Posted on 03/16/2023 4:33:39 AM PDT by tlozo
US General Mark Milley said the MQ-9 Reaper drone sank in an area of the Black Sea where depths are up to 1,500 metres.
Recovery of a US surveillance drone that crashed after being intercepted by Russian fighter jets would be challenging given the deep waters in the Black Sea, a senior United States general said, as reports emerged of Russian vessels at the crash site.
Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley said remains of the uncrewed MQ-9 Reaper drone, which the US claims was brought down by one of two Russian Su-27 jets clipping the drone’s propeller, sank in waters as deep as 1,219 to 1,524 meters (4,000 to 5,000 feet).
“It probably sank to some significant depths, so any recovery operation from a technical standpoint would be very difficult,” Milley told reporters on Wednesday. Milley added it would take several days before the US would know for certain the size of the debris field.
Moscow – which denies that its jets were in physical contact with the drone – said it would try to retrieve the drone wreckage as reports emerged on Thursday of US officials confirming that Russian ships had reached the crash site.
ABC News senior Pentagon reporter Luis Martinez tweeted that two US officials had confirmed the presence of Russian ships at the location of the crash in the Black Sea.
The Black Sea borders both Russia and Ukraine.
Russia’s Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev told the Rossiya-1 TV channel on Wednesday that Russia would attempt a recovery operation for the US spy drone.
“I don’t know whether we will be able to retrieve it or not but it has to be done. And we’ll certainly work on it. I hope, of course, successfully,” he said.
Milley said the US had taken measures to ensure there would be no loss of sensitive intelligence if the drone were to be salvaged by Russia.
“We’re quite confident that whatever was of value is no longer of value,” Milley said.
Patrushev also said the drone incident proved that the US was involved in the war in Ukraine. “This is another confirmation that they are directly involved in these actions, in the war,” he said.
Moscow’s ambassador to the US, Anatoly Antonov, said Washington deploying a drone thousands of kilometres from the US and near to Russia’s borders proved it was collecting intelligence for the Ukrainian army to help it carry out attacks on Russian forces.
Ukrainian officials cautioned on Wednesday that the drone’s downing signalled Russian President Vladimir Putin’s intention to “expand the conflict”.
“The purpose of this all-in tactic is to always be raising the stakes,” Ukraine’s Security and Defence Council Secretary Oleksiy Danilov said on social media.
But with US officials saying the Russian plane may have unintentionally collided with the drone and Moscow maintaining the jets did not interfere physically with the aircraft, it appeared both sides were focused on restraint and averting a military escalation at a time of already fraught relations over Russia’s war in Ukraine.
Milley, the US general, said it was clear the intercept and harassment of the drone by Russian jets was intentional but it was unclear whether the Russian aircraft deliberately made contact with the MQ-9 – a manoeuvre that could also put the Russian jet at risk.
“Was it intentional or not? Don’t know yet,” Milley said.
Earlier on Wednesday, US State Department spokesperson Ned Price said the incident was likely unintentional.
Milley also spoke with his Russian counterpart, Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov, in a rare phone call on Wednesday, the Pentagon said.
US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin also spoke with his Russian counterpart, Sergei Shoigu, after the incident but did not reveal details of their conversation.
It was in international airspace when it was brought down.
Very likely that it was NOT in international airspace when collecting. While surely very pretty, that drone isn’t made to go sight seeing of the sea.
“Since when does any nation get the right to declare International air space a no fly zone?”
I think you have a point, as Rule 37 only applies to NATO:
Per Rule #37 of the “Rules-Based International Order” that the EU keeps reminding Russia of. It states the following:
RULE 37: “When in the Interests of NATO, a No-Fly Zone can be declared in any areas that are demarkated by NATO and provided to ICAO with 24 hours notice. This includes International Waters.”
Gee, then we will never know. Neither side is honest.
“so you’re saying Russia does have that capability?”
Clear TROLLING now on your part. Nice try!
Sure, ignore recent Russian invasions, and threats to neighboring countries.
“Most of these Zeepers do not comprehend that Russia has advanced beyond us in certain capabilities.”
Then they spend all of their time trolling here. It’s getting to the point where they need to be removed.
Even the Russians AREN'T making the argument the drone was NOT in international air space.
They will call in their best magnet fishers.
We can’t do that without examining our own invasions. It isn’t always okay when we do it.
The US invaded Ukraine in the non military fashion a long time ago. We are there as as provocateurs for our own purposes.
None of this is worth WWIII.
They fly up and down our east coast every day. I wouldn’t be shocked to learn they fly around the west coast either.
It’s funny....y’all think the Cold War ended in 1993.
LOL, sure US invaded Ukraine with dreams of living better.
CNN called it an act of war. The BBC says it is as well. The news is trying to purport that this is at the least an unwarranted act of aggression. As I see it. Its a very warranted act of defense. When China starts putting their drones in the gulf of Mexico just off the Louisiana coast, the US will define this same situation very differently.
Not sure why some FReepers cannot get their heads around the simple concept of international air space.
“Not sure why some FReepers cannot get their heads around the simple concept of international air space.”
Come one man....they struggle with getting their “R”s facing in the right direction. Don’t expect them to understand confusing things like “airspace.” //sarc
Could be.
I can’t imagine not having a “safety switch” on a piece of equipment like that.
I know that. Initially we were told the Russians did it. After the Russians were pretty much cleared NATO started the BS lie that some rogue Ukrainian group did it. I was referring to NATO telling one obvious lie to cover another obvious lie. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
“UMB Financial Corp”
And yet I heard an ex-serviceman say the other day, that people were tracking it on Twitter & we need to get back to using untrackable spy planes.
“I’m surprised there isn’t a remote self-destruct function on something that expensive and classified.”
They have the ability to erase the sensitive information, but why it can’t also self destruct is something I don’t understand either.
Russia invaded Ukraine. It then annexed Ukrainian territory.
Why do you think its neighbors want to join NATO.
If Milley says it will be difficult to recover it, then that means the Russians will probably have it tomorrow.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.