Iran Moves 35 Years Ahead by Reverse Engineering US RQ-170

[Hyperion]

FLIR is not even an issue, as it's impossible to detect a an object in flight via FLIR at high altitudes, as the TAT (Total Air Temp) always remains way below freezing. As RQ170 uses TF34 turbofan, and is incapable of supersonic flight, therefore it's very easy to assess the TAT, without getting into complex fluid dynamics / thermodynamics. **not considering the engine exhaust, however, we are not talking about that, are we?**


So whoever stated that, must be high on something.

To prevent FLIR-detection?



That is not true. Air force isn't more valuable to Iranian military doctrine than other fields. Fact is that Iran has made significant gains in ballistic missile technology, shipbuilding (from a scratch to building ships), submarine-building, AD systems, etc.

 

[Archdemon]

To prevent FLIR-detection?



That is not true. Air force isn't more valuable to Iranian military doctrine than other fields. Fact is that Iran has made significant gains in ballistic missile technology, shipbuilding (from a scratch to building ships), submarine-building, AD systems, etc.

But engine Exhaust produce all the heat

 

[Hyperion]

LMFAO, he forgot about that, and if somehow he manages to cool that down, then that would be a first!

But engine Exhaust produce all the heat

 

[Oldman1]

Why not Iran help a victim state of US drones.. and send some specialist hackers to Imran Khan, who will land US drones @ Peshawar airport and this way children lives will be saved, without shooting a bullet.

Haven't you notice theres been many drone crashes in Pakistan for many years? Iran has a hand in it. And recent drone crashes in the states just shows how advanced Iran's hacking abilities.

 

[SQ8]

To prevent FLIR-detection?



That is not true. Air force isn't more valuable to Iranian military doctrine than other fields. Fact is that Iran has made significant gains in ballistic missile technology, shipbuilding (from a scratch to building ships), submarine-building, AD systems, etc.

Ballistic missiles are a great advancement, but at the same time these are weapons that while being excellent deterrents also end up being a hobsons choice for it. So while they prevent attack to a certain extent, they do not save it from a counter WMD reprisal. A conventional force that can hold its own for a while till a ceasefire however is a better option. And it is in that respect that Iran is falling behind. Again, there was little need for it to use these missiles to send monkeys into space when they were better off with satellites.. or was it just the people in helm who bear(in their actions) resemblance to Goebells and Hitler in their propaganda approaches. After all, the Germans had the Me-262 which could have outclassed any allied fighter at the time and stemmed the bombing tide.. yet Hitler in all his imagination ended up putting it to use as a Bomber in some idea of his to instil fear into the enemy.
Aren't Iran's military planners doing the same with their talent pool? Calling Fibre glass mockups (that arent even stealthy nor do they embody basic aerodynamic sense) wonder weapons that are already flying?

Advances in technology such as the excellent Shahab-3B are useless if they end up being used to sent monkeys into space rather than sats. And claims on UAVs that use commercial off the shelf technology are also quite useless as neither is it revolutionary(other than coatings) nor does it bring anything other than perhaps encryption techniques(which are to a large extent available for Iranian university students to learn and understand). The only true benefit of this technology, and that should have been the part of the statement rather than 35 years is that Iran may be able to create an armed version of this system(if it has the weapons to go along with it); considering that Iran's last UCAV is basically a MQM-107 drone with a Mk-82 hanging off it that gives it the accuracy of a football field.

 

[Esc8781]

Yeah I agree Iran could do it, but they cannot replicate how to manufacture the UAV. LO technology is not new to the US. When it's a breakthrough, it's usually new ways for manufacturing LO airframes. Especially in a rapid timeline, such as the RQ-170.

 

[SQ8]

LMFAO, he forgot about that, and if somehow he manages to cool that down, then that would be a first!

The requires mixing in cold air from outside with the exhaust. Again, a relatively intact drone may give clues to that. Whether it was hacked or entered a falling leaf condition is a moot point.

 

[SQ8]

Yeah I agree Iran could do it, but they cannot replicate how to manufacture the UAV. LO technology is not new to the US. When it's a breakthrough, it's usually new ways for manufacturing LO airframes. Especially in a rapid timeline, such as the RQ-170.

They could have used a 3d scanner(now easily available commercially and fairly accurate) to map out sections of the aircraft to replicate. Which means that they might succeed in replicating 80-90% of the airframe to its exact RCS levels.. perhaps more. However, that will only teach them how to make RQ-170's again and again .. and provide them with data on LO design philosophies for that particular design type. It does not mean however, that they will start churning out LO 5th Gen jets in a year that will rival the F-22 or even the PAK-FA and J-20.

That being given, do not underestimate the value of mass work and production. Put 200 computer engineers on decoding a single chip and it is possible that one of them(who has spent time browsing the IEEE,ACM and STANAG) library will hit something.
It does not say how the video was decoded? did they take apart the chip and read its contents? Or merely figure out the right bit in the right flag that tells the chip to send video feed down a port?

 

[Esc8781]

I want to ask you guys. If the sentinel was really detected and 'hacked'. Why is it still flying and still based at the same place?

 

[Esc8781]

They could have used a 3d scanner(now easily available commercially and fairly accurate) to map out sections of the aircraft to replicate. Which means that they might succeed in replicating 80-90% of the airframe to its exact RCS levels.. perhaps more. However, that will only teach them how to make RQ-170's again and again .. and provide them with data on LO design philosophies for that particular design type. It does not mean however, that they will start churning out LO 5th Gen jets in a year that will rival the F-22 or even the PAK-FA and J-20.

That being given, do not underestimate the value of mass work and production. Put 200 computer engineers on decoding a single chip and it is possible that one of them(who has spent time browsing the IEEE,ACM and STANAG) library will hit something.
It does not say how the video was decoded? did they take apart the chip and read its contents? Or merely figure out the right bit in the right flag that tells the chip to send video feed down a port?

I doubt that. Remember UAVs do not store data on their 'hard drives'. It is transfered to the ground command station. UAVs in expeditionary forces do not use encrypted signals when taking off or landing (because they aren't deployed with a certain type of kit) , and can be easily sky grabbed. When taking off UAVs uses C-band transmissions. That it transitions to Ku-band.

 

[SQ8]

I doubt that. Remember UAVs do not store data on their 'hard drives'. It is transfered to the ground command station. UAVs in expeditionary forces do not use encrypted signals when taking off or landing (because they aren't deployed with a certain type of kit) , and can be easily sky grabbed. When taking off UAVs uses C-band transmissions. That it transitions to Ku-band.

The depends on whether this particular example had one on or not. Perhaps a flash storage unit as a buffer was present?(Although that would not make sense considering the claims on seeing T/O and landing video unless that video is not decrypted and stored much like AVTR is in a black box of sorts) After all, there is more doubt on Iran being able to decrypt video feed transmissions. Especially after those that used generic protocols were found to have been picked up by Iraqi insurgents one would think they beefed up the encryption..

 

[Dillinger]

The depends on whether this particular example had one on or not. Perhaps a flash storage unit as a buffer was present?(Although that would not make sense considering the claims on seeing T/O and landing video unless that video is not decrypted and stored much like AVTR is in a black box of sorts) After all, there is more doubt on Iran being able to decrypt video feed transmissions. Especially after those that used generic protocols were found to have been picked up by Iraqi insurgents one would think they beefed up the encryption..

Considering that reports show that our dear murican bothers have often conducted flights with unmanned platforms having substandard encryption systems I would not be surprised, their in-house audit found out that the situation was far below optimum.

As to the claim being made in this thread. One can only bang their head on a wall. Even if you end up reverse engineering the air-frame where are you going to get a turbo-fan engine from? Micro turbines from CMs won't work and its not as if you can just plug in whichever engine you can get your hands on. I am yet to see a C-band or Ku-band data-link come up forget a CMDL, which means other components have not been realized either. Ergo- what of the CnC, exactly how are they going to exploit the drone with all these road-blocks?
@Hyperion midget or monkey, take a pick.

 

[Esc8781]

The depends on whether this particular example had one on or not. Perhaps a flash storage unit as a buffer was present?(Although that would not make sense considering the claims on seeing T/O and landing video unless that video is not decrypted and stored much like AVTR is in a black box of sorts) After all, there is more doubt on Iran being able to decrypt video feed transmissions. Especially after those that used generic protocols were found to have been picked up by Iraqi insurgents one would think they beefed up the encryption..

It's not a problem though. They can receive newer kits that can read encrypted feeds. Not all can intercept encrypted feed.

 

[Hyperion]

Yara, the performance of a wing-type platform varies with a difference of few grams, how are they gonna match that to components and the engine? Forget it, us discussing this topic is even below us.

Shab-b-khair to you and @Oscar

Considering that reports show that our dear murican bothers have often conducted flights with unmanned platforms having substandard encryption systems I would not be surprised, their in-house audit found out that the situation was far below optimum.

As to the claim being made in this thread. One can only bang their head on a wall. Even if you end up reverse engineering the air-frame where are you going to get a turbo-fan engine from? Micro turbines from CMs won't work and its not as if you can just plug in whichever engine you can get your hands on. I am yet to see a C-band or Ku-band data-link come up forget a CMDL, which means other components have not been realized either. Ergo- what of the CnC, exactly how are they going to exploit the drone with all these road-blocks?
@Hyperion midget or monkey, take a pick.

 

[Dillinger]

Yara, the performance of a wing-type platform varies with a difference of few grams, how are they gonna match that to components and the engine? Forget it, us discussing this topic is even below us.

Shab-b-khair to you and @Oscar

Its not just that, unless they intend to use it within line of sight they need to really invest in the technology required for CnC. Otherwise you're just cutting up a drone and replicating its broad outline while it remains a hollow system sans the real details (where the devil lurks). If one of our Iranian friends would be good enough to provide a picture of a ground exploitation cum CnC station then even a cursory look at it should make things clearer.