Drone aircraft downed in Iran

[PeterP]

Something to worry about? Most definitely not ;)

 

I thought this is a non-political forum.. -but you asked for it - because you try to give answers where no answers can be given.

 

Definitely Yes! - these days.

 

OK - this is wide spread:

A small country/dictatorship can easily destabilise the the finance-order by something "tiny" like this....

 

and keep in mind when it is caused by a dictatorship that this most of the times only involves a handful of people that can find shelter easily somewhere else while "their" people will suffering from civil war and other acting countries...

 

Just imagine there would be another "big-bang" in near east -one example: can you imagine how the gold-prise will rise and affect your economy...?! ...

 

Something to worry about? Most definitely yes!

 

Edit:

Oh - forgot a smiley :)

Edited December 15, 2011 by PeterP

[leafer]

Ok, I just read the entire thread. Dam. The U.S. of A is asking Iran to give it back? I'm sure it's protocal though. We'll ask and they'll go neener-neener then we'll bomb all the places with basketball court. This is embarrassing.

[PeterP]

That's the normal procedure/protocol with countries you are not at war - nothing to be astonished/embarrassed about...

...they don't really expect it to be delivered back.

- but you can always ask.

 

 

Late edit:

BTW: the US never ratified the International law fully at the UN - so they can do anyway what they want - but they must live with the consequence. - don't know about Iran - will look it up when I have time...

Edited December 15, 2011 by PeterP

[RIPTIDE]

Lots of cool stories in this thread.

[159th_Viper]

Something to worry about? Most definitely yes!

 

Worry?

 

:megalol:

 

Never!

 

 

I've got it sorted :P

[leafer]

That you at your job, Viper? :D

[PeterP]

OK :D - I see you that you are prepared for upcoming nano-tech wars...

But do you have also a stable table that you can use for normal "duck and cover" procedure at home ?!

 

 

 

IKEA will not do the job!!

 

-(quickly..Going to the next carpenter...:P)

Edited December 15, 2011 by PeterP

[Weta43]

I have no love for the Iranian govenrment, but you gotta love the double think that goes on here sometimes.

 

Iran is technologically savy enough that they're a significant threat to the world and we should be seriously considering starting yet another war with an arab country, because the're on the cusp of developing nuclear weapons and delivery systems that will carry them to the heart of the free world...

 

but -

 

They're too technologically backward for it to be even a remote possibility that they could bring down a drone (which some would have us believe is built with 'less than cutting edge' technology anyway)

 

and they're even so backwards they couldn't reverse engineer anything from one if someone kindly gifted one to them.

 

Re:

Look at the pictures that have been released...why do we not see the gear, the drone Iran has looks fake to me...

We'll see soon - apparently they're putting it on public display...

"Iran to exhibit US and Israeli spy drones"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/15/iran-exhibit-american-spy-drones/print

[RIPTIDE]

They're not Arab.

[sobek]

Iran is technologically savy enough that they're a significant threat to the world and we should be seriously considering starting yet another war with an arab country, because the're on the cusp of developing nuclear weapons and delivery systems that will carry them to the heart of the free world...

 

Basic nuclear weapons are 1940s technology, ICBMs are late 1950s technology. Rocket science isn't the proverbial rocket science it once was any longer.

 

Remember the Kiwi that made a (scaled, yet fully functional) technology demonstrator cruise missile out of off the shelf RC equipment and almost got sacked by his government? That was ~5 years ago.

[RIPTIDE]

Basic nuclear weapons are 1940s technology, ICBMs are late 1950s technology. Rocket science isn't the proverbial rocket science it once was any longer.

 

Remember the Kiwi that made a (scaled, yet fully functional) technology demonstrator cruise missile out of off the shelf RC equipment and almost got sacked by his government? That was ~5 years ago.

Argument invalid.

 

Its not the technology that is the problem. Like you said, it's all old hat now. Its the domestic industrial base that is the key issue. Thats why you see nuclear weapons the preserve of large countries... or (in two cases), with very large friends. ;) A modern ICBM might use technology from 200+ companies.

[sobek]

A modern ICBM might use technology from 200+ companies.

 

You don't need a modern ICBM to be a global party pooper. As long as you're able to sling it somewhere into western europe, you will be considered a threat.

[diveplane]

'Iran has 4 Israeli spy drones in its possession'

 

Iran plans to put several foreign unmanned spy planes it has in its possession on display in the near future, including four Israeli drones, the Tehran Times quoted an informed source as saying on Thursday.

 

The source said that Iran also has three US drones in its possession, including the RQ-170 unmanned aircraft that Iran displayed on television last week.

 

....lmao what they opening a museum the collection they are building up.

 

http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?ID=249549&R=R1

[Weta43]

Its not the technology that is the problem. Like you said, it's all old hat now. Its the domestic industrial base that is the key issue.

 

The technology - I agree - they have PhD's & the internet in Iran.

The industrial base - I'm not sure it's relevant to work out countermeasures against the stealth that's employed, but they seem to have that - for the use of the military if not the general public...

 

they're not Arabs

I know, but I think that's how they're grouped in most of the world's psyche (I don't think most people differentiate between 'Arabs' and 'Persians'), Muslim seemed more inflamatory.

[slug88]

So it seems it was a GPS hack that brought down the drone:

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2011/1215/Exclusive-Iran-hijacked-US-drone-says-Iranian-engineer

 

"GPS signals are weak and can be easily outpunched [overridden] by poorly controlled signals from television towers, devices such as laptops and MP3 players, or even mobile satellite services," Andrew Dempster, a professor from the University of New South Wales School of Surveying and Spatial Information Systems, told a March conference on GPS vulnerability in Australia.

 

Umm, wow, that sounds like a pretty significant design flaw in the entirety of our GPS guided arsenal.

 

Also, looks like drone hacking isn't the only ace up Iran's sleeve, they're blinding satellites as well:

 

According to a European intelligence source, Iran shocked Western intelligence agencies in a previously unreported incident that took place sometime in the past two years, when it managed to “blind” a CIA spy satellite by “aiming a laser burst quite accurately.”

 

They really don't like getting spied on.

Edited December 16, 2011 by slug88

[GGTharos]

Umm, wow, that sounds like a pretty significant design flaw in the entirety of our GPS guided arsenal.

 

Not really. This is why all GPS weapons (at least by far most) use EINS. Jam the GPS, it simply gets cut off from updating the INS.

[26-J39]

lol.. The old Chinese back door trick..

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

For a while, I've been telling youall that GPS signals are relatively easy to jam!

[Pilotasso]

LOL

[Luigi Gorgonzola]

For a while, I've been telling youall that GPS signals are relatively easy to jam!

Indeed, all it takes is a traditional portable transistor receiver and some wire.

 

Technology of teh sixties? ;)

[GGTharos]

And we've known this for a while, but ecm'ed GPS signals shouldn't result in things like this due to a reasonably assumed INS backup!

 

For a while, I've been telling youall that GPS signals are relatively easy to jam!

[Luigi Gorgonzola]

GPS is also relatively easy to poison. In such a case, which system would take precedence?

[GGTharos]

^^^^

 

And this may be what happened. To answer your question though, IMHO to bring down an aircraft using that, they'd need to make the change smaller than the required INS correction - assuming that you would reject such an update to the INS because the error is far larger than the INS should experience.

 

I don't know how practical that sort of decision-making logic would be to implement. Obviously you can check for a lot of things to try and reject and ECM emitter - signal strength comes to mind, because you might not be able to determine signal direction/source (the GPS equipment doesn't usually need to do such a thing, so one might not expect the GPS to have such capability), but also military vehicles are supposed to use some sort of encrypted form of GPS ... which should in theory make it harder to spoof.

[AlphaOneSix]

GPS is also relatively easy to poison. In such a case, which system would take precedence?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Receiver_Autonomous_Integrity_Monitoring

[GGTharos]

Pretty cool stuff.