US Stealth UAV RQ-170 downed in IRAN

[longbrained]

American robots are turning against United States because Uncle Sam is keeping them hungry and not giving them enough fuel. Situation is getting worse day by day with economic crisis and robots are latest to uprise against this degrading treatment. At least one has defected to enemy as well (as per gambit rationality):

 

[gambit]

Actually they are very embarrassed by this new Iranian technology never heard before outside of science fiction, hacking a drone. So that is why you see strange explanation, like drone was low on fuel and then it landed safely on an Iranian air field. The whole point of having a drone is for it to be destroyed without minimal loss. Even if such a mission is a manned one, the pilot would make sure that the aircraft is destroyed completely and not fall into enemy hands specially if its such a secret plane. It is a folly and pure idiocy to think that mission planners for this super secret drone had programmed it to land on an air field inside Iran if it runs out of fuel.

And to think YOU had the gall to declare you can teach me something about engineering.

Between the pilot and the aircraft, where is the weakest link? None, really.

Between the REMOTE pilot and aircraft, where is the weakest link? The communication link that replaced the pilot's hands and feet and eyes in the cockpit. So if such a weak link does exist, what would be a 'default' position should that link be lost?

- Continue on current heading.
- Enter an orbit.
- Self destruct.

Options 1 and 2 allow the possibility of reestablishing contact and control. Option 3 remains valid for extreme situations where there would be little or no time to attempt to establish control. None is the wrong answer and none is the right answer. This is about creating an alternative to a potential adverse situation.

So if either options 1 or 2 is selected, then it becomes the question of how long should we wait before we determine that a reconnect is no longer feasible? One minute or one hour? What about fuel? What if we reestablish contact and control right at the moment the drone run out of fuel? What good is that? Do we land the drone? Or let it run out of fuel and crash on its own? Or do we program it to deliberately crash after X failed attempts at reconnect? Remember, we are no longer in contact and control of the drone to give it instructions. Why is it absurd to program it to land? Can we program it to discriminate between 'hostile' and 'friendly' locations? Yes, but then we would run into the usual problem of hardware limitations that affect computer programming.

Here is my source...

Lost UAV likely malfunctioned, analysts say - Air Force News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Air Force Times

The RQ-4 Global Hawk has a similar built-in automatic feature to find and land at a divert airfield if the link is lost.

We can safely assume that the same feature is in the RQ-170. But whether or not the drone actually landed is still speculation and I have no problems saying so. Unlike you who made many definitive declarations with nothing more than ignorance and baseless hopes to back you up.

Here is the problem for you...

If the drone crashed then Iran has nothing to show for all the hot air spewed so far. If the drone successfully landed then it proved that my speculations about its operations are correct. While no one has any faith on the 'virus' speculation.

What I speculated about the drone's programming is certainly more logical and plausible than the idea that somehow Iran managed to crack a triple-DES encrypted two-way airborne data link. The problem for YOU is that the burden of proof is far greater for your speculation and so far, Iran failed to support you.

 

[poseidon]

Because cracking encryption keys is very, very, very hard. Even a supercomputer would take centuries; the stronger codes would take longer than the age of the universe.

And I already mentioned that, contrary to the movies, fuel tanks do not explode when hit by bullets.

This is my point, maybe they have found a new war of hacking. it would take ages the way america thank, but not if the persian made a new way.

people hack into the pentagon all the time, it does not take them 14 billion years does it? all Iran had to do was infect it with a virus, anyway lets wait for the footage that they say they are going to show. we will see if the fuel tank is damaged.

 

[Arman-Shahr]

I cant wait, lets hope they will really show it.

As an Iranian I like to see footage of this drone in Iran, But I hope they don't show it, because likely it replies some of US officials questions. Why Iranian officials should show this drone, when even US officials say it is largely intact on hands of Iran.

 

[gambit]

What we know for sure is that Iran has a US drone in its hands, both confirmed by Iran and US. We do not know if the drone has been damaged badly or is in good condition. Iran will soon release footage, we will see

No, we do not know 'for sure'. The US said we lost the drone. Iran said there was a recovery. Which is more believable? Usually the one who said he lost something because it is easier to lose something than to look for and finding it. So until Iran provide reasonably credible visual proofs...

 

[poseidon]

As an Iranian I like to see footage of this drone in Iran, But I hope they don't show it, because likely it replies some of US officials questions. Why Iranian officials should show this drone, when even US officials say it is largely intact on hands of Iran.

Iran has no reason not to show it, its a;ready been confirmed they have, but they need to show that they really have it in one piece so they say we are going to reverse engineer it.

 

[longbrained]

My friend what is this? please stick to the topic, your only going to cause arguments..

It is, ok, we can have a little fun. And it is related to the topic at hand, you see, I am just graphically presenting gambit's arguments and how absurd they are. Please read the 10 previous pages to see for yourself.

 

[poseidon]

Lets just wait and hopefully they will show footage.

 

[gambit]

This is my point, maybe they have found a new war of hacking. it would take ages the way america thank, but not if the persian made a new way.

people hack into the pentagon all the time, it does not take them 14 billion years does it? all Iran had to do was infect it with a virus, anyway lets wait for the footage that they say they are going to show. we will see if the fuel tank is damaged.

The flawed logic here is the automatic jump to conclusion that what happened with a 'virus' a few months back can be technically attributed to Iran. Even Stuxnet received far more demands for proofs for what it was and who created it. But now when it comes to Iran, all sorts of allowances are available.

 

[Developereo]

people hack into the pentagon all the time, it does not take them 14 billion years does it? all Iran had to do was infect it with a virus, anyway lets wait for the footage that they say they are going to show. we will see if the fuel tank is damaged.

I just remembered the movie "Independence Day" and had an image of the drone operator seeing a skull and crossbones on his display!

Oh well...

P.S. The Iranians could have damaged the fuel tanks, the communications antennae, basically some critical system which would force it to go to fail-safe mode and make an emergency landing. A drone carrying munitions would probably not be programmed to crash land or self-destruct unless explicitly instructed to do so remotely.

 

[gambit]

It is, ok, we can have a little fun. And it is related to the topic at hand, you see, I am just graphically presenting gambit's arguments and how absurd they are. Please read the 10 previous pages to see for yourself.

But Iran cracking a triple-DES encrypted OTA real time two-way airborne data link is more believable......First we encountered 'Chinese physics' now we are seeing 'Iranian physics' as well.

 

[gambit]

people hack into the pentagon all the time, it does not take them 14 billion years does it? all Iran had to do was infect it with a virus, anyway lets wait for the footage that they say they are going to show. we will see if the fuel tank is damaged.

That is not true and it is because of the misuse and abuse of the word 'hack'. Yes, there are CommSec failures but most of them came from human related or 'social engineering' tactics, not from true software or hardware vulnerabilities exploitation.

 

[Arman-Shahr]

Russia and China requested Iran to visit US drones.

One Iranian military officials told to Mashreghnews.ir (in Persian) that Russia and China have requested Iran to their experts visit the RQ-170 drone.

 

[poseidon]

Russia and China requested Iran to visit US drones.

One Iranian military officials told to Mashreghnews.ir (in Persian) that Russia and China have requested Iran to their experts visit the RQ-170 drone.

I hope Iran does not give this tech to russia and china, these countries just use Iran and dont give anything back. dont forget how they supported last round of un sanctions.

 

[Arman-Shahr]

I hope Iran does not give this tech to russia and china, these countries just use Iran and dont give anything back. dont forget how they supported last round of un sanctions.

You're right, I hope Iran first study this drone, then allow them to visit it instead of receiving some more valuable technologies.