Officials Confirm Authenticity of Iranian TV Images Showing Lost U.S. Drone

[patentesq]

If anyone is "Shocked" about losing a drone, then they are very naive.

as CC points out, to expect 100% mission success, regardless of type of platform, is foolish.

Both very good points. Then why, in Heaven's name, are we flying a top secret stealth aircraft in an area where there is no apparent plan to deal with the contingency of that aircraft being downed? Why aren't these things built to automatically self-destruct? Did anyone ask these questions? Of course, I'm just a dumb Infantry grunt, but it sure seems like 15 years of R&D and lotsa money down the drain!

Maybe Time2's Trojan horse theory is the right answer. I can't imagine the CIA is as naive as to think this aircraft had zero chance of being downed. Maybe I give them too much credit.

Are satellites now obsolete?

 

[Bullet]

Are satellites now obsolete?

Nope. Just sometimes not in the right place for the length of period needed to provide persistent surveillance. Or as easy to tell and direct: look here. Satellites have limited fuel to maneuver as required to support continual changes in surveillance requirements needs. And they are expensive to boot (makes the budget for a plane look like peanuts). Sometimes, OK EVERY time, the operators that be have to count cost effectiveness into the equation. Satellites would be the perfect solution in this case, but at 1000 times the cost. You have to settle for the "less than perfect" solution usually.

 

[patentesq]

This article seems to suggest that the aircraft did contain self-destruct code. Possibly hacked as well?
http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=8530940&c=AME&s=AIR

We need to give more ROTC scholarship money to computer whiz-kids!

 

[MemberLG]

I am skeptical,

Granted I am no cyber warfare expert, but giving Iranians credit to hack into a secreat UAV to take control of it is just too much. I might believe a story about some terrorists hacking into a defense network. What I skeptical is not the software rather being able to hack in to the signal that controls the uav.

Not the first time that the Iranian doctored up images to boost their creditablity. If anyone recalls - fake photo of Iranian missile testing several years ago.

As for U.S., perhaps more to gain by not denying it. If you deny it, might have to provide additional information to give creditablity to the denial. It could also be a trojan horse to dupe the Iranian (need to stop watching TV )

 

[Pima]

Not the first time that the Iranian doctored up images to boost their creditablity. If anyone recalls - fake photo of Iranian missile testing several years ago.

May have read your post incorrectly, but are you saying that the U.S., and President Obama is now denying this incident?

Please clarify, because of my Polish mind is not comprehending your position along with this comment:

giving Iranians credit to hack into a secreat UAV to take control of it is just too much. I might believe a story about some terrorists hacking into a defense network.

Afghanistan was also a country like Iran pre 9/11, but are you implying the Taliban didn't know Al Qaeda was not operating in their country? Do you believe the Iranian govt did not know of terrorist organizations that would shoot down an American drone if given the opportunity? Even if the terrorists hacked it, why on earth would they not claim they shot it down if it was for terrorist purposes, they have no true allegiance to any country, their allegiance is to their "higher being". Could it be, that the Iranian govt is protecting them? Ring a bell with Al Qaeda and Afghanistan? Why would Iran protect the terrorists that hacked it?

Just asking

If so, as much as I love everything about Xmas, including Santa Claus, I have to say you are being naive IMPO when it comes to terrorists shooting a drone down in Iran and the Iranian govt not having a clue, like me a 40+ yo woman believing Santa exists and drops presents under our tree on the 25th.

 

[MemberLG]

May have read your post incorrectly, but are you saying that the U.S., and President Obama is now denying this incident?

Please clarify, because of my Polish mind is not comprehending your position along with this comment:


Afghanistan was also a country like Iran pre 9/11, but are you implying the Taliban didn't know Al Qaeda was not operating in their country? Do you believe the Iranian govt did not know of terrorist organizations that would shoot down an American drone if given the opportunity? Even if the terrorists hacked it, why on earth would they not claim they shot it down if it was for terrorist purposes, they have no true allegiance to any country, their allegiance is to their "higher being". Could it be, that the Iranian govt is protecting them? Ring a bell with Al Qaeda and Afghanistan? Why would Iran protect the terrorists that hacked it?

Just asking

If so, as much as I love everything about Xmas, including Santa Claus, I have to say you are being naive IMPO when it comes to terrorists shooting a drone down in Iran and the Iranian govt not having a clue, like me a 40+ yo woman believing Santa exists and drops presents under our tree on the 25th.

Perhaps, I have been watching too much TV What will be an ultimate deception or ploy to trick an enemy - how about the United States going along with the story about UAV being shot down or taken over by Iranians? Is it far fetched that Presidnet Obama will actively support a deception plan? Yes, but never know.

If I may clarify the comment concerning Iranian UAV hacking vs terrorist hacking, I was trying to make a point that in my opinion for any entitiy to hack into radio signal of an UAV than take control of it is a lot harder than an entity to hack into a computer network. As long as something is connected to a network, it's easier for a hacker to hack. In case of UAV in flight, unless the hacker could have pre-programmend it before, having the technological means to matching the radio signal to gain access to the UAV signal requires significant technological capability. Okay, I am making an big assumptiong that we are using encrypted signal

 

[Luigi59]

If I may clarify the comment concerning Iranian UAV hacking vs terrorist hacking, I was trying to make a point that in my opinion for any entitiy to hack into radio signal of an UAV than take control of it is a lot harder than an entity to hack into a computer network. As long as something is connected to a network, it's easier for a hacker to hack. In case of UAV in flight, unless the hacker could have pre-programmend it before, having the technological means to matching the radio signal to gain access to the UAV signal requires significant technological capability. Okay, I am making an big assumptiong that we are using encrypted signal

I seriously doubt that they actually took control of the platform, more likely they transmitted some sort of EW/EA to jam it/disable it, and the "lost connection - return to base" instructions failed to execute for whatever reason. This may explain the covered undercarriage in the video, as if the landing gear never deployed and the vehicle glided back to land.

I believe a Lockheed D-21 was lost in similar situation in the 60's or early 70's and it glided to Earth like a kite, undamaged except all of it's electronics were fried from the self-destruct technology incorporated. So I would expect the RQ-170 to glide to a halt (minus the landing gear) as well, with the avionics nice and crispy. Except in this case, maybe not.

 

[Pima]

What will be an ultimate deception or ploy to trick an enemy - how about the United States going along with the story about UAV being shot down or taken over by Iranians? Is it far fetched that Presidnet Obama will actively support a deception plan? Yes, but never know

Your choice! I prefer to believe our President would not support your theory. I believe he would never place our country in danger via James Bond.

Maybe I read your post wrong. All I can say is that IMPO President Obama loves this country, and is not in cahoots with Iran. I will always believe every American life lost weighs deeply upon his conscience as if it was Mahlia and Sascha life. I believe he believes he is not James Bond.


He loves this country as much as you and I. I may or may not vote for him in 12, I may or may not respect his position regarding State or Defense. I do respect him when it comes to protecting this country and your comment of Is it far fetched that Presidnet Obama will actively support a deception plan? Yes, but never know

Is it disrespectful to the office, to our Commander in Chief, to our President when you imply/infer that they send troops in harm's way? It is also disrespectful to our troops, to imply our President would support a plan that risks our troops against Iran.

 

[Packer]

Your choice! I prefer to believe our President would not support your theory. I believe he would never place our country in danger via James Bond.

Maybe I read your post wrong. All I can say is that IMPO President Obama loves this country, and is not in cahoots with Iran. I will always believe every American life lost weighs deeply upon his conscience as if it was Mahlia and Sascha life.


He loves this country as much as you and I. I may or may not vote for him in 12, I may or may not respect his position regarding State or Defense. I do respect him when it comes to protecting this country and your comment of Is it far fetched that Presidnet Obama will actively support a deception plan? Yes, but never know

Is disrespectful to the office, to our Commander in Chief, to our President.

It is also disrespectful to our troops, who serve him.

Wow! Perhaps you know MemberLG, but I didn't interpret what he said as being disrespectful.

The deception is to deceive our enemies not endanger the US.

 

[bruno]

Your choice! I prefer to believe our President would not support your theory. I believe he would never place our country in danger via James Bond.

Maybe I read your post wrong. All I can say is that IMPO President Obama loves this country, and is not in cahoots with Iran. I will always believe every American life lost weighs deeply upon his conscience as if it was Mahlia and Sascha life. I believe he believes he is not James Bond.


He loves this country as much as you and I. I may or may not vote for him in 12, I may or may not respect his position regarding State or Defense. I do respect him when it comes to protecting this country and your comment of Is it far fetched that Presidnet Obama will actively support a deception plan? Yes, but never know


Is it disrespectful to the office, to our Commander in Chief, to our President when you imply/infer that they send troops in harm's way? It is also disrespectful to our troops, to imply our President would support a plan that risks our troops against Iran.

Pima: I think that you seriously misread what MemberLG wrote and intended. He didn't say or imply any of the things that you are suggesting. While I would have no reason to suppose that his hypothesis in this case is in fact a deception plan- it's absolutely believable, in fact absolutely the expectation that this or any other president would selectively tailor his and the adminstration's comments to give a foreign opposing nation a mistaken impression of US capabilities if that is seen as being to our benefit.

 

[patentesq]

Glad everyone around here has thick skin!!

MemberLG and Pima, your contributions are invaluable around here!

 

[raimius]

Maybe I read your post wrong. All I can say is that IMPO President Obama loves this country, and is not in cahoots with Iran.

I think he meant an intelligence operation against Iran, not with them.

That idea sounds a little far fetched to me though.

 

[scoutpilot]

Your choice! I prefer to believe our President would not support your theory. I believe he would never place our country in danger via James Bond.

Maybe I read your post wrong. All I can say is that IMPO President Obama loves this country, and is not in cahoots with Iran. I will always believe every American life lost weighs deeply upon his conscience as if it was Mahlia and Sascha life. I believe he believes he is not James Bond.


He loves this country as much as you and I. I may or may not vote for him in 12, I may or may not respect his position regarding State or Defense. I do respect him when it comes to protecting this country and your comment of Is it far fetched that Presidnet Obama will actively support a deception plan? Yes, but never know

Is it disrespectful to the office, to our Commander in Chief, to our President when you imply/infer that they send troops in harm's way? It is also disrespectful to our troops, to imply our President would support a plan that risks our troops against Iran.

What on earth...?

This isn't even remotely relevant.

 

[MemberLG]

Okay, I will suggest no more far fetched theories to current events. I should trust news reporters 100%, what I do know. . .. I am also sure that news reporters don't get used by other people. I am sure these reporters know way more than I do.

Share a true story, a long time ago I was in the 4th Infantry Division, when it was the Force XXI (or something close, so long ago I can't remember the correct name ). As such, we had the first divisional UAV platoon for fielding/testing. I happened to read a factually inaccurate article about the 4th ID UAV. So I emailed the news reporter. To my surprise, the reporter wrote back telling me that she knew the inaccuracy but her editor "edited" the story to keep the inaccuracy.

Again, no more far fetched theories from me.

 

[50stars]

Do they have their own topic?

 

[patentesq]

It appears that the drone was felled simply due to a technical glitch. Nothing more. No psyops aimed at planting false information. No Iranian hacking genius. The bird simply came down on its own. http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=8555661&c=AME&s=AIR

Stuff happens.

 

[time2]

Far more plausible then some of the other far fetched things being reported. I assume it crash landed, therefore the reason the undercarriage is hidden in the pictures being shown by Iran.

 

[Luigi59]

No Iranian hacking genius. The bird simply came down on its own.

Actually the story coming out now is VERY believable.

Exclusive: Iran hijacked US drone, says Iranian engineer
By Scott Peterson, Staff writer, Payam Faramarzi*, Correspondent / December 15, 2011

In an exclusive interview, an engineer working to unlock the secrets of the captured RQ-170 Sentinel says they exploited a known vulnerability and tricked the US drone into landing in Iran.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Midd...-Iran-hijacked-US-drone-says-Iranian-engineer

Iran guided the CIA's "lost" stealth drone to an intact landing inside hostile territory by exploiting a navigational weakness long-known to the US military, according to an Iranian engineer now working on the captured drone's systems inside Iran.

Iranian electronic warfare specialists were able to cut off communications links of the American bat-wing RQ-170 Sentinel, says the engineer, who works for one of many Iranian military and civilian teams currently trying to unravel the drone’s stealth and intelligence secrets, and who could not be named for his safety.

Using knowledge gleaned from previous downed American drones and a technique proudly claimed by Iranian commanders in September, the Iranian specialists then reconfigured the drone's GPS coordinates to make it land in Iran at what the drone thought was its actual home base in Afghanistan.

"The GPS navigation is the weakest point," the Iranian engineer told the Monitor, giving the most detailed description yet published of Iran's "electronic ambush" of the highly classified US drone. "By putting noise [jamming] on the communications, you force the bird into autopilot. This is where the bird loses its brain."

The “spoofing” technique that the Iranians used – which took into account precise landing altitudes, as well as latitudinal and longitudinal data – made the drone “land on its own where we wanted it to, without having to crack the remote-control signals and communications” from the US control center, says the engineer.

 

[usnabgo08]

Luigi,

According to an Iranian engineer. So the basis for your reasoning that Iran "hacked" into the drone is a news article that an Iranian scientist spoke to. Seriously? Is everything that comes out of Iran believable?

I recommend everyone just stop speculating because NO ONE on this board KNOWS exactly what happened. Unless you work for a government or intelligence agency and know what is going on (which you wouldn't post on here, anyways), you aren't providing any facts on how the drone ended up in Iranian territory.

 

[scoutpilot]

Luigi,

According to an Iranian engineer. So the basis for your reasoning that Iran "hacked" into the drone is a news article that an Iranian scientist spoke to. Seriously? Is everything that comes out of Iran believable?

I recommend everyone just stop speculating because NO ONE on this board KNOWS exactly what happened. Unless you work for a government or intelligence agency and know what is going on (which you wouldn't post on here, anyways), you aren't providing any facts on how the drone ended up in Iranian territory.

Or, since this is America and NOT Iran, feel free to speculate about this issue all you want, since this is like, you know, a free country and stuff...man....