Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Fears for Pentagon air power as Iran claims drone capture

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Fears for Pentagon air power as Iran claims drone capture

Old 4th Dec 2011, 20:52
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Under a recently defunct flight path.
Age: 75
Posts: 1,273
Fears for Pentagon air power as Iran claims drone capture

Reported in The Times:-

part quotation from the article
Although the Iranians claimed to have shot down a drone, the report from Tehran also said it had been recovered without serious damage. This would imply that it was not hit by anti-aircraft defence systems but by electronic counter-measures.
ďThe operators lost control of the aircraft and had been working to determine its status,Ē said a statement from the International Security Assistance Force in Kabul.
The statement gives credence to Tehranís claim that it forced down the RQ170 Sentinel drone electronically by taking over control of its operating systems. The potential consequences of that could be far-reaching for American drones operating in hostile environments and makes the loss not only embarrassing but also sinister for Washington. The Iranian Al-Alam state television network quoted a military official as saying the Sentinel was flying over eastern Iran. It is an advanced version of the Sentinel jet using radar-evading technology similar to that on the B2 Stealth bomber. It also shares the bomberís wing shape.
If the Iranian claim is true, there will be added concern for the US, because if American military action is ever taken against Iranís nuclear weapons facilities, the B2 would be used in an attempt to evade detection by Iranian radars.
Thoughts?
Lyneham Lad is offline  
Old 4th Dec 2011, 21:07
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Exit stage right.
Posts: 289
If so its already been sold to China or Russia to reverse engineer and figure out how to block.......

If actually over Iranian territory then a hostile act which Iran would be going to UN with.....

Not a good omen.
racedo is offline  
Old 4th Dec 2011, 21:18
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Age: 52
Posts: 476
Bolleaux

It is an advanced version of the Sentinel jet using radar-evading technology similar to that on the B2 Stealth bomber
Sentinel R1 and RQ-170 Sentinel are TOTALLY different capabilities. Plus B2 is SOOOO much more stealth than RQ-170. Here's why:


No stealth measures on U/C doors or exhaust


Now on the B-2 the exhaust is diffused, it is covered in RAM and look at the leading edges of the doors - that's stealth.

RQ-170 has a reduced RADAR signature by the looks of it, but I see no evidence of significant use of RADAR Absorbent Material (RAM) or fancy shapes to reduce the RADAR cross-section - and I saw one reasonably up close at KAF to make that judgment.

All in all, looks like the Times needs a new aviation expert. Sad for the 30th if they have lost a jet, though. But it could be engine failure, comms failure, operator error or a host of other issues before spouting off about Electronic Attack of the Data-Links (if similar to MQ-1 or MQ-9 any denial of the link would see it fly back in a pre-programmed emergency mode).

What a load of supposition and made up journalism this is as well (something beginning with "s" anyway):
the report from Tehran also said it had been recovered without serious damage. This would imply that it was not hit by anti-aircraft defence systems but by electronic counter-measures.
So, Lyneham Lad, my thoughts are "bolleaux"

iRaven
iRaven is offline  
Old 4th Dec 2011, 21:27
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Land of Oz
Posts: 517
iRaven: my thoughts are "bolleaux"
iRaven, you should not say your thoughts are "bolleaux" - some of your thoughts do sound reasonable.
BBadanov is online now  
Old 4th Dec 2011, 21:36
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Malkin Tower
Posts: 847
from wikid paedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockhe...Q-170_Sentinel


"The design lacks several elements common to stealth engineering, namely notched landing gear doors and sharp leading edges. It has a curved wing planform and the exhaust is not shielded by the wing.. Aviation Week postulates that these elements suggest the designers have avoided 'highly sensitive technologies' due to the near certainty of eventual operational loss inherent with a single engine design and a desire to avoid the risk of compromising leading edge technology."


yes I know wiki can't be trusted
jamesdevice is offline  
Old 4th Dec 2011, 22:21
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 158
Why bother with espionage, just pull a chair and wait. One will fall out of the sky somewhere. The airframe is just a box to carry the gubbins. Now someone else has the latest gubbins. Any fool (sorry, but its true) can build an airframe. Very few folks can build gubbins. That is where the issue lies.
Hopefully the gubbins were protected, if not we just gave the folks who hate us a wonderful Christmas gift.
fltlt is offline  
Old 4th Dec 2011, 22:37
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Ä
Posts: 74
The "gubbins" in the drone are unlikely to be more advanced than those in your Iphone 4s. Maybe different but very likely made by the same people.
Good luck trying to sell it back to them. Wake up.
lamer is offline  
Old 4th Dec 2011, 22:50
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 158
Unfortunately I haven't seen any iphone encryption/codes capabilities in any of them. No, iphone doesn't use satcom or all the other good sniffers to listen, nor does it package them the same way.

Contrary to popular opinion, i phones are neat, fancy neat. Back to sleep now.
fltlt is offline  
Old 4th Dec 2011, 22:52
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 454
It is really comforting to know that we have people that post on PPRuNe that have more knowledge of stealth technology than the engineers of Lockheed Martin?
glhcarl is offline  
Old 4th Dec 2011, 23:17
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 2,302
Racedo wrote

If actually over Iranian territory then a hostile act which Iran would be going to UN with.....
Good luck with that one! Iran got caught violating Iraqi airspace back in 2009.

F-16 shot down Iranian drone in February

F-16 shot down Iranian drone in February - Air Force News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Air Force Times

Iran on a fairly regular basis also conducts artillery strikes into Iraqi territory.

Why Iran will continue to shell Iraq | Ranj Alaaldin | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Iranian shelling reported in northern Iraq - CNN.com

Somehow I don't think that they will find much sympathy in the UN with their track record of border violations.
TEEEJ is online now  
Old 4th Dec 2011, 23:36
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Downeast
Age: 73
Posts: 17,221
From the original post...."Thoughts?"

Yep....one. Send another drone right over....armed with a great big ol' Bomb! Let'em take that one over.....and light off the firecracker when a bunch of the DxxKHeads are standing around high five'ing one another.

That'd cure the Fox of stealing chickens!
SASless is online now  
Old 5th Dec 2011, 02:47
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tullahoma TN
Posts: 482
If the Iranians actually had shot down a UAV, they'd be showing off the wreckage.

They don't have anything, didn't shoot down anything.
Modern Elmo is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2011, 07:10
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Malkin Tower
Posts: 847
"The "gubbins" in the drone are unlikely to be more advanced than those in your Iphone 4s. Maybe different but very likely made by the same people."

So you reckon the gubbins is made in China by Foxonn then?
If so, no harm done.....

Somehow I don't think so
jamesdevice is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2011, 07:17
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Malkin Tower
Posts: 847
"If the Iranians actually had shot down a UAV, they'd be showing off the wreckage."
As Steven Trimble says at BREAKING: Iran claims RQ-170 kill - The DEW Line
"t's important to remember that Iran has claimed UAV kills before, although never about the RQ-170. In January, Iran claimed to shoot down two UAVs, and then claimed another UAV kill in July. Iran never provided pictures or videos to back up its claims. "
jamesdevice is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2011, 07:47
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 62
Posts: 2,215
The "gubbins" in the drone are unlikely to be more advanced than those in your Iphone 4s
Maybe they need spares to fix the iPods they aquired from the Royal Navy.
ZH875 is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2011, 08:15
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Just behind the back of beyond....
Posts: 4,136
Top banter, '875!

Made me chuckle.
Jackonicko is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2011, 14:40
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 70
Why do the undercarriage doors need to be stealthy, are you going to lower the gear in enemy airspace?
m0nkfish is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2011, 14:55
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 93
Posts: 1,950
The shutline will act as an efficient radar reflector.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2011, 15:28
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: The sunny South
Posts: 815
Originally Posted by ZH875
Maybe they need spares to fix the iPods they aquired from the Royal Navy.
I love the banter too.

Just in case this situation leads to RAF non-aircrew being given similar opportunities to get up-close and personal with the Iranians:Unlikely in the foreseeable future because Libya has probably exhausted the RAF's hotel budget for a decade and those personnel involved are prevented from leaving their UK bases to book into foreign hotels for the next two years anyway. Those dastardly 1 in 5 RAF harmony rules strike again, right?
FODPlod is offline  
Old 5th Dec 2011, 17:36
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 2,079
Sam talks rubbish.
Just This Once... is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.