Iran missile strike successful ,Israel failed to detect missile's warhead separation

[AmirPatriot]

The bottom line is that this statement...

Bearing in mind that flying wings are notoriously difficult to keep in the air and need constant FBW input just to keep them from going out of control.

...Is technically wrong.

The flying wing design is problematic in the yaw axis, but that is solved decades ago. There is a false assumption that 'constant FBW input' means human inputs. The reality is that the fly-by-wire flight controls system removes the human pilot from that problem, at least with US designs anyway. What this means is that if human pilot inputs are absent, the flying wing UAV will revert to programmed responses, whatever they are. But it does not mean the flying wing UAV will enter uncontrolled flight, crash, and there is a wreckage of aircraft parts on the ground.

At no point did I say that FBW requires human input. It can also have autonomous input, like the going from point A to point B, assume certain flight path at B etc. as you said.

But a flying wing usually needs input from FBW to keep it in stable flight.

What I was saying was that I don't see what would have to happen for the RQ-170 to malfunction in such a way that it lands on its belly in almost perfect condition.

Communications? Uh, no. American engineers are not stupid. In such an eventuality the RQ-170 would have used protocols to return back to Kandahar under autonomous control.

Flight software (FBW)? Well. The aircraft would very likey be uncontrollable and wouldn't land in such good condition.

Engine? The pilot would know he couldn't make it and crash the RQ-170 into the ground in order to prevent it falling into enemy hands intact. Bearing in mind the RQ-170 can fly quite high, there is enough energy to point the nose down.

The only thing I can think of is that both the communications and the engine would have to fail (maybe the communications first or simultaneously, since the pilot could have time to recognise the RQ-170 won't make it and act upon this knowledge). And Lockheed Skunk Works would have had to be dumb enough not to incorporate a self destruct mechanism or procedure ("descend to sea level nose first at maximum thrust").

IMHO the stars would have to align in a more unlikely way than Iran jamming the RQ-170's communications - setting the UAV on a return path to its home airfield using GPS - and then conducting a GPS spoofing attack, thereby sending the UAV to where Iran wants, while the UAV thinks it is going to Kandahar.

 

[VEVAK]

We dont know if the zolfaqhars are new build or just fatteh 110s with the new separating warhead+guidance section retro-fitted,in fact whats interesting is that iran unveiled a zalzal that had been fitted with a fateh 110 warhead+guidance, so its possible that these are the left over fatteh 110 warheads after conversion to zolfaqhar standard.
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iranians-missiles-news-and-discussions.227673/page-100#post-9398025

No! The fuel type, configuration of the missile is different and the missile it's self is also a bit larger in diameter...
The Fatteh-313 booster can be configured into the Zolfaghar but not the Fatteh-110 on the Fatteh313 about 100kg of the warhead is sacrificed for the increased range giving the Zolfaghar ~700km range

 

[SALMAN F]

Saudis are sad they were believing the Zionist propaganda which is all lies

 

[yavar]

Iran IRGC Quds Hajj Qassem Soleimani missiles strike against terrorists in Dayr al-Zawr Syria

 

[SOHEIL]

Iran IRGC Quds Hajj Qassem Soleimani missiles strike against terrorists in Dayr al-Zawr Syria

Still no official statement from US government or defence ministry !

Those missiles pissed on the options which were on the table !

 

[Draco.IMF]

And imagine Zolfaghar missile is already "obsolete" and Iran has much much better missiles (as yavar sayd), the enemies surely cant sleep well these days....

 

[mse21]

Israeli radars can detect a cricket ball sized material from. 1500kms.
Elta green pine radar
Currently being used by india

cone shape devices have very low rcs.

Right.

My point is that Iranian account has loopholes - the more you dig into it, the more you realize it. Iranian establishment is well-known for pioneering and selling cool narratives to its masses.

I am equally skeptical of some Pakistani accounts and narratives by the way.

Anyways, this is getting off-topic so I will not argue on this matter further.

landing in desert!
why did not go back?
why landed in desert?
Lockheed Martin did not predict any gps spoofing or hacking and self destruction?!
by your logic if that happening in a city it will land right in street?! a classified drone!
or in a battlefield with heavy electronic warfare.............. right in hand of enemies!!!!!
this is your logical problem. and yes soheil is true

 

[bdslph]

bottom line its was successful strike on terrorist and israhell is not happy with it

 

[LeGenD]

landing in desert!
why did not go back?
why landed in desert?
Lockheed Martin did not predict any gps spoofing or hacking and self destruction?!
by your logic if that happening in a city it will land right in street?! a classified drone!
or in a battlefield with heavy electronic warfare.............. right in hand of enemies!!!!!
this is your logical problem. and yes soheil is true

That depends upon what this drone was "programmed" to do in the midst of a malfunction or loss of contact with its operators. American military drones have autonomous landing capabilities and this drone attempted to land after experiencing a malfunction - its landing sequence seems to be unguided by an operator because this drone suffered extensive damage in the process.

Scores of American military hardware have safeguards against GPS jamming technologies - only a fool would assume otherwise. They build the GPS and are aware of threats to it and how to counter them.

I have already highlighted the impracticality of GPS spoofing on a military-grade target [mid-flight] from the ground earlier - see post # 111 in page 8 of this thread.

 

[Sina-1]

That depends upon what this drone was "programmed" to do in the midst of a malfunction or loss of contact with its operators. American military drones have autonomous landing capabilities and this drone attempted to land after experiencing a malfunction - its landing sequence seems to be unguided by an operator because this drone suffered extensive damage in the process.

Not a big deal with autonomous landing. My university did this during a student project once or twice.

Either case. 101 on error handling for UAV near or inside hostile territory is -> nose dive and crash land. It is definitely not "try to land safely so that the enemy can retrieve" and then "probably" give it back because our "president will ask them nicely".

Scores of American military hardware have safeguards against GPS jamming technologies - only a fool would assume otherwise. They build the GPS and are aware of threats to it and how to counter them.

This logic of yours doesn't hold water! Just because you are the architecture of a system doesn't mean that you have considered all the loopholes. If that would have been the case then no system could ever be attacked since "the ones built it are aware of all the threats". That is indeed something only a fool would assume.

 

[Iranm]

Not a big deal with autonomous landing. My university did this during a student project once or twice.

Either case. 101 on error handling for UAV near or inside hostile territory is -> nose dive and crash land. It is definitely not "try to land safely so that the enemy can retrieve" and then "probably" give it back because our "president will ask them nicely".
That is indeed something only a fool would assume.

Please give it back and we will make sure next time to destroy it before it gets into your hands

 

[Arminkh]

This logic of yours doesn't hold water! Just because you are the architecture of a system doesn't mean that you have considered all the loopholes. If that would have been the case then no system could ever be attacked since "the ones built it are aware of all the threats". That is indeed something only a fool would assume.

I think internet is a good example to what you are saying. American invented it and now themselves are one of the victims of it being hacked all the time

 

[AmirPatriot]

I have already highlighted the impracticality of GPS spoofing on a military-grade target [mid-flight] from the ground earlier - see post # 111 in page 8 of this thread.

And I highlighted why aircraft error is less likely in post #136 at the top of this page.

 

[mse21]

That depends upon what this drone was "programmed" to do in the midst of a malfunction or loss of contact with its operators. American military drones have autonomous landing capabilities and this drone attempted to land after experiencing a malfunction - its landing sequence seems to be unguided by an operator because this drone suffered extensive damage in the process.

Scores of American military hardware have safeguards against GPS jamming technologies - only a fool would assume otherwise. They build the GPS and are aware of threats to it and how to counter them.

I have already highlighted the impracticality of GPS spoofing on a military-grade target [mid-flight] from the ground earlier - see post # 111 in page 8 of this thread.

so if they have safeguards against GPS jamming and autonomous landing capabilities why landed in dessert. as i said if this happening in a city that drone landing in a street by your logic. and of course when they sending one classified spy drone in iran they should think about every aspect and every situation. not just sending it.

 

[Hack-Hook]

That depends upon what this drone was "programmed" to do in the midst of a malfunction or loss of contact with its operators. American military drones have autonomous landing capabilities and this drone attempted to land after experiencing a malfunction - its landing sequence seems to be unguided by an operator because this drone suffered extensive damage in the process.

Scores of American military hardware have safeguards against GPS jamming technologies - only a fool would assume otherwise. They build the GPS and are aware of threats to it and how to counter them.

I have already highlighted the impracticality of GPS spoofing on a military-grade target [mid-flight] from the ground earlier - see post # 111 in page 8 of this thread.

Show me an operator who can land a big drone such rq-170 in middle of desert without damaging it.