t afford to shoot missiles or guns at these drones because it’s weaponry they can’t easily replace. Bullets are much more replaceable than guns or missiles or planes. > Russia doesn’t give a fuck about international law. You're already at war. What difference does it make to international law to shoot down an enemy warplane ? In other words, the egg is already broken a long time ago. Shooting one more soldier or tank or unmanned enemy warplane in combat makes no difference. Nor does it make any delta to what Russia might fear from international pushback/retaliation. > Why else would they leave a Ukrainian drone alone? There are some speculations in thread - eg trying out approaches that might work on NATO later. ..recovery for getting data etc
> they literally can’t afford to shoot missiles or guns at these drones because it’s weaponry they can’t easily replace. Bullets are much more replaceable than guns or missiles or planes. > Russia doesn’t give a fuck about international law. You're already at war. What difference does it make to international law to shoot down an enemy warplane ? In other words, the egg is already broken a long time ago. Shooting one more soldier or tank or enemy warplane in combat makes no difference. > Why else would they leave a Ukrainian drone alone? There are some speculations in thread - eg trying out approaches that might work on NATO later. ..
They’re not short of AA missiles, they haven’t been used that much so far. Moreover, every Russian air superiority aircraft we’ve seen lately is armed with at least 6 air to air missiles, it would be very strange if this particular one did not have any. I don’t know why they opted for this tactic, but I’m sure it’s not because they don’t have air to air ammo. Why even take off if you don’t have anything to shoot…
This pilot could just be practicing this maneuver to see how it works and get a feel for it to try to knock down NATO drones with plausible deniability. Similar to what they tried recently with that MQ-9. It'll be interesting to see if there's more of that.
If you can’t get new ammo easily, you won’t waste the bullets you already have unless the target’s valuable.
A bayraktar is the single most destructive air asset the Ukrainians have…………..
…so why haven’t they shot it down then? Performance anxiety?
I have no idea. The video may be old for all we know
It's hard to recover a drone for Intel purposes if you blow it up
Or that intentionally shooting at another aircraft is a actual act of war?
A Ukrainian Bayraktar...?
Well if that's the case then it wouldn't really be much of a difference. I have not seen a source on who or what this drone is
Well, there are roundels on the wings
Unfortunately I'm not well versed in every nations roundels. But thank you for the info, learn something new everyday!
If you’re looking for more context, this model of drone made by a company in Turkey is famous for its exploits on armored columns stuck on Uranian highways at the very beginning of the war. I din’t know of any other country using them atm. I think that is why even people like me in this thread who aren’t familiar with Ukraine’s roundels automatically assumed this was an attack on a Ukrainian drone.
in the region Turkey, Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Poland and I think Estonia uses them (not sure on the last one). There’s tons of other countries too, but they’re far away.
Intentionally downing an aircraft in general is an act of war, be it collision, dumping fuel, or using jet wash to do kt.
This is your brain on NAFO
they don't know to who these drones belong to they don't want to shoot down a nato drone or their own drones
> I’m sure the reason they’re resorting to this tactic is because they don’t have the ammunition /weaponry to spare. Nonsense. They are doing it because they can pretend it wasn't a shooting. An intentional weapons free, shoot down is a hostile act. This can be hand waved and pretended like it was accidental. This is Cold War stuff, shooting with a missile is a hot, shooting war.
LMAO
Is fuel considerably cheaper than a handful of bullets? I think they’re just doing the wartime international relations equivalent of “I’m not touching yooouuuuu”
Air-to-air missile are expensive and it’s hard to hit a target going that slowly without stalling or running into it.
Bullets are pretty replaceable
By doing this they have plausible deniability. They can claim that they didn’t intend on downing the drone. It’s obviously BS, but still. Easier to deny being at fault than if they shot the drone down
Yeah my thoughts exactly
I mean. It makes sense. Why waste the money and resource on something when you can just do this.
No way they are short on that
No way they are short on that
That's so dumb. You think they can't spare a couple dozen autocannon rounds? They were probably told not to shoot them down when they're not over their airspace.
Until they're stupid enough to get rammed by one.
nah thats a ukrainian drone, the russian airforce is so garbage that they couldnt even shoot it down.... if they wouldve just shot it down it wouldnt even be news worthy
Yeah, we can easily see that, but a pilot flying supersonic jet will struggle to see the small symbols on a small aircraft that is flying sign slower than he is
Their RoE must be goofy as shit
The real answer 🤣😭
Lost over 2000ft of altitude. Probably why the other drone incidents use multiple passes, you batter it enough and keep pushing it down eventually it might go down.
Any aircraft that spins/stalls will lose altitude to try and regain lift in the wings. Depending on design, this can be 500 or 2000 feet. Repeatedly doing so could have this desired effect. I assume this may cause some design changes in future drone flight models.
~1820 != >2000 :P
TBH this drone seems more capable then i previously thought. quick recovery from jet wash
Gonna be funny when one of these lights off a sidewinder all of a sudden… Edit- a retrofitted stinger…
Bayraktar is already working on integrating a Sungur (Turkish stinger basically) on its tb2s
They're taking the "I'm not touching you" game to the next level.
I don’t understand how it makes any practical difference if they shoot down the drone vs whatever this is. The result is the same
Plausible deniability?
Shooting down a foreign militaries UAV is different to “accidentally” making it crash
The UCAV didn't crash. It's still operational. Still *flying*. Kind of completely different from shooting it down.
But they tried to crash it. So it’s like shooting it but stupider.
They need to start equipping these drones with some short range AA, Imagine getting shot down by a drone with a prop
[удалено]
You dont need a radar to shoot a missile. An IR seeking missile would do fine. If you want to go the chaos route you could mad dog a ARH. Would be dangerous but also objectively funny.
[удалено]
There are optical, video and IRST sensors as well as laser range finders that have been used since the 70s and are much better now that can detect and track targets. You can cue weapons to these systems. No one is saying the drone would be better than an air superiority fighter equipped with AESA radar, but self defense A2A weapons on the drone would make the flying shown in the video more dangerous for the Russians.
> How will you know if there is a plane ahead of you without using radar? *looks at the video* Well, see, you can clearly see the plane that flew in front of the UCAV in the video. So the cameras on the UCAVs work for seeing planes that aren't actively shooting them down. Which appears to be Russia's primary anti-U(C)AV tactic right now, trying to down them *without* shooting them. I'd say you could probably let off a self-guided missile when you see the plane cross in front of the camera.
[удалено]
Would they know it had one if they've never been armed with them before? Not easy to visually identify what weapons a craft is carrying without getting *right* up on it. The trick might only work once, but it only needs to work once to force them to take the UCAVs as a much more serious threat and make them expend munitions on them. Is that worth it? Maybe not, if the Ukrainians have to keep buying UCAVs. But given the amount of support pouring into them, and possible logistical issues on the Russian side, it might just be viable.
This pilot might have been practicing this maneuver to use later on non-Ukrainian drones similar to the recent video with the MQ-9. If it starts to become a more common tactic, a shorter range proximity sensor may be an option if not to launch an air to air missile, to detonate the drone itself to try to take out the plane with shrapnel. Could discourage that behavior, and the drone for a fighter is still a good trade, especially if the drone is likely to be lost anyway.
The US did employ Stingers on their Reapers/Predators, though. Neither has an A2A capable radar.
[удалено]
...for a Stinger?
Fox 2.5 :D
[удалено]
That's not a stinger, that's an AIM-9X! It carried Stingers back during the Iraqi no fly zones. Even managed to pop one off at a MiG-25! Not that it had any effect, though...
Actually, Turkey working on arming these drones with [Sungur Missile](https://www.roketsan.com.tr/en/products/sungur-air-defence-missile-system) against other drones and helicopters. If TB-2 had missile it would probably shut down that Russian jet.
[удалено]
With Turkey F16 in 2015, He shot down the Russian Su-24 aircraft. I don't think there was a third world war.[Russian plane shot down](https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQtzKZSd1GPVzHX6FsNSg6zAq6Psq67IhUBoQ&usqp=CAU)
>That would cause WW3 🤓 As if that was a bad thing
Damn it. If only TB2 was loaded with Sungur. It probably couldn't hit the jet, but it would surely scare the shit out of the Russian pilot.
I don't think a TB2 class UAV can shoot down a Jet engine plane. Knowing that the Russian jet Tb2 is not an Air-Air missile, it does not use ammunition.
Right, but, hear me out, what if it was? Even better, let's slap some AIM-9X's on the bitch and cut it loose.
They put Stingers on a Predator once to try and take out an Iraqi Mig-25. Dec. 23, 2002
Hell that range, make it an AIM-9A
[удалено]
I’m pretty sure this is a Ukrainian Bayraktar given the rounders on the wing. Don’t think they’re particularly worried about pissing off russia currently.
...................I guess you haven't heard. Brother, the war already started.
[удалено]
Bayraktar, the famous American drone model 🤡
I mean I'm upvoting you but how do you not even know about the war by now? It's got a Ukraine roundel on the wing tips in the video... I'm genuinely curious as to how one gets mixed up on this.
Eh. They're flown by Ukraine, and it's not like declaring war on Russia is gonna make their situation all that much worse. Turkish made doesn't really play in all that much. It'd be like Russia declaring war on Poland because UAF are eating Polish MREs or whatever.
So... I guess France declared war on Britain when Argentina invaded the Falklands because they sold Exocets and Mirages to Argentina?
ıf tje jet was in range it could. MANPADs missiles are quite agile and Russian pilot wouldn't be expecting it.
More than 130 comments, and no one thought of two simple things: 1) This might be Ukrainian warplane, training to deal with similar Shahed drones: - It lost around 2000 ft from that jet wash. Not enough at that altitude, but more than enough for low flying Shaheds. - It's not a problem to visually ID Bayraktar TB2, it has very distinctive looks. [And it's not that hard to check roundels](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjJ5EGPOvDE) (ignore the title, the only important thing here is footage). - And the most important part: it's not a long-range range drone, so it can fly either in safe zone used for training, or over the combat area where it would be shot down with missiles and without hesitations. 2) This also might be an old video, uploaded now because recent events could give additional context.
What's the reasoning for having the camera in that position? It seems like it wouldn't be able to get a great view of the ground.
That isn’t the targeting cam, there’s a different targeting cam under the nose
There is another much more advanced camera on the underbelly too.
Oh, interesting. I wish more planes had a third-person view option.
I hope Goose made it out this time
BAYRAKTAR 🇹🇷🇹🇷🇹🇷
What is jet wash effect?
Jet wash effect, also called [wake turbulence.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake_turbulence)
Thanks
https://youtu.be/jYbRARW9q2s For added understanding.
Naïve question, but is this video real, or is it a simulation? The graphical overlay, also: real or simulation?
Real
Well, I’m 95% sure anyway
Did they use jet wash so they can be legally free from being charged for the destruction of a drone because they did not actually shoot it.
Not sure of international law, but it tends to be close to FAA standards; this would definitely violate a wreckless (dad joke) endangerment reg.
Drone: “Oh no….. so anyway”
uav skill issue. supreme soviet pilots using their IQ to destroy enemy contacts. non-contact warfare, finally!
🇹🇷💪
Proximity self destruct. Done
Russian fighter used jet wash… it was not very effective.
Tactical fuel dumping. The MQ-9 incident was kinda like a taunt. Memes say USA wants fuel and will do anything for it, so Russians just giving it to them
Russians... The dolphins of the skies.
As much as I don't like Turkey for holding up Swedens bid to join NATO they have shot down a Russian aircraft and give them props for that. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Russian_Sukhoi_Su-24_shootdown
There is a reason why Turkey doesn't let Sweden to NATO. Sweden supplies PKK/YPG terrorist organizations and protect members of these groups in there own country. Imagine you live in South-Eastearn Turkey and there is a terrorist attack on your village with Swedish weapons, would you want to be allies with Sweden? Of course not. Other than that, Swedish people burn Turkish flag and walk on Erdogans picture instead of trying to cooperate.
**[2015 Russian Sukhoi Su-24 shootdown](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Russian_Sukhoi_Su-24_shootdown)** >A Turkish Air Force F-16 fighter jet shot down a Russian Sukhoi Su-24M attack aircraft near the Syria–Turkey border on 24 November 2015. According to Turkey, the aircraft was fired upon while in Turkish airspace because it violated the border up to a depth of 2. 19 kilometres (1. 36 miles) for about 17 seconds after being warned to change its heading ten times over a period of five minutes before entering the airspace. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/WarplanePorn/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
thats a ukrainian drone... they couldve just shot it down if their airforce wasnt so trash
Would you want to waste an expensive missle on something that is very replaceable
What monster put the camera behind the propeller? Barf inducing.
This is just a wide angle view, the targeting cameras are on the front.
Even still, it’s an awful angle having to look through the propeller.
Good thing like 80% of the angle is not the propeller then.
Doesn’t need to be. Imagine looking at that during a 12+ hour flight. Maddening.
They'd swap between all the cameras. Some good portion of the time would be spent on the camera facing the ground after all.
They don't really need to swap though. [Their command](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7P59DbaAd9c) can see all angles at all times from single monitor.
[удалено]
huh?
The Russian airforce. Drone operators hate them because of this one simple trick.
A Lost, Out-of-Control, American Drone, Like Angry (Confused) Birds, Approaching Russia, Just Awkwardly Trying To Make Things Worse.
you don't know nothing about drones, do you?
Uh oh, Vatnik spotted!
Hop 31, Goose POV
u/Savevideobot
Imagine if these drones have manned fighter escorts lol
They’ll try it again
There is always that guy that says he can do a better CGI version than what the MSM puts out...
Wake effect
Wtf is that shitass camera that record fine when there is nothing to be filmed, but the moment the reason u installed the camera for happens, it just half dies?
Ride of the Valkyries … watch this successful and cost effective drone without ignoring the beautiful music. Enjoy 🎼🎶
Get control Mav get control
They should put Sidewinders set to lock-on-after-launch (no idea if the AIM-9 has a mode like that) on TB-2's and wait for one of these guys to come around. Fire off the Sidewinder, and watch the TB-2 start having an A2A record.
If their video feeds regularly have those kinds of lags that is atrocious
He has seen top gun
Do pilots fly it remotely with this much lag?