|
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. “The operators lost control of the aircraft and had been working to determine its status,” said a statement from the International Security Assistance Force in Kabul. The statement gives credence to Tehran’s 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 bomber’s 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 Iran’s nuclear weapons facilities, the B2 would be used in an attempt to evade detection by Iranian radars. |
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. |
Bolleaux
It is an advanced version of the Sentinel jet using radar-evading technology similar to that on the B2 Stealth bomber http://www.satnews.com/cgi-bin/displ....cgi?433576587 No stealth measures on U/C doors or exhaust http://www.airwar.ru/image/idop/bomber/b2/b2-8.jpg 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. iRaven |
iRaven: my thoughts are "bolleaux" |
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 |
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. |
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. |
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. |
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?
|
Racedo wrote
If actually over Iranian territory then a hostile act which Iran would be going to UN with..... 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. |
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!:E |
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. |
"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 |
"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. " |
The "gubbins" in the drone are unlikely to be more advanced than those in your Iphone 4s |
Top banter, '875!
Made me chuckle. |
Why do the undercarriage doors need to be stealthy, are you going to lower the gear in enemy airspace?
|
The shutline will act as an efficient radar reflector.
|
Originally Posted by ZH875
Maybe they need spares to fix the iPods they aquired from the Royal Navy.
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? :) |
Sam talks rubbish.
|
Pentagon should get some lessons in stealth technology from ParcelForce delivery vans. They always manage to call at my house, and even ring the doorbell, without me noticing.
|
Sam talks rubbish. |
Hmm. On this occasion, SAM is not talking complete rubbish. I can't vouch for the assumptions about what equipment has been supplied, but the physics of the radar systems of that age are probably about right. Just this once, assume that SAM knows something about SAM Radar.
And his point about radar reflections from closed u/c doos carries weight too. Hate to be a party pooper. Am I going to get stoned now? And I don't mean in a nice way. |
He is talking about a SAM operator.
Unless I am much mistaken, which is perfectly possible since I know nothing whatsoever about the subject, somebody needs to first find the target to hand to the SAM operator for the killing of the target. Some kind of wide area radar surveillance needs to first realise that there is a target up there. Otherwise how does the SAM bloke know roughly where to look? Those guys might have rather different radars/ interest in undercarriage door shapes. Since the other stealth aircraft have these doors, we must assume they have a reason. Yes, the drone is a lot smaller than a B2, but it is not that small, and boy is it noisy. |
I may have some experience in this area!:ok:
|
Seems like the US military is unofficially stating that Iran has the drone....
|
Tourist. Yes. I don't argue with any of that.
JTO, sorry. Didn't know where you were coming from. |
A Bloodhound Operator, huh? Here you go in layman's terms on sawtooth edges then...
Any kind of edge perpendicular to radar waves causes them to be diffracted and reflected. In particular, the edges of landing gear doors and other access panels as well as the trailing edges of the wings produce strong radar returns. This effect can be minimized by sweeping the edges so they are not perpendicular to the radar waves. Thus, the edges of doors on the F-117 and other stealth aircraft are covered with small saw-tooths, or diamond-shaped edges that dissipate the radar energy in many directions. |
If I may add my 2 cents...
.. whilst not wishing show all of my cards, my own experience tells me that SAM's contributions are, in part at least, convincing and credible.
Perhaps of greater importance, we might reflect on the credibilty of the august Sunday Times... IMHO a rag with a shoddy history of erroneous, ill-conceived and poorly reasearched aviation-related "scoops." TP |
Maybe they need spares to fix the iPods they aquired from the Royal Navy. Ouch!!!:D |
some interesting stuff in todays Iranian propaganda release
You have to try and find the truth from within the rhetoric, but the suggestion of the location, and the number of alleged previous downings is interesting As also is now the claim that it was shot down - previously they were only claiming some kind of cyber warfare was involved Fars News Agency :: Iran Warns of Wider Response to US Spy Missions " Iran Warns of Wider Response to US Spy Missions TEHRAN (FNA)- Iran's response to US spy drones will not be limited to the country's borders, a military source said after Iranian armed forces shot down another US spy drone yesterday. Given the flagrant violation of our country's borders, the electronic and operational actions of the Islamic Republic of Iran's Armed Forces against the enemy planes will not be limited to the country's borders," an Iranian official told FNA. The official had also informed FNA on Sunday afternoon that the country's forces had downed a US RQ-170 Sentinel drone over the Eastern parts of the country. "An advanced RQ-170 unmanned American spy plane was shot down by Iran's armed forces. It suffered minor damage and is now in possession of Iran's Armed Forces," a military official told FNA on Sunday. In similar remarks, military sources told Iran's Arabic language Al Alam television that Tehran will intensify its response to the United States' spying operations. "The Iranian military's response to the American spy drone's violation of our airspace will not be limited to Iran's borders any more," a military source told Al Alam, without giving details. After a day of silence, both Pentagon and NATO officials acknowledged the shooting down of their Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) in eastern Iran, alleging that the aircraft with a mission to fly over western Afghanistan had gone astray. The drone had been downed with help from the Iranian military's electronic warfare unit. The military official warned of a strong and crushing response to any violations of the country's airspace by American drone aircraft. RQ-170 Sentinel is made by Lockheed Martin and is used for highly important, top secret missions. The UAV was used to keep watch on Osama bin Laden's compound in Pakistan as the raid that killed him was taking place earlier this year. The surveillance aircraft is equipped with stealth technology, but the US Air Force has not made public any specifics about the drone. Iran has shot done over a dozen US drones during the last few years. In January, Iranian forces shot down two pilotless US spy planes over the country's airspace, and after Washington denied the shooting down of its drones, Tehran offered to put them on public display. In July, Iranian military officials showed Russian experts several US drones shot down in Iran in recent years. Also in July, Iranian lawmaker Ali Aghazadeh Dafsari said Iran's Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) had shot down an unmanned US spy drone that was trying to gather information on an underground uranium enrichment site. Dafsari said the drone was flying over the Fordo facility near the holy city of Qom in central Iran. Iranian military official first announced in February 2005 that the United States had been flying surveillance drones over its airspace to spy on its nuclear and military facilities. " |
Also in July, Iranian lawmaker Ali Aghazadeh Dafsari said Iran's Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) had shot down an unmanned US spy drone that was trying to gather information on an underground uranium enrichment site. What's interesting about all of this friction between Iran and the US is that in the first two to three years of Operation Enduring Freedom (US in Afghanistan) we found ways to work with the Iranians due to some of their concerns in re Afghanistan, and in particular the western sectors of Afghanistan. What appears to have happened is a drone in Western Afghanistan went wrong, or lost comms linkage to its controlling station and wandered off into the wrong airspace. (Alternately, might have been a deliberate "short change in course to take a peak at something in Iran" of course. Hard to say). So it was shot down, which, were I Iran's Air Defense Authority, I'd do as well. Their airspace ... it's a fair cop. |
These little UAV's are exactly that |
The one I saw was about 30-40ft wingspan - just a bit bigger in span than a Hawk I'd say, but an awful lot shorter!
Hardly "little" that's for sure!:= |
It's not the size that matters (honestly) its the RCS. And if you peek around layered ADS you will see how things are handed off from one to another. Totally different than engagement (there it is shoot) end game radar. Then on to do we have the right type of pointy thing with the right acquisition thing to get close enough to do anything. Back to layered defence.
Back to sleep. |
Au contraire, fltlt, size does matter. Stealth measures reduce RCS, so if you have a B747 sized target and apply Stealth techniques you might end up with a Tornado sized RCS (ie. Still pretty frickin' huge), but if you take a Tornado sized target and apply Stealth techniques you might end up with a golf-ball sized RCS(ie. Pretty frickin' small) - so size is applicable with stealth.
Looking at RQ-170 I see a compromise over minor stealth tweaks, economical concerns (full stealth is frickin' expensive and labour intensive) and aerodynamic performance (that looks like a high lift wing with very little stealth). I agree with others on here that RQ-170 is not a full stealth platform design like B2, F117 or F22. LJ |
Well aware RCS is what counts.
Flying wings are also rather fuel efficient - '170 has few (obvious) stealth features but I'd wager (sportsman's, not cash) that it's a damn economical, and thus enduring, piece of kit. |
Willard, my thoughts exactly - hence my comments on compromise :ok:
|
I think we thought and posted the very same within moments of each-other.
|
LJ Using tech available, size does not matter as much as you think. It is purely a matter of how you present it. At a certain point the void becomes more important than any other. If you know where to look, and you should, the explanation is there. Just takes time to wade through it all. Unfortunately with all the other advances in detection, RCS is becoming a little passe, as to what it takes to do it properly vs desired effect. Folks tend to forget that the effort is to get as close as you can BEFORE being detected in time for the opposition to do anything effectively. No matter how low the rcs is, you WILL be detected, its the standoff vs system min engagement range/reaction time odds you are trying to beat the house on.
From all the noise out there, sounds like some other folks are worried about the gubbins too. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 18:42. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.