German media: Drone at Leipzig airport struck Ukrainian plane's wing, miraculously failed to explode
German media report that a suspicious drone at Leipzig airport flew directly into the wing of a Ukrainian cargo plane on Tuesday evening, but the explosive device it carried did not detonate. Investigators now say a state actor may have been involved.
German newspaper Die Zeit, after analyzing surveillance camera footage from Leipzig airport, has concluded the airport came closer to disaster than previously believed. According to the outlet, cited by Yevropeiska Pravda, the footage shows that around 7:30 p.m. on Tuesday an object flew directly toward an Antonov-brand cargo plane parked at the airport and struck one of its wings.
Wings are considered a plane's most vulnerable part because they typically house the fuel tanks, which is why anyone seeking to blow up an aircraft usually targets them. In Leipzig, however, no explosion occurred — the footage shows the object bouncing off the wing and falling to the ground, a scenario supported by marks found on the Antonov's wing. Why the explosive device failed to detonate remains unclear.
The drone was only discovered by chance about four hours later, when a bus driver noticed it. An initial reconstruction suggested he had nudged the device with his foot and pinned it to the ground, as reported Wednesday by Detlef Seif, a CDU member of the Bundestag briefed on the incident along with other domestic-policy lawmakers. Camera footage, however, shows the drone was already lying on the ground when the bus driver approached; after brief hesitation, he stepped on it and alerted security staff. The explosive device itself was found not on the drone but some distance away, possibly having broken off during the collision with the aircraft.
New details for investigators
For Federal Criminal Police Office investigators, who took over the case over the weekend, this reveals new circumstances: it is now clearer that the drone approached the aircraft not cautiously but with clear intent to cause damage. This makes it harder to sustain the earlier theory that the drone was merely a warning device, armed but not meant to actually detonate.
So far the investigation has found no clear evidence that Russia is behind the attempted attack, but several details point to a high degree of professionalism: the drone was not bought commercially but specially built. Because it was a so-called non-commercial drone, it could not be detected by standard radar. It was equipped with Semtex explosive, powerful enough to likely have destroyed the aircraft, and typically used by the military rather than sourced on the black market. As a result, the hypothesis that a state actor was involved in some form has gained more credibility among investigators.
