Major Oleksandr Borovik of the 39th Tactical Aviation Brigade died on September 11, 2025, during a combat mission in Zaporizhia on a Su‑27
Executive summary
Major Oleksandr Mykolayovych Borovik, a 30-year-old pilot of Ukraine’s 39th Tactical Aviation Brigade, was reported killed on 11 September 2025 while flying a Su‑27 on a combat mission in the Zaporizhzhia direction; units state the incident occurred at about 13:30 and that causes are under investigation [1] [2]. Multiple Ukrainian outlets and brigade social posts repeat the same account; some foreign and pro‑Russian outlets interpret or claim the aircraft was shot down [3] [4].
1. The immediate account: brigade announcement and Ukrainian outlets
The 39th Tactical Aviation Brigade announced the death of Major Oleksandr Borovik on 11 September 2025, saying he died at about 13:30 while performing a combat mission on a Su‑27 in the Zaporizhzhia direction and that the circumstances are being clarified; that message is reported by Ukrainska Pravda, Ukrinform, LIGA and other Ukrainian outlets [1] [2] [5]. Local reporting repeats identifying details — name, birthdate (19 April 1995) and age — and stresses that an investigation into cause and circumstances was opened [6] [3].
2. How independent outlets covered the event
Independent Kyiv and Western‑language outlets summarized the brigade statement and noted the loss in the context of sustained fighting in the Zaporizhzhia sector; the Kyiv Independent reported the brigade post and emphasized that causes remain under investigation, while pointing to broader activity on that front [7]. Coverage is consistent across several independent Ukrainian newsrooms: they cite the same brigade Facebook post as their primary source [8] [5].
3. Alternative narrative: claims of being shot down
Some foreign and Russian‑aligned outlets presented the incident as a shoot‑down by Russian forces — for example, a site claiming Russian forces “shot down a Su‑27 along with pilot Oleksandr Borovik” — but these accounts do not cite Ukrainian command confirmation beyond referencing the 11 September loss [4]. The brigade’s publicly reported statement does not, in the available reporting, specify whether the aircraft was shot down, suffered technical failure, or crashed for other reasons; it only says causes are being investigated [2] [1].
4. Corroboration and gaps in reporting
Multiple sources repeat the same core facts (time, place, aircraft type, unit and that an investigation is under way), which gives strong corroboration for the death itself [3] [6] [1]. Available reporting does not provide official forensic details, wreckage analysis or independent battlefield imagery in the sources supplied; therefore, assertions about the plane being downed by enemy fire are not confirmed in these Ukrainian reports [2] [5]. In short, the identity and timing are well documented; the precise cause of the loss remains unreported in these sources.
5. Broader operational context and implications
The loss is framed by Ukrainian outlets as a significant blow to one of their tactical aviation brigades and is reported amid sustained combat on the Zaporizhzhia axis, where Ukrainian commanders were warning of heightened activity through early September — a background often invoked by outlets covering the incident [7]. Pro‑Russian coverage casts the event as a battlefield success for Russian forces, which illustrates how single incidents are rapidly absorbed into competing information campaigns; that divergence underscores how battlefield deaths become both strategic and narrative assets [9] [4].
6. Read the signals: what the public should expect next
Given the brigade’s statement that circumstances are being investigated, authoritative disclosure about cause — combat shoot‑down, mechanical failure, or other factors — will likely come only after internal military inquiries or official statements from the General Staff; current sources do not contain definitive investigative results [2] [8]. Expect follow‑up reporting from the same Ukrainian outlets and, separately, from Russian sources that may continue to claim a shoot‑down without publishing verifiable evidence in the supplied material [4] [9].
Limitations and note on sourcing: this analysis relies solely on the provided news items and translations of the brigade’s announcement; all factual claims above cite those items directly. If you need a timeline of subsequent investigative statements or forensic evidence, available sources do not mention later findings beyond the initial reports cited here [3] [6].