• The TOC
  • SOFREP Explained
  • The Loadout Room
  • Team Room
SOFREP.com - THE Special Operations Forces Report
SOFREP Logos AFSOC MARSOC NSWC USASOC
  • News & Intel
    • SOF News
    • Op-Ed
    • AFSOC
    • MARSOC
    • NSWC
    • USASOC
    • Coalition SOF
    • SOF History
    • Special Operations
    • Black Ops & Intel
    • Admin
    • No Kidding There I Was
  • About Spec Ops
    • AFSOC
    • MARSOC
    • NSWC
    • USASOC
    • Coalition SOF
  • SOFREP TV
    • Inside the Team Room: U.S. Army Rangers
    • Heroes of U.S. Special Operations
    • Inside the Team Room: U.S. Navy SEALs
  • SOFREP Radio
  • Charities
  • Comms Check
    • Share Your War Stories
    • SOFREP Explained
  • The PX
Home Previous story Next story
submit to reddit
Like us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Youtube
Home » Special Operations » Superior Iranian Technology…Really?

Superior Iranian Technology…Really?

by Travis Lively · March 23, 2012 · Posted In: Special Operations
SOFREP_IRAN_UAS

Superior Iranian Technology…Really?

Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) proudly displays an RQ-170 Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) which went down over Iranian airspace. Their assertion is that they commandeered and brought down via their own advanced technological capabilities.

Related Posts
  • News: Iran & North Korea Sign Technology Agreement. More Nukes Please
  • NEWS: Duqu Strikes Iranian Oil Infrastructure?
  • Iranian Special Operations in Syria



Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, Commanding General, IRGC Air Force stated: “Recently, our collected intelligence and precise electronic monitoring revealed that this aircraft intended to infiltrate our country’s airspace for spying missions. After it entered the eastern parts of the country, this aircraft fell into the trap of our armed forces and was downed in Iran with minimum damage.”

Shortly after the US acknowledgement about the lost a RQ-170 Sentinel UAS originally flown out of a US base in western Afghanistan, Iran wasted little time proclaiming victory in defeat of otherwise superior US technology.  While watching television footage of a highly advanced American ISR UAV being paraded by Iran on Al Jazeera television is unsettling for most of us, I feel pretty confident when stating these proud claims of technical superiority or vigilant surveillance leading to the apprehension of this particular UAS are false (as usual).

According to varying reports, the Iranians claimed they intercepted the intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) UAS employing one of three methods. Utilizing UNCLASSIFIED and publicly available information, let’s examine these claims from the Iranian government:

Claim #1:  IRGC utilized their own advanced line of sight (LOS) or beyond line of sight (BLOS) communications technology and to commandeer the aircraft and remotely pilot and land it onto Iranian soil. 

Why this is improbable:  Every UAS in the US inventory utilizes unique and proprietary software programs for command & control of the aircraft, sensor exploitation and onboard weapons systems.  Iranian UAS operators would require extensive and instruction specific to piloting the Lockheed manufactured RQ-170 as well as a mated ground control station equipped with an identical data link capability and the (absolute) latest version of this specific UAS system software.

Claim #2. IRGC deployed sophisticated Russian-made jamming technology disrupting the RQ-170 satellite communication causing it to crash. 

Why this is improbable:  All satellite capable UAS are equipped with various contingency measures designed to deal with issues such as a lost link or jamming.  If a UAS experiences a loss of communication with the command center or GCS, it will, independent of external communication or jamming, autonomously revert to and fly a pre-programmed lost-link profile consisting of waypoints at various altitudes until it re-establishes communication via LOS or BLOS or runs out of fuel and crashes.   Depending on the type of UAS, some of these profiles are robust enough to automatically divert and navigate the aircraft back to a home base where it can autonomously land itself.  It is more likely the RQ-170 experienced a loss of communications, was unable to reestablish communication ran out of fuel and either autonomously landed or crashed into an obstacle obstructing a flight path (aka. a mountain range).

IRAN_UAS_SOFREP_TECHNOLOGY

Claim #3. IRGC air defenses discovered and shot down the RQ-170 as soon as it entered Iranian airspace.

Why this is improbable:  Again, It is more likely the RQ-170 experienced a loss of communications, was unable to reestablish communication ran out of fuel and either autonomously landed  or crashed into an obstacle obstructing a flight path (aka. a mountain range).  I am hard pressed to believe the Iranian radar defense systems are all of sudden capable of detecting stealth technology as advance as the profile of the RQ-170 at a standard operational altitude of 50,000 ft.

The bottom line: Regardless of superior technological and engineering advancements, the probability of an eventual malfunction with any piece of complex military grade hardware will always exist.  Iran just happened to be an unwitting recipient who accidentally back into this “victory.”  This is a hard but valuable lessoned learned

To appreciate my perspective, here is a basic understanding about the pros and cons of how today’s satellite-capable UAVs operate.

The aircraft shown on Iranian television looked like the RQ-170 Sentinel made by Lockheed Martin, first spotted in Afghanistan in 2007. The same type of drone was used to provide surveillance of Osama bin Laden’s compound in Pakistan before the May raid that killed the al-Qaida leader.

About Our Links
We link to other websites if we find their content compelling. We also link to relevant products on Amazon.com as affiliates. The money we earn from these sales helps keep our website running and a few beers on ice.

Related Posts

  • North-korea-iran-nukes-sofrep

    News: Iran & North Korea Sign Technology Agreement. More Nukes Please

  • DuquOilFacility

    NEWS: Duqu Strikes Iranian Oil Infrastructure?

  • Iranian Special Operations in Syria

    Iranian Special Operations in Syria

Follow Sofrep on:
Follow @sofrep OR  rss
61 comments
  Livefyre
  • Get Livefyre
  • FAQ
Sign in
+ Follow
Post comment
 
Link
Newest | Oldest
TheVict0r
TheVict0r 5pts

maybe we let them "have" it? Perhaps a cyber trojan horse.

Gengiskhan6
Gengiskhan6 5pts

A perfect act of war at which U.S. agencies (warmongers) are master of. It's a fact that U.S. is in great need of creating wars as it is Israel and all the rougue states of this World or behaving like one.It's a fact that this video is clearly stating, "now there's a threath, we must prepare for war" it is clearly saying this to the average unable to criticize a normal news citizen and to a normal unaware of information\media tactics audience.But this is clearly a ante bello action ... war is already on as has been said etc, economically, cybernetically etc since years... but I really have enough of this seeing war everywhere and be forced to do that everytime. It's all BS! Stop doing this, Iran is a nice country even nicer for many things then the U.S. itself, it's people are more welcoming and have a more open mind then many U.S. rednecks let me imho.Peace and respect.

HugeFan
HugeFan 5pts

 @Gengiskhan6

 Dude... WHAT?

Gengiskhan6
Gengiskhan6 5pts

 @HugeFan  Sensationalism, talking about air ... that's it. Trying to convert a lot of readers to the idea of war, war war war war. .. cool article by sofrep but in the end, we are talking about nothing, all invented story trying to be pushes as something that makes history. ... you guys are too movies prone. The world is run by the agencies who know that people reasonate like they were living in a total big fiction. Iranian might have built this thing to provoke U.S. reactions ... I saw the video of december 2011 where President Obama was asking for the drone to be returnet. On the first days of the year like on 1st january 2012 I remember there was a couple cannon shot in the persic gulf and there was a military debacle between the side occupying the gulf (U.S. ... ) and the Iranian Republic...

 

I find good this space here (Sofrep) doesn't talk about war and doesn't provoke it, but it just assess what happens and what has happened from a objective point of view. I hope it will continue to do so. We don't need more fake media news between wich the informed individual has to operate a jukes and dribblings to avoice being caught in the net of false stories.Huge fan : huge comment!

MattFanning
MattFanning 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

From what I read they used a known exploit in the GPS system to gain control.  At some level this makes sense because our military is massively over reliant on GPS and if they were able to jam ground communications while also feeding it corrupted GPS information it isn't outside the realm of possibility that they were exerting some small measure of control.  The aircraft would think it was 500m South of waypoint A when in reality it was 2,800m away.  I doubt that they were able to actually control it with any kind of accuracy but they could have directed it further into the interior of the country for safer recovery.Don't forget that as far back as Kosovo the Chinese were watching live video from our UAV's and that wasn't the last time data was intercepted.  I believe US technology is the best on the planet but I also think we tend to plan for the last war and underestimate many of our modern enemies.

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 6 Like

Personally I think we should stop rubbing everyones nose in it about our UAV/UCAV tech. Start treating it like Submarines who gather SIGINT in awesome ways as well as provide a stealthy deterrent. We dont brag on the newest upgrades to the Sub fleet but yet we allow all kinds of journalists insight into the drone world. Its the future, I have a friend who is a jet jock and all the talk and love affair with Unmanned systems chaffes the hell out of her. Its here to stay, we should treat it like the JSOC Comms sets or the big man made constellation in the sky, because if we dont sooner or later were going to be in for a big costly awakening.

vpi
vpi 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

Good article.  But my theory:  Russian operated Avtobazas.  They were allegedly delivered 6 weeks before the crash.  Additionally, Russia (and China) have plenty of incentives to help crash one of these things.  

 

Yet, I could be wrong.  

SEAN SPOONTS
SEAN SPOONTS 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

@hqi777 It's old technology. The Japanese didn't develop radar, they developed radar detectors that had twice the detection range of our surface search sets and could pin point the line of bearing and range pretty accurately. Had they been on the offensive they would have come in handy in picking the when and where for a fight, but being on defense they pretty much got extra time to pucker up for the fight that was coming to them in massive force. So the Japanese could detect the 3rd Fleet coming at them at longer range but were powerless to stop those 30 fleet carriers steaming towards them. What the Japanese failed to do was marry their radar detection plot to their gunnery computers, which we did to their great discomfort. I'm not sure of this, but drones are pretty EMS quiet, they don't emit radar for the Russian systems to detect and the stream to their nav and command system would look like sat transmissions that are pretty broad in spectrum from what I'm told.

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @SEAN SPOONTS  @hqi777

 And using horses fighting the Taliban was old tech too but CAG/SAD did it.

SEAN SPOONTS
SEAN SPOONTS 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

@ArcticWarrior @hqi777 I agree, old tech can still be useful tech. I'm just not sure that what the Russians sold the Iranians would help them find stealthly drones that aren't emitting an appreciable EMS to detect. You know, the Russians are awfully good weapons salesmen. They've sold a billion tons of crap to 3rd world countries promising them that their stuff could counter our stuff. In the 1st Gulf War we beat a French Anti-Aircraft defense network, French Fighters, French SAMs , Soviet Armor, Soviet fighters, Soviet and French Helicopters, Austrian and South African Arty and Brazilian APCs. Hell we even defeated some of our own equipment the Iraqis captured from Kuwait. Let Iran waste their money. If the Russian shit was that good they wouldn't sell it.

P.O.N.I.
P.O.N.I. 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

Personally, I kinda think it was handed over in a "oh dang you got my toy" kinda way. This program has been thrown around since the early-mid 90s at LM, and a lot of the tech in the first planes was rev 1 and rev 2 software; not to mention the physical changes to the aircraft itself. You can see the evolution of the 170 in photos in a few different places, just got to timeline it all yourself. I think this plane was outdated (ish), or at least not as evolved. Now since "they" have it, it gives china...*oops I mean Iran, something to occupy their time with. Kinda like a sacrifice bunt for you baseball fans.

I do know a little of what I'm talking about though on the evol. of the 170. I work for LM. True, I'm a PONI but still get to work on some fun stuff. Just google for pics and some of LM own showcase stuff comes up.

LCpl X
LCpl X 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

 Old PH2: "Wouldn't it be fucking awesome if something like STUXNET on steroids was uploaded into the hard drives!  Think of the mayhem!  What a cyber war wet dream!!!"

 

Exactly, man, I'm more inclined to think that this is all part of our sabotage barrage on Iran, rendering almost everything they make either useless or questionable. 

 

SEAN SPOONTS
SEAN SPOONTS 5pts like.author.displayName 1 Like

@LCpl X Well, if Iran did lift the software(which I doubt they have the Techies to do it with) and did proliferate it to Russia(which could), the Chi-Coms(also coulds) and the Norks(not a chance),...and it did have a back door built into the software we could do all sorts of things to their drones and ANYTHING else with that software in it(like ICBMS and cruise missiles) with a few keystrokes or a broadcast signal set to a certain frequency.

AceP
AceP 5pts

 @SEAN SPOONTS  @LCpl think you'd be surprised what their "techies" can do. It all depends on if LM followed the correct software and hardware development standards. Judging from their recent debacle with F-35 software "maybe" getting hacked, I would err on the side that the Iranians can do it. The software engineering standards we use aren't perfect - hell, they're not even up to date. In a day and age when they could create a bit for bit copy of any hard drive, including source code, and blast it out to any friend or rogue state, I'd say it's safe to say that whatever we had on board is compromised. That being said, I doubt there was much on the airframe we weren't willing to lose if it was actually crossing the border, the 170 was designed to be modular in its payload. For a mission like deep penetration I would expect its load of IMINT and SIGINT collection tools would be pretty bare bones.

LCpl X
LCpl X 5pts like.author.displayName 1 Like

We sent them shit, but they weren't suppose to go on TV and advertise it, hence all this talk now.

cto1321
cto1321 5pts like.author.displayName 1 Like

Too bad no one had the thought to drop a bomb/missile on the damn thing right after it crashed.

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 4 Like

 @cto1321

 If tensions werent so hight with Iran and the implications so severe Im sure a recovery team would have gone in, done waht they do a leave. An airstrike would be a direct and overt  assault and an act of war. This was supposed to be a covert flight, different rules.

SEAN SPOONTS
SEAN SPOONTS 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

I'm really skeptical of the idea that the Iranians captured this drone intact. I think the object they displayed is a mock up they built. The Iranians are notorious fakers. There are tape marks where the wings were attached. In other photos of the actual RQ-170 those seams are not visible. When you look at the profile aspect of the actual RQ-170 the engine intake appears to be set further back on the fuselage than on the one supposedly captured by the Iranians. It also looks as if the Iranian model has a nose to tail length shorter than the actual RQ-170. I also think the wingspan on the Iranian fake is shorter than in pictures I've seen of the actual drone, especially the photos of the drone launching at Khandahar. Much shorter in fact. Finally, I've seen a profile picture of the Iranian fake in which the engine intake grill is visible in profile. Readers will notice that in profile shot of the actual RQ-170 above that intake grill is not visible. Here is a link to the photo I am talking about. http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ZeI3z3LCweM/TuHEAZjYXvI/AAAAAAAAYN0/a4tKmTU7IhQ/s400/IRAN%2BDEC%2B9%2B2011%2BDTN%2BNEWS.jpg

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName 1 Like

 @SEAN SPOONTS

 And we never said its a fake, and yet acknowledged we lost one and confirmed they got to it before we did

SEAN SPOONTS
SEAN SPOONTS 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

@ArcticWarrior They may well have gotten to its pieces before we did, not that we would go after them.. As for confirming or denying the fakery officially, perhaps we have a reason for not doing it? Consider what we did not do in this case. What the Iranians just proclaimed is that they illegally commandeered and stole the property of the United States. We could claim very easily that the Drone was in Afghan Airspace, that the Iranians stole it and directed it over their airspace and demand our property back. We could make a diplomatic row over this and warn the world that if Iran can take over the flight control computer of a highly advanced drone, they certainly do the same thing to a fly by wire airliner, perhaps even from another aircraft. Iran could seize jets at will hold them for ransom, crash them into the ground or even into cities. I the interests of ensuring the safety of the airways we could announce a no-fly zone over Iranian airspace and prevent any plane from going into or out of their airspace until international inspectors could see this equipment to ensure it does not pose a risk to civilian aviation. We could have a field day with Iran on that. I've got another idea about what might be going on, but I'd hate to be right and blow up something that took some people a lot of work to put together. It has to do with the Iraqi Air Defense system in the first "Persian Excursion."

SEAN SPOONTS
SEAN SPOONTS 5pts like.author.displayName 1 Like

@ArcticWarrior Yeah, well, it sure couldn't have flown out that's for sure. They gave Osborn the DFC and made him a flight instructor, but there was a lot of second guessing on his decision to land that plane in China at the time. I confess to being one of those second guessing him.

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @SEAN SPOONTS  @ArcticWarrior

 Yeah they demanded it but it wasnt returned in any hurry. Kind of like when China had our Aries II, was taken in April and returned in boxes 3 months later.

SEAN SPOONTS
SEAN SPOONTS 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

@ArcticWarrior I beg to differ. The Soviets blew out their O rings when Belenko(?) flew that Foxbat to Japan. They claimed it was stolen and demanded it be returned forthwith. Belenko claimed he had legal authorization to fly the plane but just changed his flight plan. We complied and shipped it back to them in boxes after suitable examination of course. We found out it was a clunker that basically functioned like the old Me-163 Komet, straight up on afterburner, fire missiles and land out of gas 40 minutes later. The Soviets were not a very trusting bunch. In peacetime they carefully measured out the gas in their jets so their pilots could not reach Nato Airfields or borders. I agree with you on the drone not being such a big deal. It's not like the technology is some huge breakthrough. We had datalinks back in the 80s, cameras in WWI, the composite structurals were pretty tasty back in the 80s but its off the shelf stuff now.

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @SEAN SPOONTS  @ArcticWarrior

 A US warplane violating Iranian air space is no longer our "property" as in MIg25 in Japan, F14 that goes into the drink and then 4 Russian "trawlers" show up and the 60 varient that went down in Pak during the OBL raid. Notice we asked for it back and PAK didnt really care and shared it with probably everyone before they eventually started letting us take the pieces home. Again its not all that advanced, its not like the Beast only moved at night. If we really wanted why not use a Gloabl Hawk? Risk aversion issues? After all we flew off Sakhalin often, it was no secret when pieces left EAFB and came back a day later we knew, they knew. Shooting down a crewed aircraft is bad news whether it flew near a highly sensitive base or not, commandering a drone is embarrasing to who was flying it before it was lost, nothing to go to war over.

 Maybe we really wanted to see what that Russian system could do and put the bait out? Lots of questions and little answers.

Old PH2
Old PH2 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

In the 80's our Tomahawk missiles had an inertial navigation system that was self contained and required no input after launch.  They had an up link for command detonation, but relied on no external input once launched.  The Tomahawk was 70's technology.  What I'm implying is If the RQ-170 was lost I highly doubt it was brought down through "spoofing" or jamming methods, more than likely it augered in.   

AceP
AceP 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

@Old PH2 the problem with that logic is today's UAVs don't rely on simple inertial navigation. Their SATCOM and BLOS-C2 links are notoriously hard to pass across different ground stations. if it had lost communication with a ground pilot in-country or stateside it would be a simple matter to spoof GPS signals. (there are a few open source tools out there that can do this on a commercial level). it stands to reason that if the UAVs navigation protocol dictated landing safely in a situation where the link was disrupted, an enemy COULD spoof GPS and get it to land somehwere other than a US Controlled installation. Is it likely the iranians could put this all together? probably not. could they be blasting pirated GPS signals or faulty C2 commands en masse along their border in the hopes that we lose control of a bird? I'd be surprised if they weren't. just my 2 cents.

Old PH2
Old PH2 5pts like.author.displayName 1 Like

 @AceP  @Old The digitized maps available for the Old inertial nav systems were wrote into the IC's and relied on onboard sensors to compare Landmarks.  Pretty hard to spoof.

Old PH2
Old PH2 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @Matt2  @AceP I think you can hear my face palm from over the internet.   Christ almighty what a fucking world we live in.  Biggest part of my ten years in the Navy I was beaten around the head and ears with"Pay attention to detail!!!"   Fuckin' A

Old PH2
Old PH2 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

 @AceP So the greatest Military machine to ever walk the face of this earth is too fucking Lazy or can't bothered to do it right?  Jesus Fucking Christ, my old Chiefs will be rising from the grave to put a boot in someone's ass.

AceP
AceP 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

 @Old PH2 I don't think it started out as arrogance. At the beginning coordination was just so shoddy that the only way you could be sure that the boys on the ground could see the same thing as the pilots they had to forgo any encryption with the ROVERs. The C2 links are another story, but I don't want to air dirty laundry in an open source environment. I think this sort of thing has stuck around out of convenience. Rather than go to the trouble of going through proper channels to pass video encryption keys to different units we have just used "secure waveforms" that aren't really that secure. Case in point:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126102247889095011.html

 

They didn't "hack" anything, just acquired the right software to look at our broadcasts.

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @Old PH2  @AceP

 Didnt we have fake electronics components found in our aircraft recently?

Old PH2
Old PH2 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @AceP Are we that arrogant?  Or have we just been so busy playing hide the Salami with Washington lobbyists that we no longer make "weapons grade" electronics?   Fucking Christ on a stick,  we can't be that mother fucking stupid.

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @Matt2  @AceP

 No shit

AceP
AceP 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

 @Old PH2 True, but our UAVs are not like this anymore. They rely to heavily on GPS. A hardened inertial reference system would be nigh to impossible to spoof. With a GPS transponder on the other hand, I was able to crack using a couple of downloaded script-kiddie tools when were doing a demo for the Airforce last summer. That is the least of my worries considering that at the beginning of the war they were still broadcasting video data and C2 links in the clear because they were sure no one else was listening in. I wonder how many airframes still run on this habit? I highly doubt that anyone has developed an exploit if this holds true or we would be losing birds left and right.

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @SEAN SPOONTS  @ArcticWarrior  @Old  @AceP

 That is true, an idea that outran the tech of its day.

SEAN SPOONTS
SEAN SPOONTS 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

@ArcticWarrior @Old PH2 @AceP Supposedly the development of cruise missiles came from the Kamikaze attacks of WWII which were very damaging to the US Navy.

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 4 Like

 @Old PH2  @AceP

 Think about how truely remarkable the Tomahawk was, framed on 70s tech. Wasnt perfect but its the grand daddy of all our UCAVs.

HunterGuy
HunterGuy 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 4 Like

You know what I found funny about this whole debacle, that the Iranians sold this drone to the Chinese.  Which tells me they don't even have the technological know how to reverse engineer this piece of equipment.

HugeFan
HugeFan 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 4 Like

The following is NOT an indicative of all Iranians just the dumbasses in charge: Is anyone else reminded of the opening seen from "2001: Space Odyssey"? If there was ever a metaphor for what I saw in that video, I'd say that that would be it! Really? They "hijacked" that thing? Right... looks like the Sand People (not a racial slur, I'm referring to Star Wars) finding some of the Empire's schwag. We've probably all seen their 'Karrar' UAV and that thing looks almost exactly like the Third Reich's V-1. A country doling out already-obsolete gear cannot expect anyone to take seriously their technological prowess. 

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

 @HugeFan

 Dont underestimate the probability of Russian, Chinese or Pakistani engineers working in Iran on an Air Defense Network. So even if Iran cant someone by proxy could. That thing looks pretty good for something that hit a mountain ( Ive seen that in Alaska and it never is pretty, even a Cessna makes a mess) or went into a flat spin and pancaked in doesnt it?

SEAN SPOONTS
SEAN SPOONTS 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

@ArcticWarrior @HugeFan Take a close intel gatherer trained look at the pictures and tell me if what you see matches up to what I'm seeing. It just doesn't look like the same thing. Those drapes around the bottom of the thing are hiding something or the absense of something. Landing gear are a little harder to make out of foam and fibreglass than wings and a fuselage.

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @SEAN SPOONTS  @ArcticWarrior  @HugeFan

 Im sure F5 landing gear and foam core could be mocked up just as well. I think the thing took a hard landing. Fluid was visibly leaking. Either the data link was compromised or we threw a blanket infected with small pox over the wall. We admitted it was ours after they paraded it out, much like we admitted after Powers was paraded that a U2 was brought down by missles that didnt exist. Same with we didnt admit a 117 was downed by a country with limited air defense until they were seen on Tv partying on the pieces. We have a bad history, seems it happens once a generation, about underestimating an advisary. Coincidentally LM is involved in all the above.

HugeFan
HugeFan 5pts like.author.displayName 1 Like

 @ArcticWarrior

 That is why I prescribe to Sean's theory above.

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @HugeFan

 We dont know which Block 170 this is, it was alledged to be a dumbed down version, we knew the odds were good we might lose this one. The paint scheme is off from the Beast at KNDR. The timeline of when we lost it, when they announced it and when we confirmed it dont allow a whole lot of time to build a mockup and get it on TV that next day. Looks like it had a rough landing, wings were pulled off, it was trucked to an airfield, slapped back (the exact same things we do after a frame recovery) for photos. There were pics and images of fluid leaking out of the flip side of that bird. For all the details they alledgedly miss they sure added some good ones.

 

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @HugeFan

 Hezbollah hacked Israeli drones multiple times. They say in the Ossetia rumble the Russians hacked Georgian drones. It can and is done. LM puts out too much unicorns and butterflies.

HunterGuy
HunterGuy 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

 @HugeFan Your V-1 reference to their UAV was the exact first thing I thought of when I first saw it.

Congrats Iran, your fielding shit the Germans invented 70 years ago!

This comment has been deleted

HugeFan
HugeFan 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

 @Matt2

 Never been in the military but I have been a contractor to the world's finest Navy and Coast Guard for a number of years so since you did NOT ask me... I'll provide my two cents :-) I think that regardless of what the circumstances were that lead to the 170 ending up in unfriendly hands, you can bet money that everyone from Ahmed to Vladimir to Kim to Jiao will be getting a look inside of it. Where's the Mission Impossible self-destruct mechanism when you REALLY need it? Late...

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

 @HugeFan

 It was also unlikely the Russians could shoot down a U2 due to our superior tech.....it was also unlike a 117 could be brought down over the Balkans....

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts

 @Matt2  @SEAN SPOONTS  @HugeFan

 Yeah I agree.

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @SEAN SPOONTS  @Old  @HugeFan  @ArcticWarrior

 Technically according to our version, it never flew in Iranian air space but along the border. Now Preds and Reapers could do the same thing couldnt they? The Beast couldnt be all that top shelf being it was routinely seen at Khandahar during daylight hours. After when pressed by CNN we admitted we had imagery of the "crash" site and confirmed it was one of ours. See below article, this is also something Im sure MI had great interest in before and most certainly after Dec 2011.

 

26 Oct 2011

 

Russia has delivered to Iran a consignment of mobile radar radiation detectors and hopes to agree on a number of similar deals, a Russian arms trade official said on Tuesday.

“We’re not talking here about aircraft or submarines or even S-300 systems. It is about providing security for the Iranian state,” Konstantin Biryulin, deputy director of Russia’s Federal Service for Military Technical Co-operation, told RIA Novosti.

The detectors, called 1L222 Avtobaza, passively collect electromagnetic radiation from surrounding airspace and identify its sources. Those include side-looking airborne radars used in combat aircraft, targeting radars of air-to-surface weapons, and radars used to guide aircraft flying at extremely low altitudes.

“We are in constant negotiations with Iran over the acquisition of military hardware not subject to UN sanctions against this country. Those are defense systems, including electronic warfare weapons, in this case,” Biryulin stressed.

The S-300 systems in question are Russian-made long-range air defense weapons which Russia was going to sell to Iran. The deal was signed back in 2007 but was never finalized due to an arms embargo implemented by the UN in 2010.

Iran has since developed its own system, which it believes to be better than the S-300. Tehran believes that Moscow backed out of the arms deal due to political pressure put on it by Washington and Tel Aviv.

SEAN SPOONTS
SEAN SPOONTS 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 4 Like

@Old PH2 @HugeFan @ArcticWarrior You may be onto something there. Think of "The man who never was." They don't need an intact aircraft to get the hard drive which would be shielded from heat, cold, moisture, vibration, shock, electronic interference and other variables. It might be in a hardened case like a black box. We might have handed them a wrecked on purpose. As far as I know the drone in question is a tactical surveillance type with video and cameras for a battlefield commander to use. It's not like the total package global hawk that is jammed with stuff. Why would we fly a type like that over Iran with such limited capabilities for intel gathering. I could see it being used in an operational testing role to watch the border between Iran and A-stan for people and weapons coming over but not for deep penetration of Iranian airspace. I just don't think its that kind of drone.

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @HugeFan  @ArcticWarrior

I think your right about there PR, they certainly made like they did big things to snag it (now why would you publicly admit you had that tech?) Hopefully it was the Trojan Horse scenario. However LM has been breeched more then once on top shelf projects. We begrudgingly admitted we lost it, that it went down outside of Afghani airspace(Iran) and that the one on display belonged to us.

Old PH2
Old PH2 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @HugeFan  @ArcticWarrior Wouldn't it be fucking awesome if something like STUXNET on steroids was uploaded into the hard drives!  Think of the mayhem!  What a cyber war wet dream!!!

HugeFan
HugeFan 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

@ArcticWarrior My gripe stems from the Iranian propa-tollah machine claiming that it was "superior" technology and skill that brought the 170 into Iran's control. Without knowing fully what happened, I will prescribe to the theory that the machine went "Toyota" and decided to fly off course by not recognizing the pilot's input. -OR- Like Sean said this was a ploy to which end I am unsure by the Iranians to embarrass the US. In fact my sincerest hope is that this was an intentional SNAFU meant to mislead and deceive gov't's that really want our know-how. Perhaps this is a dummy designed to have these folks build easily foilable uav's. Wishful thinking? Crazy conspiracy? Perhaps, I should put down the Tom Clancy books... Out.

Old PH2
Old PH2 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

 @ArcticWarrior  @HugeFan Dude don't bag on Lockheed,they'd never sell an over priced Piece of Shit death trap.  OOOPS! I forgot about the F104..... Scratch that.

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

 @HugeFan

 And this thing is built by LM right? The same LM who makes the 35 right? The same program that is seeing delays because software/code might have been hacked right?

HugeFan
HugeFan 5pts like.author.displayName 1 Like

 @ArcticWarrior

 Touche! Of course, even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then. In all seriousness, I do see your point.

This comment has been deleted

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

 @Matt2  @HugeFan

 Haa I was thinking that same thing watching Ahmadinejad walking around it when it happened.

HugeFan
HugeFan 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @Matt2

 Or Farci for that matter!

This comment has been deleted

ArcticWarrior
ArcticWarrior 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

 @The Nature Roy  @Matt2

 I would imagine any auto destruct would add unwanted weight and such. Easier to send in a SAR team pull the boards, attach some thermite and move out. The Beast just went down in a bad place to do all that.

Chris Martin
Chris Martin 5pts like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

 @Matt2 There were reports that the thing does have a auto destruct but it failed to initiate. Ouch!

 

Drone losses are not new and have to be expected. There were also reports that this reality was factored into the Beast's design and construction -- that its true cutting edge tech is in its encrypted software, etc. areas that won't be easily accessed/reverse engineered, even after falling into enemy hands.

 

I don't know if that's true or even realistic, but it's been put out there.

Join the SOFREP Team Room, Support Our Veteran Writing Team
  • Hot Now

  • Latest SOFREP

    • Hoodlums Howling Allahu Akbar Hack British Soldier to Death on Busy Street in London

      Hoodlums Howling Allahu Akbar Hack British Soldier to Death on Busy Street in London

      May 22, 2013, 54 Comments
    • What's Missing from The U.S. Dept. of State's Mission Statement, and What I've Added

      What’s Missing from The U.S. Dept. of State’s Mission Statement, and What I’ve Added

      May 22, 2013, 24 Comments
    • 3D Printers For SOF Units

      3D Printers For SOF Units

      May 22, 2013, 14 Comments
    • A Team Effort - Part 2

      A Team Effort – Part 2

      May 21, 2013, 9 Comments
    • Is Pakistan Heading Towards a Cliff?

      Is Pakistan Heading Towards a Cliff?

      May 20, 2013, 20 Comments
    • And The Hits Just Keep On Comin'

      And The Hits Just Keep On Comin

      May 20, 2013, 22 Comments
    • A Team Effort - Part 1

      A Team Effort – Part 1

      May 19, 2013, 27 Comments
    • In the IDF, 'Lonely Soldier' is a term that describes soldiers serving on active duty who have no family is Israel. These are volunteers that came to serve for 3-5 years. They typically go back to their respective countries upon completion. Most commonly, these are people who immigrated to Israel by themselves. I was one of them. While in Israel, I lived in an apartment building where the majority of people were lonely soldiers. It was located on the outer ring of Jerusalem, surrounded by four Arab villages. My roommates were two recon guys (like me) and one who worked in field intel. All of the other inhabitants were soldiers from various units, with most of them serving a combat role. It was a well known thing, especially to the Arabs in the village. Most of the time we wouldn't be there, but when we were on leave, we would come to the apartment for a little R&R. It was rare that the four of us were there at the same time, but once in a blue moon, it did happen. Each village had, as is customary, its own mosque. When the time for prayer came, the loudspeakers would call out to the faithful. It was OK, we were used to it. However, over the weekend they would make it a point to play the call to prayer very, and I mean VERY, loud. They knew soldiers would be in the building trying to get some sleep - recovering from several weeks in the field. This always annoyed me but there was nothing I could do. On this particular weekend, after an intense seven weeks of non-stop ops, all I wanted was to go to the apartment, sleep, eat, sleep some more and then sleep again. That weekend the four of us were at the apartment and we were all equally tired. We arrived Thursday night and after a small dinner and some beers, we went to sleep. At 0400 we all jumped.... The freaking loudspeakers at all four mosques began their call to prayer at full blast. Fuck.... We spent the remainder of the day trying to rest and every time we would fall asleep, again... The call for prayers, full blast! Over lunch, we all looked at each other and knew this had to stop. We came up with a plan. I know it wasn't nice, but at that point we couldn't care less about political correctness. Here's what we did. After some recon that night, we noticed that the call to prayer wasn't performed by an Imam or some other person with a microphone. It was a tape recorder that used a tape. We figured the four of us, experts in stealthy infils, could sneak in and steal those tapes. However, while we were planning the different infil routes for each village, we all smiled and did something better. We recorded Metallica's 'For Whom the Bell Tolls' on repeat on all four tapes and then waited till midnight. At midnight, each one of us - armed with a Metallica tape - headed to a different village. All dressed in black, we were careful not to be seen. We entered into the buildings and exchanged the tapes. We rallied back to the exfil point, a crossroad not far from the last village and headed back to our apartment. And then we waited... At 0350 we went to the roof with some coffee, opened some field chairs and waited for the show to begin. At 0400 sharp the first "call" came alive, full volume: Make his fight On the hill in the early day Constant chill deep inside ... Take a look To the sky Just before you die It's the last time he will Followed by the next, then the 3rd and 4th joined in. Full volume Metallica! Soon after, we heard sirens headed to the villages. I don't know what happened after that, but we had our own private concert, right there. No kidding, there I was... Metallica call to prayer

      No Kidding There I Was… Metallica Call to Prayer

      May 18, 2013, 50 Comments
    • 345

      Battlefield America: Literary Reflux in 500 Words or Less, #2

      May 17, 2013, 102 Comments
    • north-korea-missiles_opt

      North Korea: Missile Systems

      May 16, 2013, 24 Comments
  • Most Commented

    • Not Mirandizing Terrorists? Slippery slope...

      Not Mirandizing Terrorists? Slippery slope...

      April 25, 2013, 544 Comments
    • Extortion 17 Heroes

      Extortion 17 Heroes

      May 9, 2013, 371 Comments
    • What’s Been 'Camouflaged' About Camouflaged Uniforms?

      What's Been 'Camouflaged' About Camouflaged Uniforms?

      May 14, 2013, 261 Comments
    • Benghazi: Book Delves Into the Details Nobody's Talking About

      UT Report: Benghazi Book Uncovers the Details Nobody's Talking About

      May 7, 2013, 245 Comments
    • Attention Whores and Conspiracy Theorists (But I Repeat Myself)

      Attention Whores and Conspiracy Theorists (But I Repeat Myself)

      April 27, 2013, 242 Comments
    • State Department at Fault Over Benghazi Response

      State Department at Fault Over Benghazi Response

      May 2, 2013, 229 Comments
    • DSC_4902

      Why Does PETA Want to Kill Our Special Operators?

      April 29, 2013, 188 Comments
    • SOFREP on Newsmax TV Discussing Benghazi

      SOFREP on Newsmax TV Discussing Benghazi

      May 8, 2013, 157 Comments
    • red dawn

      Battlefield America: Literary Reflux in 500 Words or Less

      April 30, 2013, 136 Comments
    • 1,000 Posts Into the SOFREP Story

      1,000 Posts Into the SOFREP Story

      May 1, 2013, 127 Comments
  • Topics by Category

    • SOF News

    • Op-Ed

    • MARSOC

    • NSWC

    • USASOC

    • Coalition SOF

    • SOF History

    • Special Operations

    • Black Ops & Intel

    • Admin

    • No Shit There I Was

  • SOFREP TV

    • U.S. Army Rangers Episode 4: Life in Ranger Battalion (Part 1)

      U.S. Army Rangers Episode 4: Life in Ranger Battalion (Part 1)

      May 20, 2013, 14 Comments
    • US Army Rangers Episode 3: Ranger Indoctrination (RIP)

      U.S. Army Rangers Episode 3: Ranger Indoctrination (RIP)

      May 15, 2013, 24 Comments
    • U.S. Army Rangers Episode 2: Ranger Indoctrination (RIP)

      U.S. Army Rangers Episode 2: Ranger Indoctrination (RIP)

      May 13, 2013, 43 Comments
    • Honoring the Fallen

      Heroes of U.S. Special Operations: Honoring the Fallen

      December 9, 2012, 4 Comments
    • The Unifying Issue

      Heroes of U.S. Special Operations: The Unifying Issue

      December 8, 2012, 3 Comments
    • Veterans Day

      Heroes of U.S. Special Operations: Veterans Day

      December 7, 2012, 2 Comments
    • Inside the Team Room Episode 26: Passing the Gut Check

      Inside the Team Room Episode 26: Passing the Gut Check

      November 19, 2012, 7 Comments
    • Inside the Team Room Episode 25: SEALs vs. Gangsters

      Inside the Team Room Episode 25: SEALs vs. Gangsters

      November 18, 2012, 16 Comments
    • Inside the Team Room Episode 24: Leaving the Teams

      Inside the Team Room Episode 24: Leaving the Teams

      November 17, 2012, 4 Comments
  • SOFREP Radio

    • And The Hits Just Keep On Comin'

      And The Hits Just Keep On Comin

      May 20, 2013, 22 Comments
    • Navy SEAL Mike Ritland And Dog Rico Tour New York

      Navy SEAL Mike Ritland And Dog Rico Tour New York

      May 10, 2013, 18 Comments
    • Mark Donald - SEAL Medic And Author Of Book Battle Ready

      Mark Donald – SEAL Medic And Author Of Book Battle Ready

      April 28, 2013, 10 Comments
SOFREP Network SOFREP Network SOFREP Navy SEALs The Loadout Room Hot Extract The Arms Guide SOFREP Radio SOFREP TV SOFREP Team Room
Listen to SOFREP Radio #1 on iTunes
  • Contact
  • About
  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Commenting
  • Advertisers

© Copyright 2013 SOFREP Inc. All Rights Reserved.