[QUOTE=Swebonny;33566633]Big Dumb American, he can be trusted. Trust me :v:
[editline]4th December 2011[/editline]
Yeah according to some other articles they are now all encrypted. Now, I have no idea about all this, but seeing as RQ-170 is quite new maybe it still needs some tweaking.
By the way, how does commanding a UAV even work?
Do you sit in USA steering drones in other countries?[/QUOTE]
Depends on the model. Some of the bigger, more advanced platforms can be operated from pretty much anywhere on the planet, via satellite, but the most commonly deployed ones are typically controlled from a ground control station towed into position with a Humvee. The GCS's have a relatively minimal range. A couple hundred miles, maybe, if the weather is very nice, and those would still be extremely bad-ass ranges. Most operate within 100km.
I don't know anything about the RQ-170, though, so I could only speculate about that one.
[QUOTE=Swebonny;33566586]But this drone is supposed to have all kinds of stealth technology. I don't understand how they managed to not only track it, but shoot it down with little damage and recover it. [/QUOTE]
I drew you a pic
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/X1evn.png[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;33566504]That a drone might be shot down is a reasonable assumption, whereas that Iran managed to hack and capture (a feat that has not yet been accomplished by any other nation) one of the most advanced pieces of military hardware currently in operation requires a much greater suspension of disbelief. The conflicting stories in the various reports further bring those claims into suspicion. In nearly every case, the simpler explanation is the correct one.[/QUOTE]
Surely the more advanced the drones become, and the more complex the software gets, the potential for bugs and security loopholes is only gonna go up.
[QUOTE=smeismastger;33565884]America sends out spy drones to map out Iran's military bases so they can plan their invasion of Iran.
Iran shoots down said drone and captures it.
Iran are the the bad guys
:suicide:[/QUOTE]
Oh yeah man the US is totally gonna invade Iran!
[QUOTE=smeismastger;33566680]Right now I trust the potatoes sold at the local grocery store more than his [I]assumptions[/I], sorry.[/QUOTE]
You don't trust a former Mod? Come on, what has he to gain by lying.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;33565861]Oh come on calm down everyone ok? Don't start a war, please. That would be totally uncool. Lets sit down and talk it out as mature, intelligent people.[/QUOTE]
If only some countries' leaders weren't so fucking insane!
[QUOTE=Swebonny;33566586]But this drone is supposed to have all kinds of stealth technology. I don't understand how they managed to not only track it, but shoot it down with little damage and recover it.
The hacking scenario isn't new. Already in 2009 insurgents in Iraq managed to tap into US drones with Russian developed software.
[url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/17/skygrabber-american-drones-hacked[/url]
[/QUOTE]
Drones rarely sport bleeding edge stealth tech.
My understanding is that the reason is twofold:
1) Stealth coatings are a bitch to maintain. Extremely time consuming and expensive to maintain over the life of the vehicle.
2) Drones get shot down or have engine failures due to a reliance on one engine. In such cases you don't want to have to send in an airstrike to destroy the tech.
The RQ-170 is a sorta stealth aircraft as a result. It doesn't sport all the normal stealth features. The entire point of the 170 is to send it into enemy air space with a high risk of being shot down. We EXPECT to lose them in an area where they will be retrieved.
We learned our lesson from losing U-2's during the cold war.
I take back my previous comment. Although I still strongly believe Iran is a corrupt and terrible country, we were the ones at fault, and they had every right to fire a few warning shots to get our drones out of their country.
I'll show myself out of this thread.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;33565861]Oh come on calm down everyone ok? Don't start a war, please. That would be totally uncool. Lets sit down and talk it out as mature, intelligent people.[/QUOTE]
No worries. The US expects to lose 170's. That is why they are there.
So fucking stupid to provoke like that...
has a republican claimed we had to do it and made a reference to Cuba yet?
Wait, is the RQ170 the same as the RQ10, just because the BBC has the latter on their website.
[QUOTE=smeismastger;33565884]America sends out spy drones to map out Iran's military bases so they can plan their invasion of Iran.
Iran shoots down said drone and captures it.
Iran are the the bad guys
:suicide:[/QUOTE]
We don't want to invade Iran really that would be a waste of potential profits, we're just scouting out where to set up the next McDonalds and Wal-Mart.
Do you guys really think Iran wouldn't do the same to America is they had the chance?
sensationalist headline awaaaaaaayyy
Iran's military "claimed" they shot down a drone, with absolutely no evidence. They've already made the same claims twice this year( one of which they promised to display the drones, but surprise surprise, they never did)
[QUOTE=cyclocius;33565942]You should totally go and beat their asses America, they're totally asking for it. This is a declaration of war![/QUOTE]
Hell no, we've been in enough wars...........
Time to step up, Canada. :downs:
What does the Q stand for in RQ-X?
I actually spoke with an ex-head of the intelligence department for avionics control, who is now the head of internet-defense research at ASU-Skysong (Arizona State University's Research Center) about this. He said it's VERY easy for someone to intercept the information from a drone, due to the fact that it's basically just floating around in the airwaves, barely encrypted because the signal has to be so strong. He actually spoke to us about the huge risk of someone targeting the ability to control a UAV from the ground and said that someone could literally take control with a laptop if they had a cell tower.
Am I the only one that thinks "Good"? I'm happy to see someone standing up to the US military's belief that they have the right to park drones over anyone, anywhere. Even if it has to be Iran.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;33566504]Though I hate to sound nationalistic, America truly is one of the pioneering forces of UAS technology. You need very special facilities to operate and program UAS's. Furthermore, UAS's contain on-board programming that takes over in the event of link loss, which will automatically guide the aircraft back to its point of origin. To hack one would require that Iran both had the proper facilities, which is unlikely, given that Iran has little-to-no unmanned tech, [I]and[/I] that they were able to reprogram the on-board software.
That a drone might be shot down is a reasonable assumption, whereas that Iran managed to hack and capture (a feat that has not yet been accomplished by any other nation) one of the most advanced pieces of military hardware currently in operation requires a much greater suspension of disbelief. The conflicting stories in the various reports further bring those claims into suspicion. In nearly every case, the simpler explanation is the correct one.[/QUOTE]
My guess is if you tracked radio communications those drones put out and received for a long enough period of time, you could eventually figure out what the commands are and what they do, even if its encrypted, since encryption doesn't really help if you send the same string of encrypted information every time the drone does a specific thing. Units that jam American radio systems exist; the Russians have ones that can jam AWACS jets, so I'm guessing scrambling the remote communications while simultaneously sending new instructions to the drone would not be that hard.
Besides, I'm fairly sure it's easier to operate and steal a UAV than it is to actually make one. Saying that Iran's lack of drones means they cannot steal one is a bit unlikely.
This is a good example of coherent thinking vs. incoherent mumbling.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;33566534]That's a further assumption that has zero supporting evidence. Is it [I]possible[/I] that a UAV could be hacked? Perhaps, but it's very unlikely given Iran's access to that technology, and would require the aid of impressive outside forces. It is more likely by a huge factor that the drone was simply shot down.[/QUOTE]
Reasonable explanation and assertion
[QUOTE=smeismastger;33566546]Like your assumptions.
China[/QUOTE]
One lame statement and the naming of a single country with no explanation whatsoever
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;33566557]My "assumptions" are based off my first-hand experience as a UAV operator, whereas yours seem to be based off [I]Call of Duty[/I] plotlines.[/QUOTE]
Truth
[QUOTE=smeismastger;33566569]How do I know that? Give some actually reliable sources and other proof.
For all I care you can be the supreme Commander of tactic00l nuclear weapons orbital laser special ninja unit.
Your assumptions seem to be based on the bandwagon that every country in the middle east are poor and low-tech.[/QUOTE]
Incredibly stupid assumption
[QUOTE=smeismastger;33566680]Right now I trust the potatoes sold at the local grocery store more than his [I]assumptions[/I], sorry.[/QUOTE]
Declaring that potatoes have the ability to operate UAVs
Honestly you can do better than that smeisgmastigertigertank :v
Why not? It's America's fault for flying that drone into their airspace.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;33565861]Oh come on calm down everyone ok? Don't start a war, please. That would be totally uncool. Lets sit down and talk it out as mature, intelligent people.[/QUOTE]
Politicians being mature and intelligent?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA! That's a good one.
[QUOTE=MrEndangered;33565860]I wish they'd stop droning on about this.[/QUOTE]
aww but I like drone.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdeqvhxu7iI[/media]
:dance:
I can easily see things escalating from here. I wouldn't be surprised if America and/or NATO were to go to war with Iran in the next few months.
Well shit. I wonder what's going to happen next :v:
[QUOTE=Morbo!!!;33572458]I can easily see things escalating from here. I wouldn't be surprised if America and/or NATO were to go to war with Iran in the next few months.[/QUOTE]
Nah, not from a single lost drone. America loses drones all the time, it's just that most of the time its because of operator error. During my stay at the UAS training facility, we lost three drones to operator error (that I know of).
The first time was because a maintainer forgot to remove a critical pin from the launching mechanism, which essentially catapulted the UAS at high speeds nose-first into the ground (and this was during a presentation for some very high-ranking people).
The second occurred on landing; apparently the drone's altimeter was improperly set, causing it to hit the ground at a much faster speed than it should have.
The third was a result of a simple link-loss (extremely common) that was improperly handled. I'm not sure of the specifics, but the rumor mill had it that the bird simply flew into the side of a mountain while they were trying to regain control of it.
Point is, we lose way more drones to ourselves than we do to hostile targets, but it's okay. Drones are [I]meant[/I] to be expendable. Obviously nobody's happy when one [I]does[/I] bite the dust, but the cost of replacing a drone is minimal compared to the cost of training a new a pilot.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;33566456]This is [I]extremely[/I] unlikely.[/QUOTE]
It's not [I]extremely[/I] unlikely.
It's plausible that the Iranians have Russian or Chinese tech. Improbable, but plausible.
The F-35 is supposed to be similarly high tech yet the PRC is all over that.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;33573752]Nah, not from a single lost drone. America loses drones all the time, it's just that most of the time its because of operator error. During my stay at the UAS training facility, we lost three drones to operator error (that I know of).
The first time was because a maintainer forgot to remove a critical pin from the launching mechanism, which essentially catapulted the UAS at high speeds nose-first into the ground (and this was during a presentation for some very high-ranking people).
The second occurred on landing; apparently the drone's altimeter was improperly set, causing it to hit the ground at a much faster speed than it should have.
The third was a result of a simple link-loss (extremely common) that was improperly handled. I'm not sure of the specifics, but the rumor mill had it that the bird simply flew into the side of a mountain while they were trying to regain control of it.
Point is, we lose way more drones to ourselves than we do to hostile targets, but it's okay. Drones are [I]meant[/I] to be expendable. Obviously nobody's happy when one [I]does[/I] bite the dust, but the cost of replacing a drone is minimal compared to the cost of training a new a pilot.[/QUOTE]
Not to mention the fact that those pilots are in fact, people whom 'costs' can't be related to. UAV's save lives man, good stuff.
They didn't hack the UAV, they merely converted to Islam, and it switched sides.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
