The collision is a cover story
A Russian fighter jet struck the propeller of a U.S. surveillance drone over the Black Sea on Tuesday in a “brazen violation of international law,” causing American forces to bring down the unmanned aerial vehicle, the U.S. said.
But Russia insisted its warplanes didn’t hit the MQ-9 Reaper drone. Instead, it said the drone maneuvered sharply and crashed into the water following an encounter with Russian fighter jets that had been scrambled to intercept it near Crimea.
“Struck the propeller” of the MQ-9, says the Pentagon. Seriously? Without actually crashing into it and bringing down both aircraft?
.jpg){kind=link}
The AP report adds:
The U.S. European Command said two Russian Su-27 fighter jets intercepted the drone while it was operating within international airspace. It said one of the Russian fighters struck the propeller of the MQ-9, causing U.S. forces to bring it down in international waters.
Prior to that, the Su-27s dumped fuel on the MQ-9 and flew in front of it several times in “a reckless, environmentally unsound and unprofessional manner,” the U.S. European Command said in a statement from Stuttgart, Germany.
“Causing U.S. forces to bring it down in international waters”?
Russia claims that “as a result of sharp maneuver, the U.S. drone went into uncontrollable flight with a loss of altitude and collided with water surface.” I’m betting the Russian pilots forced it down.
The Russians might have blasted close by at high speed and sent the drone spinning into the water. But dumping fuel on it? Likely an attempt to stall out the engine and send it into the water where Russians might recover it more or less intact if they can.
The collision is a face-saving cover story.