Russia 'shot down Georgia drone'

Russia 'shot down Georgia drone'

news.bbc.co.uk

A Russian fighter jet has shot down an unmanned reconnaissance aircraft over Georgia, Georgian authorities say.

Georgia's defence ministry told the BBC it had video footage showing a Russian MiG-29 aircraft shooting down the unarmed Georgian drone on Sunday.

A spokesman for Russia's air force told Reuters the claim was "nonsense".

(visit the link for the full news article)

Seems to me that tensions are increasing between Georgia and Russia;

Russia "launches airstrike" against Georgia 2007

Georgia did threaten open war with Russia.

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Here is the actual video of the shoot-down from the perspective of the drone.



Pretty cool!

Yeah, they can prove it was shot down by a Russian Jet.

I want them to prove it was actually in Georgian airspace. If it had crossed over the Russian border, then the Russians have every right to shoot it down. I would too.

Johnny hit Sally... Billy kicked Eddie... Shelly spit on Jimmy... Charlie farted on Bobbys' head... and then WWIII started.

To borrow a line from Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?"

Being honest, I don't know where Georgia is outside of the US, but this sounds interesting.

The video was awesome.

reply to post by infinite


Russia doesn't like spy planes or drones at all! just ask Gary Powers!

I think Georgia has a right to fly UAV's, seeing that they're trying to be on
their own. But provoking Russia in any way, is not too smart.

I dont often get involved in current affairs/news stuff but a friend of mine pointed me to the video on the bbc site..and we are of the same opinion,
so I now I know im not alone when I say, is it me or does that video look somewhat...ya know...fake? I am generally good at picking stuff out, but there is something not sitting right with me on this one.

Interesting that the recovered wreckage is covered in stencils in English, not the native language of the area or, most likely, it's military.
Pretty surprising too that Georgia all of a sudden has UAV's. Wonder where they got those from and just who operates them?

Great footage of the shootdown though

Originally posted by freakyclown
is it me or does that video look somewhat...ya know...fake? I am generally good at picking stuff out, but there is something not sitting right with me on this one.

I know what you mean, i think it's the clarity of the picture and that the attack plane got as close as it did before firing. I would've thought it would've shot it down from a much longer range so as to maintain anonimity.

I think it's unlikely that the UAV would've had time to see the plane, focus on it, and then watch the missile hit. That all did seem rather 'fake' to me too.

Originally posted by johnsky
Yeah, they can prove it was shot down by a Russian Jet.

I want them to prove it was actually in Georgian airspace. If it had crossed over the Russian border, then the Russians have every right to shoot it down. I would too.

Should be pretty easy, they're showing the coast line so you can get an indication of its location. But i agree, once it's in Russian airspace then the news story takes on a different view point, it would then be of interest to see what Russia's retaliatory response would be to being spied upon by Georgia.

That video was awesome. I don't think its fake. I don't see any indications that it was fake. Some are saying the clarity of the video, but don't you think a UAV should have a good camera on it considering it is used for aerial reconnaissance?

Also, we don't know how close the MiG got so to say it got too close when it shot is baseless. And really thats just speculation on why it got so close. We don't know their protocols, their procedures or how they attack different aircraft. Its really just an assumption fueled by wanting to prove something a fake or hoax.

I think its pretty simple: If the UAV went in to Russian territory, Russia has every right to do what they did. If it did not, Russia has no right to do what they did.

On a side note, OP, did you state that right? "
Georgia did threaten open war with Russia"? I think that would be suicide for Georgia.

Originally posted by john sky
Yeah, they can prove it was shot down by a Russian Jet.

I want them to prove it was actually in Georgian airspace. If it had crossed over the Russian border, then the Russians have every right to shoot it down. I would too.

Quite simply, when it comes to Russia and Georgia.. if a Georgian drone happened to be in Russian airspace, Russian officials would have had a hayday over it.

The fact that they say "it was all nonsense" says to the world "ha, ya, we did it.."

As someone else noted, it was the Georgian coastline, and it was probably in Northern territory where break away provinces have been known to attack Georgian infrastructure and personnel.. which may be why Russia shot down the drone, as it supports the rebels (Georgia sides with America)

And we all know Russia is not beyond attacking Georgia for no reason. They have done so in the past, and will do so again in the future.

The missile fires from the port outer pylon so it was most like an R-73 which has a minimum range of 300m but it just doesn't add up. Why use a valuable missile at all!? Hmmm, $300 worth of bullets from the GSH-30 cannon or a $300,000 R-73 missile? I smell a rat.

I just noticed something....why is it that all the brits think its a fake...or at least fishy...?

do we not trust the bbc any more?

The video inst working correctly for me, anyone else got a link from a diffrent site?

Originally posted by freakyclown
I just noticed something....why is it that all the brits think its a fake...or at least fishy...?

do we not trust the bbc any more?

I don't necessarily think its fake, just more surprised that the UAV wasn't shot down from a couple of miles away so there was no evidence of the attacker. The fact they got close enough for the UAV to identify the aircraft would make me believe that they either-

1) Knew they were in the right and following normal ROE for an invasion of airspace.

2) Wanted to cause a suitable international incident.

As has already been mentioned, the fact they're denying the incident would suggest number 2.

NovusOrdoMundi, with regards to my comment about the clarity of the footage, it wasn't so much the clarity; as you rightly point out it's bound to have a good camera on board for reconaissance, i think it was the fact that it managed to pick up the presence of the attacking plane and then lock onto it whilst it fired.

Do UAV's have radar? Would it have been able to detect the attacking plane? Or was it just pure chance that they happened to catch it on camera?

All thoughts are questions or assumptions, but just putting those thoughts out there for others to consider.

Originally posted by PW229
The missile fires from the port outer pylon so it was most like an R-73 which has a minimum range of 300m but it just doesn't add up. Why use a valuable missile at all!? Hmmm, $300 worth of bullets from the GSH-30 cannon or a $300,000 R-73 missile? I smell a rat.

Missiles are cool that's pretty much universal!

Granted the machine guns are also a lot of fun (I imagine!) but like you say there is a huge difference in price and you could blow things away with tracer fire all day - Yawn!

How often can you convince your self you got a legitimate reason to light one of those baby's up!!

And to all those that think it's faked - I really don't think so, there is a possibility of it being 'set up' but again I don't think so. Ivan was getting in some practice.

Much rather that was the last thing some dumb camera with wings saw - that would be one bad day for a pilot..

The UAV in question is an Israeli Hermes 450 manufactured by Elbit systems and can be equipped with a SAR/GMTI radar intended for ground based target tracking.

However if you check the video at 25 seconds you can see that the one in question does not have the radar pod attached so the fact that it knew that a Mig 29 was approaching to a suspiciously short range at a suspiciously low velocity using a really weird attack vector and deploying rather inappropriate ordinance for the job is something of a mystery.

(it would appear as a drop shaped pod under the fuselage and would occlude the camera FOV, standard kit for the hermes appears to be just a satellite tracking and comms system*)

Also not mentioned in the original BBC article which was since updated is the fact that the drone was destoyed in Abkhazia's Airspace and Abkhazia secessionists arnt notoriously friendly towards Georgia.

*as far as i can tell in any case.

Then again, the pilot could just have been bored.

Cheers

Absence.

I can't BELIEVE that this guy didn't go to guns. Shame on Lt. MiG Pilotskov. On the other hand, he probably wanted a sure kill.

Meanwhile, hundreds of Allied pilots are crapping their g-suits as they realize that Russian pilots can, and will, effectively shoot your Rolex-wearing butts DOWN.

This is a great vid!