Air Force Says Iran Didn't Down Drone

First time accepted submitter QQBoss writes "The Air Force is not saying what caused the RQ-170 UAV to crash in Iran, but that Iran's claim to have forced it down is erroneous. The drone didn't come down and land gently as Iran had suggested it did. At least Iran got a good photo op, though the more interesting question is what technology will they be able to glean from what they did capture."

Comments

Forget PR

[oldhack]

Did USAF figured out how/why the drone got captured?

Re:Forget PR

[cold fjord]

If they did, I very much doubt they will say anything about it.

Re:Forget PR

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Hi. We're the US Airforce.

We run a secret intelligence agency, and have an acknowledged PsyOp division, aimed at the general US population.

Please believe us. We are not lying to you, about this. Really.

Re:Forget PR

[cold fjord]

We run a secret intelligence agency, and have an acknowledged PsyOp division, aimed at the general US population.

Please believe us. We are not lying to you, about this. Really.

Yes, because obviously what the American public believes has a direct effect on the technical capabilities of the Iranian government in a sort of "mind over matter" fashion. Most people don't make that connection.

Re:Forget PR

[Ethanol-fueled]

Yeah, I also laughed out loud when I saw the page in the link.

I do find it credible that Iran didn't use technical wizardry to down the drone. As a former Air Force electronic warfare technician, I'm guessing that Iran just flooded the area with high-amplitude noise jamming to trigger an automatic landing routine. My knowledge is not current, but much military technology nowadays uses 2 other (3-letter-acronym) types of satellite-based navigation technology with better precision than that of GPS.

There's a reason for classifying technology, and it's not to hide super-secret features. It's to prevent the enemy from knowing what a piece of shit the technology is.

But then again, seeing how the Joint Strike fighter and the F-22 both turned out to be flimsy, overpriced pieces of shit, It would not surprise me to see hurried Tijuana design practices in the systems integration. The last good American aircraft was the ultra-versatile, ultra-reliable F-15 airframe, which is still being adapted for use. I know because I worked on 'em, back in the days when their main antenna array was mechanically scanned :)

Re:Forget PR

[rtb61]

Who can forget how this all started out.
It not ours we didn't lose one.
We lost one but that's not it.

We want it back.
Now it's, 'er' yeah, it's our's but they didn't bring it down, we lost it all on our own (somehow that's meant to be better.

Of course the web site source is going wildly counter Republican dogma about the dangerous Iranians "the Iranians are constantly lying about their military exploits, especially when it comes to developing new weapons and technology. This is apparently done mainly for domestic propaganda as satellite photos never show more than a few prototypes of these wonder-weapons". So no great threat after all.

The real battle at the moment is between the US and Israel. The US administration is sick of Israel forcing into losing situations, losing billions and losing soldiers and knows Israel is actively trying to goad Iran into attacking Israel.

Likely Russia and China will not be too impressed in Israel launches an airstrike even a series of airstrikes on Iran in an attempt to precipitate a conflict and draw in the US at the US's expense.

Likely this will result in both China and Russia supply Iran with the latest weapons to test them against US hardware.

Re:Forget PR

[Anonymous Coward]

The government today announced that it is changing its emblem from an Eagle to a CONDOM because it more accurately reflects the government's political stance. A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks, and gives you a sense of security while you're actually being screwed.

Re:Forget PR

[dkleinsc]

We run a secret intelligence agency, and have an acknowledged PsyOp division, aimed at the general US population.

Incidentally, that would be admitting to breaking the law, because the US military is bound by law to aim psyops solely at foreign populations.

Re:Forget PR

[Ethanol-fueled]

Why are you contradicting yourself?

Noise jamming is not "technical wizardry." It is the crudest form of electronic jamming known to man. It's the "hail mary" of the jamming world. If Iran used it, they did so because their technology is primitive, not because they had inside information.

Yeah that's called "security through obscurity" and no self-respecting security relies on it.

Tell that to the Serbians who shot down an American stealth fighter using primitive sixties-era Russian technology.

Re:Forget PR

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Do you remember when laws used to be enforced? That seemed to work OK. I wonder why they stopped?

Re:Forget PR

[swb]

It was damaging our ability to innovate.

Re:Forget PR

[hairyfeet]

Well don't forget it was only a couple of years ago (late 09 i believe) that Intel quit making the 386 because the military was still buying and that thing is so old they haven't been found even in goodwill stores in nearly a decade, hell I throw away machines a dozen times more powerful than that old POS chip.

Despite all the talk of the "high tech military' by the time the gear gets through committees and sub-committees and 14 levels of bureaucratic BS the stuff is pretty damned ancient. I don't know what is sadder, how much really old crap our soldiers are dealing with or how the really old crap is better than the new stuff, like the F35 which is up to what? A billion plus just to fix the bugs they've found so far? Frankly i think we'd be better off having some more F-15s and F-18s cranked out even though those are old designs.

but if this program is anything like what we've seen with the fighters the only thing the program is really good at is cost overruns and the thing probably has so many bugs you could knock it down with a hacked iPhone. How much you wanna bet the Chinese will end up with it like they did the stealth chopper we lost going after Bin Laden and the F 117 they had dug up in Kosovo? Maybe they can figure out how to make it at a decent price and have it actually functional.

Re:Forget PR

[Raindog]

IIRC there was a version of the 386 that was hardened against high levels of radiation...hence their being used quite a bit in space (and presumably nuclear) applications, which would go along way towards explaining such a thing.

Re:Forget PR

[__aaltlg1547]

Nobody would use a highly vulnerable communication system to fly an airplane, let alone in a war zone.

Re:Forget PR

[timeOday]

I think you and the GP are missing an important, falsifiable statement from the story: "The air force did say that, because they had figured out what brought the RQ-170 down, they were continuing to fly RQ-170s on reconnaissance missions."

.

I have a hard time believing they would do this if your theory - simple jamming - were correct.

I also have a hard time believing the GP that US propagandists would use such a simple, falsifiable lie.

So, I think the most likely scenario is that this new high-tech drone simply broke down over Iran and crash-landed.

Re:Forget PR

[Rennt]

It wasn't so much hardened, as much as it was just made on such a crude process (over 1 micrometer) it was largely unaffected by radiation.

Re:Forget PR

[Sun]

hell I throw away machines a dozen times more powerful than that old POS chip.

There are more important aspects to a chip that is supposed to be used in an aircraft than processing speed. Radiation resistance, temperature sensitivity, having a frame that can withstand 9G over time and twice that at emergencies, etc. count for more than having more processing power, even if the result is that you are using a less powerful chip.

The reason the 386 took so long to be replaced wasn't because of some slow working committee. It is because the economical pressures at ground levels are different, causing chip makers to produce chips that are indeed faster, but less suited to the operating conditions inside a fighter aircraft.

I didn't know they actually found an alternative. Maybe they didn't, and are just so swell stocked up on 386s that they feel there is no need to pay the cost to Intel of keeping the old production line open.

Shachar

Re:Forget PR

[JWSmythe]

    Right. They upgraded to IBM AP-101S. 32bit, 1.2Mhz, 1MB RAM.

    From what I understand, there were Intel 80386 processors used for other functions.

    They are used in all kinds of embedded systems, both gov't and commercial. There isn't much need to upgrade the CPU on some embedded device that's always worked that way. Well, not til the next generation needs more power.

    The shuttle didn't generally change very much, so if they were using 386's to run some device, there wasn't much need to upgrade.

Re:Forget PR

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

You believe all the distortions, half truths and misrepresentations sold to you by the CNNBCFox?

It is impossible to retort to those who play in imaginary sandboxes. I'm glad that - at least - you didn't pay for that brainwashing.

Re:Forget PR

[zdzichu]

There's a great quote I saw recently:

General: "So, how do we get Stuxnet 2 in Iran? USB sticks won't do it any more"
Sergeant: "What if we crash land an infected drone there?"

Re:Forget PR

[Patch86]

Noise jamming is not "technical wizardry." It is the crudest form of electronic jamming known to man. It's the "hail mary" of the jamming world. If Iran used it, they did so because their technology is primitive, not because they had inside information.

Well, it did work. Seeing as they successfully netted themselves a USAF unmanne drone with simple noise jamming (if that is indeed what happened), anything "more sophisticated" would have been wasted effort. Like picking the lock on a door when the window is wide open.

Re:Forget PR

[Patch86]

Great when you're flying over enemy-infested desert mountain ranges, but not so great when flying over a city or key piece of infrastructure. The military is (generally) not in the business of "let's just blow everything up regardless!".

Re:Forget PR

[nutshell42]

No but it has a direct effect on the financial capabilities of the DoD.

If a half assed regime could down a multi-billion dollar super high tech weapon with shit bought at Home Depot, people might question if all those juicy contracts are really necessary.

Re:Forget PR

[shiftless]

If Iran used it, they did so because their technology is primitive, not because they had inside information.

Which technology is more primitive? The Iranians with their crude jamming, or the multi-million dollar drone which is clearly easily defeated by said crude jamming?

Re:Forget PR

[cold fjord]

If a half assed regime could down a multi-billion dollar super high tech weapon with shit bought at Home Depot, people might question if all those juicy contracts are really necessary.

That is ridiculous. Drones are pretty clearly necessary, so finding an actual vulnerability would generate more contracts to fix the problem, not fewer from the elimination of drones.

Uh

[Anonymous Coward]

Do people expect the military to admit that their drone wasn't hacked and gently landed? Of course they're going to save face here. I don't trust their PR department any more than I trust any other PR department.

Re:Uh

[icebike]

Do people expect the military to admit that their drone wasn't hacked and gently landed? Of course they're going to save face here.

Did you read the linked article:

Then many Americans familiar with the RQ-170 carefully studied the pictures of the "captured" RQ-170 and immediately suspected something was off. For one thing, the RQ-170 shown was the right size and shape but the wrong color. Not just a different color from that seen on many photos of the RQ-170s in Afghanistan but also a color unknown in American military service. A closer examination of the Iranian RQ-170 photos indicated that the Iranians had reassembled an RQ-170 that had crashed and broken into three or more pieces.

It wasn't even the military that first noticed the paint job.
And the landing gear was always hidden by drapery.
If it landed intact why hide it?

Re:Uh

[Anonymous Coward]

the fact is that Iran HAS the unit, even if they had to duct tape it back together. Even if it crashed, it was still close enough to Iran to land ON THEIR SIDE of the border. The thing to take as US citizens is that our military is consistently goading Iran along... Obviously the drone was violating Iran's airspace when it went down... so our government is stoking them to keep up the crazy talk.. just because they are paranoid doesn't mean our side isn't out to start shit.

They didn't bring it down...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's just so well made that it fell out the sky undamaged.

SOPA

[mr_lizard13]

They shouldn't just be able to take what they want from it. That technology is valuable IP.

This is why we need SOPA.

Re:SOPA

[oldhack]

Yeah, Lawyers vs. Mullahs.

I can only hope they annihilate each other.

Re:SOPA

[bky1701]

My god, you are a genius! We can get them to fight it out in ritual combat using swords and axes. Chris Dodd can head the US/Lawyer team, and Khamenei can head the Iran/Mullah team. If we put it on pay-per-view, we can probably pay off the US debt!

Re:what they'll get..

[DigiShaman]

They will exchange or gift it to some other nation in exchange for diplomatic relations. Namely China or Russia. Aside from the whole stealth paint technology, it provides little extra value.

Self-Destruct anyone?

[mvmortier]

Why doesn't the drone have a self-destruct functionality?

I mean... isn't this like the ultimate reason for that functionality? So that technology doesn't get into enemy hands? Just like spies having these suicide pills?

Oh well... seems like this one doesn't have any.

Re:Self-Destruct anyone?

[izomiac]

I would imagine one could politically argue that putting explosives on an unmanned aircraft is just a convoluted way of making a missile, the use of which would be an act of war. Furthermore, I'm sure the designers made them exceptionally difficult to reverse engineer, and there are probably digital and perhaps even chemical self-destruct mechanisms that aren't as flashy nor leave as much visible external evidence. For all we know, Iran got a warped airframe with a bunch of melted circuit boards and oxidized stealth paint.

Why Drones? Right Here's Your Answer

[grumling]

Imagine if this was a U2 or similar piloted vehicle instead of a drone. We'd be preparing the bombers right now, along with special congressional resolutions condemning the Iraqis to death for "capturing" one of "our boys." Meanwhile the Iraqi government would be parading him all over Tehran, mostly for the western media to slobber over.

Instead we get a few jokes on Leno and the Daily Show, and a lot of diplomatic posturing.

No doubt we're going to war with Iran no matter what the American people want, but at least not over a spyplane (for a change).

Re:Why Drones? Right Here's Your Answer

[ironjaw33]

Imagine if this was a U2 or similar piloted vehicle instead of a drone. We'd be preparing the bombers right now, along with special congressional resolutions condemning the Iraqis to death for "capturing" one of "our boys."

There are at least two cases where this has happened. The Soviets shot down a U2 in 1960 and held the pilot hostage for over a year until he was traded for another prisoner. Also, in 2001, the Chinese forced a P-3 to land on Chinese soil and held the crew hostage for 10 days before they were released. In both cases, I'm sure the Soviets and the Chinese pored over whatever sensitive stuff was left intact and wasn't destroyed by the crash in the case of the U2 or the US aircrew in the case of the P3.

I wasn't born in the 1960s so I couldn't tell you what the public sentiment was at the time, but in the 2001 incident, I don't remember anyone caring all that much about the hostage crew, all the way up to President Clinton. If I remember, the Chinese forced Clinton to give some kind of apology before they released the crew.

Re:may it does or at least a suicide battery

[Overzeetop]

Sony and Chevy are both competing for the new self-destruct battery contract.

Alt. Scenario

[Anonymous Coward]

U.S. receives intelligence that Iran are working on tech to bring down an enemy drone safely.
U.S. plays along and lets Iran "land" a drone with sub-par/poisoned tech on board.
U.S. pretends to try and reproduce the bug that Iran publically announces, hence the delay.
U.S. claims that Iran's method couldn't have possibly worked and that it was an unknown error.

Iran thinks that U.S. is either incompetent or has failed to realise the key, unreleased, step in their methodology.
U.S. lets Iran believe that their method works, and, optionally, leads them down the garden path with poisoned tech on board the planted drone.
When Real War breaks out, U.S. has an advantage, drones continue to fly and Iran wastes time and energy trying to perfect their drone-capturing skillz.

Re:Alt. Scenario

[l00sr]

The real scenario:

Drone crash-lands in Iran due to software bug.
Iran hauls drone away in pick-up truck, gives it a paint job, and makes it the centerpiece of a propaganda campaign.

Never attribute to advanced spycraft that which can adequately be explained by incompetence.

Don't trust USAF, but in this case . . .

[walterbyrd]

It is extremely unlikely that Iran "hacked" the drone and landed it.

You are right not to trust the US government stories. But, Iran is not especially trustworthy either.

The most likely story is: the drone lost signal, or had some sort of mechanical problem, and glided to a crash landing. Iran picked up wreckage - which was probable not that bad.

They would say, wouldn't they?

[mbone]

The Air Force is saying that "Iran's claim to have forced it down is erroneous."

WIth all due respect they would say that, wouldn't they ? So, as an indication of what happened, I am afraid this is not very useful.