Slashdot Mirror


Crashed Helicopter Sparks Concern Over Stealth Secrets

Hugh Pickens writes "The crash of a helicopter involved in the raid on Osama bin Laden's Pakistani hideout has prompted intense speculation about whether the aircraft was specially modified to fly stealthily — and whether its remains could offer hostile governments clues to sensitive US military technology. Remnants of the helicopter, including a nearly intact piece of its tail, suggested that the aircraft involved in the raid wasn't the typical Black Hawk flown by special-operations forces. Aviation experts who scrutinized photos of the scene say the tail had unusual features that suggested the helicopter had been extensively modified to fly quietly, while appearing less visible to radar. 'The odds are fair — based on my knowledge of the subject area — the vast majority of the special MH-60s aircraft were purpose-built to make those aircraft as stealthy as they could possibly be,' says aviation expert Jay Miller, adding that the remnants of the aircraft suggested extensive use of nonmetallic composite parts, which reflect less radar energy. Experts also say the tail rotor's design suggested an effort to reduce the 'acoustic signature' (video) of the helicopters to make them fly more quietly."

63 of 484 comments (clear)

  1. Yes it was modifed by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Or a new design. That tail rotor is not from any know US or even NATO Helicopter. How much was compromised? Maybe some materials It will depend on if Pakistan gives it back or not. They will probably pass some parts onto China since they are working with them on new aircraft. Or we will sell them some more F16s cheap if they give back to US.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:Yes it was modifed by hawguy · · Score: 2

      If this tech is so top-secret, why don't they spend some time and build a self-immolate feature into the entire helicopter? They don't really seem to try to not let the tech fall into the wrong hands...

      Because you don't want it to accidentally self-immolate in the air when hit by small arms fire?

  2. Hardly secret or surprising by fridaynightsmoke · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The fact that civilian aviation experts were able to look at the pictures and say "gee, that's a so-and-so modification to reduce noise" suggests to me that this is hardly top-secret technology. Also, the fact that special forces have relatively stealthy helicopters is hardly surprising.

    What next; controversy about a crashed police car 'revealing' secret tuning and suspension modifications?

    --
    This is a substitute for a clever sig that fits within the maximum number of characters.
    1. Re:Hardly secret or surprising by Zeek40 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If we only found damaged parts of that police car, and it was used to capture or kill one of the FBI's most wanted, and none of those parts were found in any other known production vehicle, then yes, there would be controversy over what the vehicle was.

    2. Re:Hardly secret or surprising by Americano · · Score: 2

      Sun Tzu understood why this was a concern: "Be extremely subtle even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate."

      If you know what materials are in use, and what technologies are implemented by your opponent, then you're no longer looking for the proverbial needle in a haystack. You know exactly what the other guy is using, and can then build systems specifically designed & tuned to hinder/counter/neutralize the benefits that tech gives him.

      It's not just that the "experts recognize X as way of making quieter rotors," it's that "here's an operating piece of the tech that they're actually using, so now we know exactly what components and designs they've used, and can take specific steps to counteract that tech's advantages."

      Will it benefit an organization like Al Qaeda, with limited scientific & research resources? Probably not. But a country with the resources and military of China, or North Korea, or Russia, or Iran? You'd be crazy to think they wouldn't be interested in seeing the classified tech we use up close and personal, but without the hidden prize of a Navy SEAL team inside.

    3. Re:Hardly secret or surprising by joocemann · · Score: 3, Informative

      No way... the truth I there is tons of technology that our military uses that only those with a need to know are usually aware of.

      We spend 1.8 trillion on the military industrial complex per year from taxes, and that isn't including DoD budgets or pentagon budgets. Damn straight we're gonna have crazy technology that people aren't aware of. Most civilians have no idea what we even amount to in this field, and most soldiers won't even see or hear about the tech they don't directly work with.

      We pay for it, that's for sure.

    4. Re:Hardly secret or surprising by fridaynightsmoke · · Score: 2

      Who mod this guy as "interesting"? Noise reduction in this case is only part of the intriguing things in this helicopter. Never came across something that is probably something completely new and never wanted to know more about it?

      I'm not saying that it isn't interesting or intriguing (because it is); I'm saying it's not an "OMG National Security" disaster. Because it probably isn't.

      --
      This is a substitute for a clever sig that fits within the maximum number of characters.
    5. Re:Hardly secret or surprising by Sir_Sri · · Score: 3, Informative

      Knowing that composites reduce radar signatures is well known in the civilian world. What specific composite works well against whatever brand of radar the pakistani's use is a whole other matter.

      Everyone knew the F117 was a stealth fighter bomber, it had a shape, coating materials etc for that purpose. 10 years after it was built the russians still very quickly scooped up all the pieces they could find when one crashed in yugoslavia.

      There's a big difference between knowing in general things that make something stealthy, it's quite another to have specific implementation you can copy/steal/learn from. In the same way that we all know nuclear bombs exist, and the basic principles of operation, but actually building a 5 Megaton bomb is a somewhat different problem.

      The concern here is both what you can see externally, and then any of the electronics hardware on the inside that you can't see. When that EP3 spying on China in 2001 was forced to land on Hainan the important part wasn't the aircraft, it was the NSA operating system and all of the electronic stuff that we know sort of in general was there, but not how it worked.

      The only thing to me is that Pakistan is officially a US ally in this, so for them to turn over the remains of the aircraft to anyone else would be... problematic (especially since it's a free market and who has more money to spend than the US?). Random bits that went flying around the neighbourhood, sure, they're gone. But any of the parts big enough to need a vehicle to move I'd guess the US will be wanting back.

    6. Re:Hardly secret or surprising by mikael_j · · Score: 2

      The only thing to me is that Pakistan is officially a US ally in this, so for them to turn over the remains of the aircraft to anyone else would be... problematic (especially since it's a free market and who has more money to spend than the US?). Random bits that went flying around the neighbourhood, sure, they're gone. But any of the parts big enough to need a vehicle to move I'd guess the US will be wanting back.

      From what I've come to understand the main concern isn't that Pakistan as a country would sell this off to China or Russia but rather that less trustworthy elements in the Pakistani military/government (essentially the same thing most of the time) would either use this tech themselves (they are after all a nuclear power even if a lot of people tend to think of them as little more than "towelheads") or have bits of it "disappear" only to have it turn up in Russia or China at about the same time as said official decided to retire early and withdraw to his newly purchased mansion...

      --
      Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
    7. Re:Hardly secret or surprising by Mr.Intel · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'm experiencing deja vu.

      I remember this same discussion back in 1991, when a stealth fighter crashed in Iraq, and "experts" were worried that the crash parts would be stolen and help enemies build their own stealth fighter. So far I've not seen any great harm caused. Remember: These pundits are paid to talk, even if it's just "the sky is falling" nonsense and/or hand-wringing like an old maid.

      You mean 1999 during the Kosovo war? The only operational (combat) loss of an F-117 (S/N 82-0806) was in Yugoslavia.

      They were right to be worried since China has developed a stealth fighter from the technology stolen from that very plane.

      Balkan military officials told the Associated Press that China and Russia may have adopted some stealth technology from a Lockheed F-117 Nighthawk, which was shot down by the Serbian military in 1999 during the Kosovo war.

      source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iE3jMTTaEhm5I8l63W9OzWiji0-Q?docId=e8f4fe6f3cc042d8af123a99e96b2a96

      --
      ASCII tastes bad dude.
      Binary it is then.
    8. Re:Hardly secret or surprising by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 3, Informative

      1.8 trillion total since the GWoT started more like.

      FY2007 Department of Defense appropriations: $70 billion(estimated) for Iraq War-related costs
      FY2007 Emergency Supplemental (proposed) $100 billion
      FY2008 Bush administration has proposed around $190 billion for the Iraq War and Afghanistan
      FY2009 Obama administration has proposed around $130 billion in additional funding for the Iraq War and Afghanistan
      FY2011 Obama administration proposes around $159.3 billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars

      US defense budget FY2010
      Provides $533.7 billion for the Department of Defense base budget in 2010, a four-percent increase over 2009.
      Includes $75.5 billion in supplemental appropriations for 2009 and $130.0 billion for 2010 to support ongoing overseas contingency operations, while increasing efforts in Afghanistan and drawing down troops from Iraq responsibly.

      http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy10/pdf/budget/defense.pdf

      Visualizing the US defense budget

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/apr/01/information-is-beautiful-military-spending

    9. Re:Hardly secret or surprising by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2

      The only stealth fighters that crashed were...

      S/N 79-0785 was lost on 20 April 1982 during takeoff on its maiden flight in California, recovered.
      S/N 80-0792 was lost on 11 July 1986 in California, recovered
      S/N 85-0815 was lost on 14 October 1987 in Nevada, recovered
      S/N 82-0801 was lost on 4 August 1992 in New Mexico, recovered
      S/N 86-0822 was lost on 10 May 1995 in New Mexico, recovered
      S/N 81-0793 was lost on 14 September 1997 in Maryland during air show, recovered
      S/N 82-0806 was lost on 27 March 1999 in Serbia, not recovered

      No stealth fighters crashed or were lost in Iraq or Kuwait

    10. Re:Hardly secret or surprising by x6060 · · Score: 2

      more likely would be a 2000lbs JDAM being dropped on it 20 minutes after the SEALS were gone.

    11. Re:Hardly secret or surprising by Luckyo · · Score: 2

      Additionally, a truly designed-from-the-ground-up model would most likely have NOTAR instead of a tail rotor. It's what police helicopters around the world like to use as it completely removes the choppy sound (which comes from airflow from main rotor hitting the airflow from tail rotor). Obviously engine sound itself remains, but that's a small fraction of the choppy noise. This is most likely a modifier version in a sense that they slapped add-ons on top of already existing model, rather then fully rework and redesign it, as would be necessary for different tail rotor structure.

    12. Re:Hardly secret or surprising by Coren22 · · Score: 2
      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    13. Re:Hardly secret or surprising by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 2

      They were right to be worried since China has developed a stealth fighter [wikipedia.org] from the technology stolen from that very plane.

      No, the F-117 and the Chinese jet have fundamentally different designs.

      What you probably mean is that China gained some knowledge of stealth coatings from the F-117 crash (what is in them, perhaps how they are applied... But certainly not how to manufacture them)

      But the paint is only a small part of "stealth".

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
  3. Cutting edge by Dan+East · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The key factor is that this mission was so important - even the President was personally involved in its planned - that the very best, most advanced technology available would have been employed. If there are secret helicopters and eavesdropping equipment and spy gadgets, then they would have been employed for this. I think the design (5 blade), material and aerodynamic shape of the tail rotors would be the biggest thing up for grabs after this incident. It also makes me wonder if China, Russia, etc, have their act together enough to quickly place buyers in Pakistan to purchase whatever photos, or even actual pieces of the wreckage, they can. One thing is for sure, China and Russia are very good at reverse engineering.

    --
    Better known as 318230.
    1. Re:Cutting edge by dcherryholmes · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm not expert in this stuff, but I did do some time on submarines and participated in refueling overhauls and decommissions. When the sub is in drydock the screw is kept covered with a tarp at all times, lest somebody just see the shape of it and glean anti-cavitation tech. So it is plausible to me that just seeing the shape of one of the rotors would be significant.

    2. Re:Cutting edge by Shivetya · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The real achievement wasn't the helicopters, it was flying from their station in Afghanistan without being picked up by Pakistan's military. A lot of that had to do with know where the coverage was and the terrain combined with great flying and planning. Never underestimate the skill of those flying these machines. Flying helicopters in the dark at the levels and speeds they were moving isn't for the feint at heart.

      The explosives were most likely done to break up certain shapes and destroy electronics. I doubt the materials themselves used to skin the helicopter are as important as compared to the shape of the various components of the copter.

      --
      * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
    3. Re:Cutting edge by poity · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, security among nations perhaps, but not security for people in totalitarian states. If Libya had better tech to defend against NATO, that country would probably be at "peace" right now in the sense that no nation would bother its sovereignty, but it would have a few hundred thousand less of its people, and harsher lives for those who remain. If either of their histories is any indication, Russia and China are indeed totalitarian states not too far removed from Libya in their stance towards dissent. What a wonderful peace for people of the world to look forward to.

      --
      your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
    4. Re:Cutting edge by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      "If so, it will be a good thing for this tech to end up with China and Russia just to balance out the power a little bit."

      Screw balance of power, I cant wait for cheap China RC helicopter toys that will come from this!

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    5. Re:Cutting edge by drsmack1 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I sincerely hope that China "balances out" the USA by invading whatever shithole you live in. Fucks like you are the first to blame the USA when they *don't" intervene. If it was not for our intervening, you'd be eating some sort of sauerkraut/sushi mix for breakfast every day.

      Dumbass. I doubt there would be a single democracy on the planet were it not for the USA.

    6. Re:Cutting edge by tgd · · Score: 5, Funny

      Pakistan's military didn't notice Bin Laden living in his giant compound a quarter mile from their elite military training school.

      Somehow I think we could've flown a bunch of bi-planes trailing a banner with "We're coming for you Bin Laden" in giant letters, with wing walkers and dropping tootsie rolls onto the onlooking public and the military still wouldn't have noticed.

    7. Re:Cutting edge by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      Those are obviously photoshopped.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    8. Re:Cutting edge by ArcherB · · Score: 2

      Truth be told, I'm having a hard time believing that Pakistan didn't know he was there. I think the more likely scenario is he was there under house arrest as part of some deal he made with the Paki's. He did have access to quite a bit of money and giving the US access to Afghanistan via roadways and airspace for an extended period of time has proven to be quite lucrative to the Paki government. I think the Paki's full well knew he was there and kept pointing intel to the tribal regions for a variety of reasons.

      I think the Pakistanis were keeping here there to keep the gravy train flowing. They knew that once Bin Laden was captured, our Afghanistan operations would be winding down. Now that Bin Laden is dead, expect our Afghanistan operations to be winding down within the next few years. With us not being in Afghanistan, we will have much less need for Pakistan. Since we will have no use for Pakistan, expect the funds to dry up.

      Bin Laden was the golden goose for Pakistan.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    9. Re:Cutting edge by SnarfQuest · · Score: 2

      They apparently also missed the CIA agents living across the street for the last couple of years, according to some news stories.

      --
      Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
    10. Re:Cutting edge by Coren22 · · Score: 2

      Well, than maybe we should just bring home our toys and not help out the Libyans, maybe renew the old isolationist policy and let the rest of you kill yourselves off. When the shit started hitting the fan in the middle east recently, all I heard on TV was people asking why the US wasn't helping out, and it is exactly attitudes like yours as to why we didn't help out right away, it took a couple weeks, and then I heard on the TV about how (many times the very same people as earlier) felt that Obama went too far in trying to help the Libyans dispose their dictator. We can't win, we stay out of it, you bitch, we help out you bitch. I say we just take out ball and go home, and screw you...

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    11. Re:Cutting edge by Luckyo · · Score: 2

      "Millions displaced"? The country's entire population is six million total. Of these, only a small fraction is in rebelling towns. And in every rebelling town, it's mostly young men. Of those, only a few leaders would be killed along with their families to make an example with rest being punished financially. There is plenty of historic precedent on this from how Gaddafi handled his power.
      Hell, the main reason why he's still in power is because he was never a true tyrant to his own people - he left most of the governing, including the tyrannical aspect to tribal councils.

      Please stop eating up propaganda and swallowing it whole.

  4. What exactly is the concern? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That we have a stealth helicopter or that its 'secrets' might be out there now?

    Concerns are irrelevant either way. We worked on a stealth helicopter design for a while (RAH-66) which failed to materialize, but it makes sense lessons learned from the project could be put to use. In regards to people knowing about it (or having access to its parts), well, if you use it in combat you might lose one, and then it's out there for everyone to see.

  5. Stealth Blackhawk BETA by RCourtney · · Score: 2

    It must have been a Stealth Blackhawk in BETA - never seen before and bound to crash at least once.

    All kidding aside, it is quite unfortunate that it's debut was the result of a crash in a country that has been known to export nifty knowledge and new technology they acquire (i.e. A.Q Kahn and nuclear weapons).

  6. lol stealth helicopter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Helicopters are the opposite of stealth.

    Naval Aviator: "You know how a helicopter flies?"
    me: "uhh.. the main rotor, lift, drag, etc?"
    Naval Aviator: "Wrong. They make so much goddamn noise the Earth gets away from them"

    1. Re:lol stealth helicopter by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 2

      Noise reduction, reduction of RCS, reduction of IR ... When the enemy realizes that you're near, it is too late to react. It worked, as when the occupants of the house realized what was happening it was too late to try to escape.

      --
      Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
    2. Re:lol stealth helicopter by Svartalf · · Score: 3, Funny

      A helo's an array of spare parts flying in fairly loose formation.

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    3. Re:lol stealth helicopter by Hydian · · Score: 2

      They beat the air into submission.

  7. The reason it crashed too? by goombah99 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    According the NYtimes the reason it crashed was not mechanical failure but lack of lift. two reasons were given 1) thin air 2) the walls of the compound created a vortex. So apparently just some modestly walls to guide air will reduce the lift enough to crash this thing. I wonder how it is supposed to land between buildings? I wonder if perhaps the noise reduction and stealth features came at a price of reduced performance.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:The reason it crashed too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      According the NYtimes the reason it crashed was not mechanical failure but lack of lift.

      According to Aviation Week the reason it crashed was the tail rotor struck the top of the compound wall during the landing attempt, breaking the tail rotor off, which resulted in a hard landing. That's the reason the tail section was on the opposite side of the wall from the rest of the helicopter, and why it didn't get destroyed when the Seal team blew up the helicopter.

    2. Re:The reason it crashed too? by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's credible. Now please explain to me how they got 24 seals complete with combat equipment, two flight crews, a body and lots of swag - total at least 6,000 pounds - out in the one remaining chopper.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    3. Re:The reason it crashed too? by yurtinus · · Score: 3, Informative

      Wikis for the UH-60 show 8000 or 9000 lbs cargo capacity depending on configuration. Wouldn't be comfy in there, but when it's your only ride out, you make it work.

      --
      +1 Disagree
    4. Re:The reason it crashed too? by catbertz · · Score: 3

      Every news report I've read had two Blackhawks in first, followed by several Chinooks loaded with support teams.

    5. Re:The reason it crashed too? by cptdondo · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've read reports of 70+ men on the team. Two Blackhawks for the initial strike, plus a bunch of Chinooks for the mopup crew, arab language experts to rifle files, and a few burly men to haul the loot back to the Chiniooks.

    6. Re:The reason it crashed too? by ktappe · · Score: 5, Insightful

      2 special Black Hawks for insertion, two standard Chinooks lifted the Team, gear, and swag.

      And that would explain why a neighbor a good distance away was (unwittingly) Tweeting about the operation. He probably didn't hear the stealthy insertion but the Chinooks used for extraction make a boatload of noise and annoyed the piss out of him and everyone else a decent radius around there.

      --
      "We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
    7. Re:The reason it crashed too? by jittles · · Score: 2

      If they had brought any chinooks in, they would have just sling loaded the crashed helicopter out. There would have been no need to blow anything up. Those things can out climb an F-16 and carry some 50,000 pounds of goods.

  8. Picture of what it might look like by RCourtney · · Score: 2
  9. Re:I don't understand by Augusto · · Score: 2

    That would have killed a lot of civilians, undermining the decision to use special forces in the first place.

    --

    - sigs are for wimps.
  10. Re:I don't understand by TheDarkMaster · · Score: 2

    Open an enormous crater in the middle of a city? This is often understood as an act of war.

    --
    Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
  11. Why all the worry? by bradgoodman · · Score: 2

    Our good friends and allies, the Pakistanis, are just going to give us back the helicopter, and protect it's secrets from our enemies... right?

    1. Re:Why all the worry? by Xelios · · Score: 2

      Look at it from their perspective, 'good friends and allies' don't launch covert military operations into your country without at least informing you first. Maybe the US had good reasons not to, but it's not very fair to pull something like this then turn around and point fingers when the operation doesn't go quite as planned.

      --
      Murphey's fighting Occam, and we're in the stands.
  12. Re:I don't understand by jgtg32a · · Score: 2

    Actually just sending troop into a country is an act of war; it's also considered good etiquette not to announce to the world when you do, do it.

  13. the bigger puzzle by catmistake · · Score: 2

    How did they fit 24 commandos, 4 pilots, a dog, a body, and retrieved materials into the remaining stealth Blackhawk? Did the military developed stealth midget commandos for this mission?

    1. Re:the bigger puzzle by SydShamino · · Score: 3, Informative

      Two Chinook helicopters followed the two stealth helicopters. This was intended so that the SEALs could make a ground escape if necessary (to be picked up nearby).

      One or both of those likely picked up the other SEALs.

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
    2. Re:the bigger puzzle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Pakistanis might be fair weather allies *cough*, but they're not that stupid.

    3. Re:the bigger puzzle by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 2

      If we flew over hundreds of miles of Pakistani airspace with freaking Chinooks, why did we bother with stealth helicopters in the first place? Was it just to reduce the noise of inserting the commandos? Chinooks are possibly the least stealthy and most obvious aircraft that the Navy operates. SAM technology from the 50's could take them down. If we were using Chinooks, it's 100% clear that we had the full cooperation of Pakistani air defenses.

    4. Re:the bigger puzzle by WuphonsReach · · Score: 2

      Was it just to reduce the noise of inserting the commandos?

      Yes.

      My impression is that once the cat is out of the bag (after the assault team is inserted), there's not as much worry about telling the host country that those Chinooks are not actually on a training flight, but are going to land and extract a team.

      Most of the secrecy was probably aimed at not letting OBL get away, either by directly alerting him, or by alerting any spies that he had placed in the local command structure.

      (Was it hundreds of miles? I thought they launched from a US base nearby? I confess that I was more interested in puzzling over the pictures then paying attention to the mission profile.)

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
  14. creepy and exciting tech by smellsofbikes · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The first time I heard about this whole mission, I thought, whoah, American helicopters managed to fly 150 km into Pakistan without being noticed? Pakistan isn't a slouch when it comes to military equipment: they've fought several wars with India, and are used to trying to track some of the finest military hardware in the world. Yet two helicopters flew in, invisibly. It sounds like they were supported by two Chinooks, that came in a bit later, and those *were* seen by the Pakistani air defense, but the first group in weren't seen. A lot of other countries are going to want to figure out how we did this.

    There have been a lot of US projects in making low-observable helicopters, from the modified Hughes OH6 Loach used to surreptitiously place wiretaps on lines during Vietnam, that also used increased numbers of blades, and the cancelled RAH-66 Comanche, that was supposed to be quiet and have a vastly reduced radar signature. The ones used Monday are probably Blackhawks modified based on the stuff learned from the Comanche, but they could be completely new aircraft: the descriptions of the amount of personnel and material taken in are at the very edge of what two stock Blackhawks could carry, and adding lots of stealth technology adds a *lot* of weight.

    Among other interesting things I've read and observed: the stock Blackhawk is manufactured with sheets of aluminum riveted together along the edges, like most planes. The pictures show rivetless construction, and in one picture it looks like there's a long weld seam that appears to have been done by hand rather than machine, making me think there are a very small number of prototypes of this. I also saw a link somewhere, that I can't find now, to a press release by a company who was adding small servos into the collector linkages that added continuous slight variance to the blade angle, to minimize noise by distributing it across different frequencies, which seems pretty cool. I've even seen a few claims that the whole aircraft was covered in material that could emit low levels of light, to blend it visually against a lighted sky (a technique used back in WWII by putting headlights on the leading edges of aircraft wings so that they could dive-bomb submarines without being seen until it was too late for the sub to dive. This was distinct from the british Leigh lights, that were used in after-dark attacks along with radar.)

    I'm betting a whole lot of people are bidding on the wreckage that was recovered -- which is, itself, surprising, at least to me, because it sounds like the commandoes were able to completely destroy the whole main fuselage, leaving just the tail. Under the hurried circumstances that's pretty surprising. (I wouldn't be surprised to find out they actually hooked it to one of the Chinooks and dragged it out along with them.)

    --
    Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
  15. Stealth in, Chinooks out by raehl · · Score: 3, Informative

    Two stealth helicopters got them in; they had two helicopters in reserve to get them out.

  16. What if the helicopter hadn't crashed? by NimbleSquirrel · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder if the world would have heard of this event if that helicopter hadn't have crashed. When that helicopter crashed and left a section of somewhat identifiable wreckage, the US lost capability for plausible denial. They had to tell the world.

    I also have to wonder if, given the number of helicopters (two modified Black Hawks and two Chinooks), the original mission was just a capture mission. With this kind of carrying capacity, they could have removed everyone in the compound that wasn't killed in the initial raid. They would have landed the SEAL team first with the stealth Black Hawks, pulled out the Black Hawks and then followed that up a while later with a Chinook or two to pull out captives and the SEAL team. With no-one alive in the compound, the US would have had some degree of plausible deniability. On top of that, they'd have a large number of presumably senior al-Quaeda members to interrogate.

    Instead, the crashed helicopter would have taken out a large chunk of the LZ (leaving no landing space for a Chinook), it would have taken up crew to dispose of the wreckage and tend to any wounded from the crash. Combine this with an already limited timeframe and being stuck with only one aircraft to remove the SEAL team and Bin Laden, and this may have suddenly become a kill mission.

  17. Re:That makes sense by DarkOx · · Score: 2

    Well Osama was found in a populated city filled with Pakistani Military and Spy agency personnel and by all indications he had been there along time. That leaves a few possibilities :

    1. The Pakistanis are completely incompetent at security, and therefore could not be trusted to protect our bird.
    2. The Pakistani Government knew where Osama was and was protecting him from us, they are therefore not actually or allies but an enemy who has been playing us, and therefore could not be trusted to protect our bird. The jury is still out.
    3. Parts of the Pakistani Government and or Military leadership are disloyal and were protecting Osama from the rest of the government and us. From and operation standpoint we can't know who can and cannot be trusted therefore none can be trusted, and we had to scuttle the bird.

     

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  18. Re:it will be retrieved by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2

    seal team 6 is going back in to assassinate whoever has the parts and taking them back

    Or maybe Apple's lawyers.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  19. Re:It looks like a stealth assassination copter. by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Funny

    "Doesn't make a sound, "

    Except for all that wind being blown around by the ginormous fan.

    Hmm honey, why suddenly is all the dust in the alleyway being blown around like a tornado just hit?

    Even if they could do silent, you're not going to be within 1000 feet of your target without them knowing exactly where you are.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  20. Re:tweets by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the author from the blog where I found the image of what could be the "stealth hawk" have a interesting theory: To ensure they got to the house without being noticed by the Pakistanis, it is possible that the Chinnoks were also stealth versions.

    Standing off some distance and being more easily detected would also have been something of a diversion.

    --
    Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
  21. On the other hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Another view is that by the time the military is allowing "advanced tech" to be seen in theater or in public, it is already far enough along the lifecycle that we don't care if it is divulged. I.e. the F-117 was already an obsolete machine when it was lost in Serbia, and perhaps this helicopter was also similarly obsolete before it got picked for a very high profile mission.

    We probably wouldn't risk exposure of real secret stuff unless our backs were against a wall, and long-term strategic release of info is no longer a basis for decisions (think World War 3, not anti-terror skirmish #582). But recall, even in World War 2, the lore says that tactical losses allowed to fail in order to protect strategic secrets... there is rarely a situation so dire that strategy is off the table.

  22. Re:It looks like a stealth assassination copter. by CyberDruid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That twitter guy who became famous for live-tweeting the raid when he was annoyed by a helicopter certainly seemed to have heard it.

    --

    Opinions stated are mine and do not reflect those of the Illuminati

  23. So What? by hduff · · Score: 2

    Any kind of mechanical device, out out in the real world, will eventually make it into the hands of the "enemy".
    There have always been technology transfers via this mechanism.
    If it was so damn important, it shoud never have been put into the field.

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert