What's new

Simorgh class drones > ashes of the beast

you knew last time we bombed ISIS just 3km away from USA base and they were not aware of it until it ended .
Read my post again.

Or simply read this article: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/10/01/middleeast/iran-syria-missiles/index.html

"US satellite surveillance last week had shown mobile missile launchers were moving into positions in Iran where missiles were fired from, the official said. The US is closely watching those launchers and any potential movement, the official added."

This was the "last time" incident - 3 KM away from US forces in the region where Iranian ballistic missiles struck ISIS positions. US forces were absolutely aware of what was happening around them.
 
Last edited:
How would you know? Nobody (from the other side) will tell you whether the drone was being watched or not. Keep in mind that USAF is up there patrolling Syrian airspace very often. They have a good view of the activity over Syrian airspace (hint: electro-optical equipment), and even F-22A Raptors are known to patrol Syrian airspace.

Ample clue in this revelation:

"US satellite surveillance last week had shown mobile missile launchers were moving into positions in Iran where missiles were fired from, the official said. The US is closely watching those launchers and any potential movement, the official added."

Source: https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/01/middleeast/iran-syria-missiles/index.html

IDF shot down a similar drone in 2018 as soon as it infiltrated Israeli airspace. This is not possible without a particular sensor system alerting IDF to its presence. This also show that Iranian RQ-170 derivatives are not VLO.

USAF have shot down Iranian drones in Syria when they got really close to American troops on the ground, twice in 2017. FYI: http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...drone-as-tehran-warns-of-more-missile-strikes

The only conclusion we can derive is that US did not interfere with the Iranian operation.

Shooting down a stealth anything within line of sight is really not a technological feat nor something special. And Israel is a really small country and because of that they can cover every inch of their boarders with thermal sensors to protect against low altitude threats and stealth aircraft are NOT immune to thermal sensors
And within line of sight it really doesn't matter if your flying an F-22 or a MiG-29 with TVC hell like the crappy F-16 almost every Russian Aircraft from MiG-29 and above have an edge over the F-35 once within line of sight. And current stealth tech is only meant to protect you beyond visible range and NOTHING MORE!

And clearly your mixing up U.S. capabilities with U.S. capabilities in Hollywood movies and US propaganda

1st off if US sat's were so capable the U.S. wouldn't spend so much money on recon UAV's and why would they even try to send recon UAV's inside Iranian territory or fly high altitude maned recon aircrafts near Iran's boarders and simple explanation for that is that this is NOT a freaking Hollywood movie! And U.S. monitoring 2-3 large missile bases near Iran's boarders right after Iran said it was going to respond is one thing vs U.S. monitoring every base and runway in Iran and tracking every UAV that takes off on a daily bases is quite another and so is Iran choosing NOT to blind out U.S. sat's using lasers which is a capability Iran has already proven it has.

2ndly U.S. flying a few sorties over Syria doesn't mean they can simply intercept any aircraft any time they want clearly your seem to be under the delusion that there are 100's of American aircrafts patrolling Syrian and Iraqi Airspace at any given time which is nothing but a delusion because in reality most of the time there are NONE!
When the U.S. conducted a No fly zone over Iraq in the 90's they have an average of only 2 sorties a day 5 day's a week so just because they have a no fly zone over Syria and conduct patrol missions over parts of Syria doesn't mean they can detect and intercept anything at any given time and even if they detect Iranian UAV's just like the Israeli's they would have to get within line of sight which would be easy with propeller driven aircrafts that are slower than most Helo's but a little more complicated with Jet powered stealth UCAV's flying at 700kph

FYI with building an INS to get you within 10km of your target is far less complicated today and a far more feasible option than emitting frequency for command guidance to targets some 600km away
It's like getting a cruise missile that doesn't have to fly at low altitude to within 10km of it's target it's really not that complicated for a country like Iran! Hell German's in WW2 were able to send their V-1's using a crude mechanical navigation systems before computers even existed. Today you can get you exact bearing, speed and altitude using off the shelf digital devices with elector gyro's and feed that data into a computer with a digital map that also factors in earth rotation... Basically a computer simulator based off a real map but instead your feeding live data into it like your heading, speed,.... compared to Iran's Precision guided Ballistic Missiles this is child's play for Iran plus drop counter imaging into the mix and you'll have exact data and you can do counter imaging the entire way there or do counter imaging once you get to within 10-20km of your target or at specific locations during turns.... or if need be you can have covert teams on the ground within 20km of the target that can do the rest out of a easily portable suitcase once the UAV get's within range.....
And the options are endless and are all better than relying on frequency for ground guidance from 600km out on a stealth platform at least until quantum communication become available and that's when you can go back to command guidance....
 
Last edited:
Shooting down a stealth anything within line of sight is really not a technological feat nor something special. And Israel is a really small country and because of that they can cover every inch of their boarders with thermal sensors to protect against low altitude threats and stealth aircraft are NOT immune to thermal sensors
And within line of sight it really doesn't matter if your flying an F-22 or a MiG-29 with TVC hell like the crappy F-16 almost every Russian Aircraft from MiG-29 and above have an edge over the F-35 once within line of sight. And current stealth tech is only meant to protect you beyond visible range and NOTHING MORE!

And clearly your mixing up U.S. capabilities with U.S. capabilities in Hollywood movies and US propaganda

1st off if US sat's were so capable the U.S. wouldn't spend so much money on recon UAV's and why would they even try to send recon UAV's inside Iranian territory or fly high altitude maned recon aircrafts near Iran's boarders and simple explanation for that is that this is NOT a freaking Hollywood movie! And U.S. monitoring 2-3 large missile bases near Iran's boarders right after Iran said it was going to respond is one thing vs U.S. monitoring every base and runway in Iran and tracking every UAV that takes off on a daily bases is quite another and so is Iran choosing NOT to blind out U.S. radars using lasers which is a capability Iran has already proven it has.

2ndly U.S. flying a few sorties over Syria doesn't mean they can simply intercept any aircraft any time they want clearly your seem to be under the delusion that there are 100's of American aircrafts patrolling Syrian and Iraqi Airspace at any given time which is nothing but a delusion because in reality most of the time there are NONE!
When the U.S. conducted a No fly zone over Iraq in the 90's they have an average of only 2 sorties a day 5 day's a week so just because they have a no fly zone over Syria and conduct patrol missions over parts of Syria doesn't mean they can detect and intercept anything at any given time and even if they detect Iranian UAV's just like the Israeli's they would have to get within line of sight which would be easy with propeller driven aircrafts that are slower than most Helo's but a little more complicated with Jet powered stealth UCAV's flying at 700kph

FYI with building an INS to get you within 10km of your target is far less complicated today and a far more feasible option than emitting frequency for command guidance to targets some 600km away
It's like getting a cruise missile that doesn't have to fly at low altitude to within 10km of it's target it's really not that complicated for a country like Iran! Hell German's in WW2 were able to send their V-1's using a crude mechanical navigation systems before computers even existed. Today you can get you exact bearing, speed and altitude using off the shelf digital devices with elector gyro's and feed that data into a computer with a digital map that also factors in earth rotation... Basically a computer simulator based off a real map but instead your feeding live data into it like your heading, speed,.... compared to Iran's Precision guided Ballistic Missiles this is child's play for Iran plus drop counter imaging into the mix and you'll have exact data and you can do counter imaging the entire way there or do counter imaging once you get to within 10-20km of your target or at specific locations during turns.... or if need be you can have covert teams on the ground within 20km of the target that can do the rest out of a easily portable suitcase once the UAV get's within range.....
And the options are endless and are all better than relying on frequency for ground guidance from 600km out on a stealth platform at least until quantum communication become available and that's when you can go back to command guidance....
There are a great number of misconceptions in your post which will take some time to address.

I want you to simply [read] following posts however:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...ns-infrastructure.581116/page-4#post-10856517
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...ns-infrastructure.581116/page-4#post-10857776

This revelation:

"US satellite surveillance last week had shown mobile missile launchers were moving into positions in Iran where missiles were fired from, the official said. The US is closely watching those launchers and any potential movement, the official added."

- Nicely fit in with my disclosures [links provided above]; I have explained in my posts that how American spy satellites can obtain a lock on a moving TEL and track its movements in real-time. However, my disclosures are limited to information in the public domain which is nothing in comparison to information in the classified domain. American surveillance apparatus is extremely advanced, and its capabilities are not easy to digest in a short span.

I will get back to you when I have time.
 
Last edited:
There are a great number of misconceptions in your post which will take some time to address.

I want you to simply [read] following posts however:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...ns-infrastructure.581116/page-4#post-10856517
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...ns-infrastructure.581116/page-4#post-10857776

This revelation:

"US satellite surveillance last week had shown mobile missile launchers were moving into positions in Iran where missiles were fired from, the official said. The US is closely watching those launchers and any potential movement, the official added."

- Nicely fit in with my disclosures [links provided above]; I have explained in my posts that how American spy satellites can obtain a lock on a moving TEL and track its movements in real-time. However, my disclosures are limited to information in the public domain which is nothing in comparison to information in the classified domain. American surveillance apparatus is extremely advanced, and its capabilities are not easy to digest in a short span.

I will get back to you when I have time.

Yeah but satellite can't see past cloud. Cloud made up of trillions of water droplets and ice pellets. Each one of them is like a little mirror. That's why cloud scatters light so much.
 
Yeah but satellite can't see past cloud. Cloud made up of trillions of water droplets and ice pellets. Each one of them is like a little mirror. That's why cloud scatters light so much.
Please refrain from commenting on matters which you do not understand. Your ignorance have no limits.
 
Last edited:
@LeGenD as far as I'm aware there is no surveillance photo of video published by USA that show our drones during the operation .
And by the way I wonder why USA always is aware of our movement after we announce them to the world .
We built Fordu and told IAEA to come and install your camera and then USA announce they are aware of the site from several month ago .
We say we attacked Isis and sent our drone 3km away of USA base to bomb the hell out of them and then USA say we had you under surveillance . if so why they didn't announce these incident before hand . let tell you how they are aware of them .when we say something they go and pull the photos of the area from archive and say yeah we can see it here and then they announce they had us under surveillance from the beginning .
 
Also this part from the CNN show how much they were aware of our operation
"Iranian forces did conduct no notice strikes last night and we see open source reports stating that they were targeting militants it blamed for the recent attack on an Iranian military parade in the Middle Euphrates River Valley," said Ryan in a statement. "At this time, the Coalition is still assessing if any damage occurred and no Coalition forces were in danger."

Even a day after incident they were assessing damages that happened just 3km away and they were talking they are aware of it .
Before that they shoot two of our drone down because they come 50km of the group they supported ,this time 7 of our drones bombed targets just 3km of their base and they were assessing the damages next two day.
 
Last edited:
Yeah but satellite can't see past cloud. Cloud made up of trillions of water droplets and ice pellets. Each one of them is like a little mirror. That's why cloud scatters light so much.

In your lengthy PDF carrier, have you ever heard about SAR systems on satellites?
 
Last edited:
There are a great number of misconceptions in your post which will take some time to address.

I want you to simply [read] following posts however:

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...ns-infrastructure.581116/page-4#post-10856517
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/paki...ns-infrastructure.581116/page-4#post-10857776

This revelation:

"US satellite surveillance last week had shown mobile missile launchers were moving into positions in Iran where missiles were fired from, the official said. The US is closely watching those launchers and any potential movement, the official added."

- Nicely fit in with my disclosures [links provided above]; I have explained in my posts that how American spy satellites can obtain a lock on a moving TEL and track its movements in real-time. However, my disclosures are limited to information in the public domain which is nothing in comparison to information in the classified domain. American surveillance apparatus is extremely advanced, and its capabilities are not easy to digest in a short span.

I will get back to you when I have time.

Again this is NOT a Hollywood movie and Sat's have clear limitations!

Imaging spy Sat's are usually in low - medium earth Orbit and they don't stay in one place long enough for you to get 24/7 live data from every potential target using one sat and you still need the manpower to monitor each location and getting still images every now and again to monitory what goes on at a large well known missile base over time is one thing vs tracking every vehicle and getting live data as to where they go and where and when they launch is quite another.
Not to mention the fact that you still need the manpower to do it because even with advanced imaging software, vehicles come and go all the time and Iran is just one country and is far from having any kind of capability to pose a threat to U.S. soil!
So during each orbit how many sats do you think the U.S. is going to dedicate to getting live data from various targets in Iran where they go about tracking each TEL and monitor every UAV that takes off each base with live images?

As for U.S. higher earth orbit IR sats those sats at those altitudes are by the most part an early warning system used against ICBM's and at best liquid fueled IRBM's allowing them to detect the launch where the 2nd stage and PBV are producing high heat at altitudes where it should be cold so they can send their data back in enough time to the right locations for it to mater so they can take action....

Also in a war time situation Iran is fully capable of tracking and blinding U.S. sat's using lasers as they have done in the past for they are in a fixed orbit with fixed speeds and latitudes and Iran's had years to find and track most of the relevant sat's on top of various countermeasures Iran can take on the ground for the fact that the U.S.has the most advanced and largest fleet of high end sat's in space is no secret but Iran is clearly NOT going to deploy countermeasures, decoys or attempt to blind US sat just to drop a few missiles on terrorists.
 
Again this is NOT a Hollywood movie and Sat's have clear limitations!
Blanket statements like these are meaningless. Reconnaissance satellites are becoming more powerful and capable with passage of time, with relevant upgrades in a series of BLOCKS (and periodical replacements), just like in the case of other military assets. To put things in perspective, SAR imaging resolution have increased to 2 cm by now, and complex EO/IR operations (e.g. midcourse discrimination) are possible in the Earth Shadow at present.

However, every single platform have mission-specific limitations (specializations); this is why different types of reconnaissance satellites are developed and deployed, to address operational and functional limitations of a single platform (there is no such thing as one-shoe-fit-all).

Different types of reconnaissance satellites:-

1. Optical Imaging
2. Electromagnetic Spectral Imaging - EO/IR (Infrared and Ultraviolet)
4. Radar Imaging - SAR
5. Laser Imaging
6. SIGINT
7. Hybrid solutions
8. Oceanic*
9. Special purpose (e.g. tracking other satellites)

*Interesting read: https://www.wsj.com/articles/as-new...444?ns=prod/accounts-wsj&ns=prod/accounts-wsj

Reconnaissance satellites exist and function in the form of constellations (networks). They provide extensive coverage of agenda-relevant developments around the world while working in tandem (from multiple angles and perspectives), to relevant ground control stations where such information is processed by powerful computers for desirable ends.

Radar-Family-Tree.jpg


Satellite communications is also an area where significant advances are taking place, and these advances are reshaping modern-era battlespaces in ways like never before. By now, all reconnaissance satellites have digital communications capability with relevant ground control stations (no need for 'recorded films' to be extracted from satellites like in the Cold War era); information processing-time is also reducing in accordance with the advances in computing technologies (near real-time satellite-driven surveillance for certain ends is possible now). Some reconnaissance satellites have onboard information processing capabilities and can even talk to each other for a mutual objective.

General information about military-specific satellite communications in this link: http://www.defence-and-security.com...of-military-satellite-communications-6097723/

---

I do not know much about others but I shall inform you that Radar imaging (SAR) and Electromagnetic spectrum imaging (EO/IR) reconnaissance satellites are MOTION SENSITIVE. They certainly have limitations in this respect because they are designed to track movement of certain types of objects [not everything in the world]. Their tracking capabilities are only a part of the story; satellite data processing software systems [in the relevant ground control stations] do the MAGIC.

"Within five weeks, the first Onyx—also designated 3101 for the satellite program number (3100) and the mission
number (one)—used its on-board rocket engines to reach its operational orbit. It then transmitted its digital imagery,
with resolution in the five-to-10-foot range, to its ground station at White Sands, N.M.

The imagery helped monitor Soviet SS-20 missile movements, transportation of nuclear weapons, and other nighttime Soviet military activities. It also assisted in monitoring Iraqi tank movements during Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm." - Jeffrey T. Richelson (2009)

Radar imaging satellite can detect moving targets on the ground; radar pulses reflecting off moving targets has a different Doppler shift than that of the radar pulses reflecting off the surface around them. Through high-quality signal processing, differences in Doppler shift can be detected and used to highlight locations of moving targets.

An SBIRS EO/IR class satellite is equipped with two types of sensor systems (scanner and starer) - multi-function platform. It can obtain a lock on a particular object with SCANNER sensor and track its movement with STARER sensor in near real-time (extremely fast refresh rates).

2018-11-07-22_13_36-window.png


"The scanning sensor continuously scans the earth to provide 24/7 global strategic missile warning capability. Data from the scanner also contributes to theater and intelligence missions. The step-staring sensor, with its highly-agile and highly-accurate pointing and control system, provides coverage for theater missions and intelligence areas of interest with its fast revisit rates and high sensitivity."

Source: https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104549/space-based-infrared-system/

"SBIRS GEO-1 carries a scanning sensor similar to, but more agile than, the already-deployed SBIRS HEO sensor, and a staring sensor. The scanning sensor will generally provide global surveillance, with the staring sensor intended to interrogate areas of interest around the globe with even more enhanced sensitivity and revisit time. Support to the theater missile warning mission, missile defense mission, technical intelligence mission, and the evolving battlespace awareness mission area, were the drivers for design of the GEO staring sensor. As a result, it will provide very fast re-pointing ability, high sensitivity, and small revisit time for areas of interest, as well as for tracking dim ballistic missiles to booster burnout. The staring sensor will also provide a mode of operation that allows it to continuously stare at a site with very high refresh rate, as well as flexibility in spectral band selection. Enhanced sensitivity and revisit time from the SBIRS sensors bring opportunity for earlier detection of missile launches, higher confidence detection of new dimmer and shorter-duration events, and more accurate estimation of missile trajectory parameters."

Source: http://science.dodlive.mil/2011/05/05/modern-missile-defense-sbirs-satellite-set-to-launch/

SBIRS satellite design (notional):

SBIRS-design.png


Some information about the capabilities of these satellites below.

Now, satellites have their role in providing meaningful INTEL, but is this the end? No. Long-range surveillance drones are known to patrol near global flashpoints and they can plug potential gaps in the coverage of satellites in such regions [if necessary]. To give you an idea:

"Among the largest UAVs in use for tactical and ISR applications is the Global Hawk (Fig. 1) from Northrop Grumman. Considered a high-altitude, long-endurance (HALE) UAV, it is designed to provide near real-time ISR over large geographic areas. The electronics on board the Global Hawk are designed to match its impressive flight capabilities, with run times exceeding 32 hours. It is designed to carry an Enhanced Integrated Sensor Suite (EISS) payload, as well as an Airborne Signals Intelligence Payload (ASIP) for long-range detection and intelligence gathering.

The Global Hawk’s EISS contains a synthetic-aperture-radar (SAR) system, a moving target indicator (MTI), an electro-optical (EO) digital camera, and an advanced infrared (IR) sensor. All of these detection systems operate using a common signal processor, with the on-board computer enabling simultaneous operation of the SAR and MTI, coupled with the capability of transferring ISR data to warfighters in real time."

Source: https://www.mwrf.com/systems/uavs-keep-eye-enemy-movements

Imaging spy Sat's are usually in low - medium earth Orbit and they don't stay in one place long enough for you to get 24/7 live data from every potential target using one sat
Constellation of SBIRS class EO/IR platform:

SBIRSDSP-Constellation.jpg


3rd party modeling:

SBIRS1.png


Constellation of Mercury class SIGINT platform:

high-altitude-sigint.png


In fact, some satellites are SIGINT and SBIRS in the same package (SBIRS HEO layer).

Constellations of Optical imaging, SAR imaging and Laser imaging reconnaissance satellites exist separately from the aforementioned. Largely unknown experimental platforms out there as well (ghost platforms). Above all, different types of reconnaissance satellites are in different orbits such as HEO, GEO and LEO to provide consistent coverage of mission-relevant developments on the surface in various regions of interest at a time.

And who knows what so many supposedly commercial satellites are equipped with and doing? Some are too high-end for commercial applications only. To give you an idea:

"Satellites—like DigitalGlobe’s WorldView-3 orbiter—can be used to take photographs in the shortwave infrared spectra, for example, detecting a clandestine reactor that is putting off heat. Electro-optical and radar satellites could help complete the picture. (That’s one of the ways that the U.S was able to find Iran’s previously secret underground nuclear facility in 2009." - Tim Mak (Daily Beast)

Open advertisement: https://mdacorporation.com/docs/def...ial-services/radarsat-2-products.pdf?sfvrsn=2

and you still need the manpower to monitor each location and getting still images every now and again to monitory what goes on at a large well known missile base over time is one thing vs tracking every vehicle and getting live data as to where they go and where and when they launch is quite another.
The responsibility of controlling, and processing information received from reconnaissance satellites, is undertaken by the Air Force Space Command: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Force_Space_Command

38,000+ individuals, at 88 locations, are involved in AFSC missions (highly trained and vetted). They have supercomputers and numerous failsafe arrangements at their disposal to manage their tasks on a 24/7 basis (routine tasks are fully automated, and experts concentrate on analyzing information in large part).

Not to mention the fact that you still need the manpower to do it because even with advanced imaging software, vehicles come and go all the time and Iran is just one country and is far from having any kind of capability to pose a threat to U.S. soil!
So during each orbit how many sats do you think the U.S. is going to dedicate to getting live data from various targets in Iran where they go about tracking each TEL and monitor every UAV that takes off each base with live images?
I [honestly] do not have the time (and energy) to explain to you the scale and scope of American surveillance operations. One can write a thesis on this subject, and it won't be enough. But I will give some pointers.

Take a look at how many satellites are up there (active at the moment): https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...hingYou-satellites_ai2html-desktop-medium.jpg

Now suppose that a country turns into a battlespace (e.g. Iran); then in this situation, reconnaissance satellites will not be the only layer of surveillance. A range of powerful airborne surveillance assets from USAF and USN will join the show, and do the needful. Under these circumstances, the subject country is essentially *uc*e*.

Some of the most powerful (long-range) airborne surveillance platforms such as Global Hawk, MQ-9 Reaper, RQ-180 (VLO; top secret) and X-37B are known to complement surveillance operations over the regions [of interest] from time to time (to plug 'remote sensing' coverage gaps, and more), even in peacetime situations.

FYI: https://www.mwrf.com/systems/uavs-keep-eye-enemy-movements

RQ-180 feature the very best of VLO technologies in existence, and is so capable in its missions, that it is yet to leave a trail of its activity over any region it has operated since 2014. This is a ghost platform among UAV.

This is an excellent read: http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...ica-keeps-watch-over-north-korea-from-the-sky

As for U.S. higher earth orbit IR sats those sats at those altitudes are by the most part an early warning system used against ICBM's and at best liquid fueled IRBM's allowing them to detect the launch where the 2nd stage and PBV are producing high heat at altitudes where it should be cold so they can send their data back in enough time to the right locations for it to mater so they can take action....
All of them are [more than] early warning systems in reality, and they are powerful enough to obtain a lock on even a tank shell in motion.

"Because SBIRS high-fidelity sensors, which are said to be at least three times as sensitive as older systems, it is rumored that these satellites can detect and possibly track many other things than just ballistic missile launches. These speculations include surface-to-air and air-to-air missiles, artillery fire, and even aircraft in flight."

Source: https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/these-are-the-doomsday-satellites-that-detected-the-exp-1737434876

2018-11-07-22_14_31-window.png


LockheedMartin_SBIRS_Photo.jpg


“What SBIRS brings in capability…is the ability to find dimmer targets with shorter burn times, and those are representative of the tactical threats we see both in Asia and in the Middle East today.” - Col. Dennis Dennis Bythewood

The older generation DSP was this much capable:

"DSP not only successfully detected ICBM launches, but was sensitive enough to detect tactical missiles and even Soviet bombers on afterburner." - SatelliteObservation.net

SBIRS platform have an experimental LEO layer as well - STSS satellites [2 in total, to provide STEREO coverage of stealthy objects in motion from birth-to-death]; these are among the most powerful in existence by any measure - and these are not defunct (intentional disinformation), but better than ever (upgrades). You also need to keep in mind hybrid solutions in a constellation (SBIRS HEO layer). On the whole, SBIRS platform pack lot of surprises.

You need to think on the lines of what a constellation can do on the whole (not on the lines of what a single satellite can do).

Next step is to think above a constellation; multiple constellations working together for shared ends (multi-spectral imaging; hyper-spectral imaging; and more). Simply put, American satellite-driven surveillance capabilities - ALONE - offer virtually persistent coverage of important developments around the world. Think on the lines that this surveillance is non-stop and the entire geography of Earth is mapped. Think on the lines of how much information they have amassed over the course of years. Think about what they have learned from commercial uses of GPS and smartphones.

And next step is to think about long-range surveillance drones complementing surveillance operations of reconnaissance satellites in a region of interest. There isn't a damn thing that can operate undetected over Syrian airspace given the amount of attention it is receiving from US forces in the region.

Back to this point of mine:

"How would you know? Nobody (from the other side) will tell you whether the drone was being watched or not. Keep in mind that USAF is up there patrolling Syrian airspace very often. They have a good view of the activity over Syrian airspace (hint: electro-optical equipment), and even F-22A Raptors are known to patrol Syrian airspace."

I have connected the dots for you.

Also in a war time situation Iran is fully capable of tracking and blinding U.S. sat's using lasers as they have done in the past for they are in a fixed orbit with fixed speeds and latitudes and Iran's had years to find and track most of the relevant sat's on top of various countermeasures Iran can take on the ground for the fact that the U.S.has the most advanced and largest fleet of high end sat's in space is no secret but Iran is clearly NOT going to deploy countermeasures, decoys or attempt to blind US sat just to drop a few missiles on terrorists.
Who is high on Hollywood now?

FIRST: Satellite movement tracking is literally open-source activity in current times (part-time hobby of some); thanks in part to such efforts, Iran (or any country) does not need to do much on its own in this regard.

SECOND: Efforts to tag (illuminate)/blind reconnaissance satellites with particle beams (lasers) is not a new phenomenon [this is Cold War era stuff]. However, this is not Star Wars either.

Any country that can launch its own satellites is likely to have Satellite Laser Ranging (SLR) technology at its disposal, to track their movements with a high degree of precision. This is important for both scientific and defense applications, and a number of satellites are equipped with retroreflectors to facilitate SLR activity (cooperative satellites).

FYI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_laser_ranging

I am aware of Chinese and Iranian experiments to illuminate a reconnaissance satellite or two [happened in 2006 and 2011 respectively]; SLR efforts in reality.

Excellent read: https://www.princeton.edu/sgs/publications/sgs/archive/17-1-Butt-Effects-of-Chinese.pdf

Satirical piece of writing: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...us-satellites/2011/10/03/gIQAHvm7IL_blog.html

Problem is that reconnaissance satellites are among the non-cooperative types by design, and heavily shielded on top. Ranging them can be useful in regards to tracking their movements [under the right circumstances], but blinding them and/or damaging them is far from easy. Continue to read below.

THIRD: Reconnaissance satellites are [always] designed with potential threats in mind - [always]. They can be a billion+ USD a piece and a chunk of this cost goes into shielding each from extreme forms of stresses (and potential threats) via special substances and design approaches.

To give you an idea:

"Lacrosse is a nuclear war, laser, and battle hardened spacecraft to the extent possible. The spacecraft carries in addition one auxiliary earth imaging IR payload instrument of some kind also in addition to its Harris Corp. (Air Force Magazine, Aerospace World, 3/1986, p. 28) primary gimbals mounted imaging phased array radar deployable dish which is resistant to interference. The open mesh dish was designed to prevent earth or space based interference of its imaging radar that is not possible with flat plate imaging radars."

Source: https://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/lacrosse.htm

Reconnaissance satellites are subjected to extreme forms of stresses before deployment: https://warisboring.com/testing-satellites-by-nuking-them/

Look at this infographic:

SBIRS_Infographic_Square.jpg.pc-adaptive.full.medium.jpeg


Some reconnaissance satellites are even equipped with efficient deflectors (e.g. MISTY class).

FYI: https://gizmodo.com/5162837/misty-stealth-satellite-hides-perfectly-while-watching-you

Cold War with USSR was a great teacher, and (laser shielding) is a thing.

---

Certain elements tend to sensationalize certain developments for public consumption [efforts to maintain the HUBRIS of vulnerabilities] because their agenda is seek FUNDS from politicians to improve existing assets, and to develop new assets. You might have noticed that media was being flooded with reports of China thrashing the shit out of US in a hypothetical fight not long ago because 2019 DEFENSE BUDGET was pending approval.

Mission accomplished: https://militarybenefits.info/2019-defense-budget/ (Approval process was incredibly smooth too, LMAO)

---

There is no cost-effective method to defeat a reconnaissance satellite. HTK approach is most reliable, but easier said than done. Reconnaissance satellites tend to move in the MACH 22 - 24 range, feature alert mechanisms, and can change course on the fly. US is deploying a special type of maneuverable satellite which can serve as a kill vehicle in space: MiTEx micro-satellites [but this is an incredibly challenging endeavor in itself]

Did it ever occur to you that why Iran is unable to prevent reconnaissance satellites from uncovering its secrets?

REMINDER

"Satellites—like DigitalGlobe’s WorldView-3 orbiter—can be used to take photographs in the shortwave infrared spectra, for example, detecting a clandestine reactor that is putting off heat. Electro-optical and radar satellites could help complete the picture. (That’s one of the ways that the U.S was able to find Iran’s previously secret underground nuclear facility in 2009." - Tim Mak (Daily Beast)

Numerous observations

https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/satellite-images-iran-builds-s-300-missiles-sites
https://www.thenational.ae/world/me...new-missile-site-at-mashhad-airfield-1.784046
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB439/

Keep in mind that strategic facilities tend to be DENIED spaces for observation on the surface (and otherwise) - in any country. They feature a large number of jamming and camouflaging arrangements as well. However, reconnaissance satellites are designed to observe such spaces and render their defensive arrangements invalid.

Images of Iranian, Pakistani, Indian, Chinese, Russian and North Korean strategic facilities - are virtually impossible to obtain from standard equipment. Try to operate a UAV near a Iranian strategic location and see what happens [unless you work in one].

Even powerful commercial solutions such as Google's GeoEye-1 have caught lot of INTERESTING developments in the act around the world. And these solutions are exploding in numbers: https://www.satimagingcorp.com/

---

In case of war with US (God forbid), reconnaissance satellites will be the least of your concerns. USAF and USN will step in and will not only blanket Iranian airspace with their powerful EW measures, but deliver volley after volley of kinetic strikes to degrade Iranian defenses to the point that they will become insignificant. To give you an idea, Iraqi armed forces were reduced to using couriers for communications during the course of SHOCK & AWE campaign.

USAF and USN can establish a battlespace-relevant airborne surveillance layer as a substitute for satellite surveillance, should the need arise.

Good luck with laser-blinding each reconnaissance satellite out there. Facepalm.

Also this part from the CNN show how much they were aware of our operation


Even a day after incident they were assessing damages that happened just 3km away and they were talking they are aware of it .
Before that they shoot two of our drone down because they come 50km of the group they supported ,this time 7 of our drones bombed targets just 3km of their base and they were assessing the damages next two day.
Take a good look at my disclosures above.

When you understand the bigger picture, then it is easy for you to read between the lines.

US military is a huge force with multiple branches, and their assets are spread across LAND, SEA, AIR and SPACE around the world. It is not necessary for troops in a particular location to have access to every form of INTEL on the fly; operational realities in a particular location are not necessarily clear to 'distant observers' either, because troops are not reporters.

Col. Sean Ryan pointed out that Iran did not (officially) notify US forces of its intent to utilize ballistic missiles to strike potential targets in a location which was only 3 MILES away from their positions. An official communication channel is important between military forces of different countries when they are operating in the same region [precautionary measure]; Russia, Turkey, US and Israel have a deconfliction line in Syria for this purpose. In no way or form, is this an indication that American surveillance agencies were not doing their job at the time, and US forces did not knew that Iranian forces were conducting operations near their positions.

Same soldier also alluded to post-strike damage assessment; this is an SOP of any military force. Troops do not stick to [political] disclosures on the web, to assess situation on the ground. They commit to a thorough post-strike assessment after each operation.

The statement "we see open source reports stating that they were targeting militants it blamed for the recent attack on an Iranian military parade in the Middle Euphrates River Valley" - does not imply ignorance in the battlefield, but to understand who were the targets. More on the lines of what compelled Iran to consider Ballistic missiles to strike a region (these weapons rarely employed to kill some terrorists). Post-strike damage assessment is conducted to distinguish political rhetoric from concrete facts.

He did not mention drones by the way; you are connecting the wrong dots.
 
Last edited:
Take a good look at my disclosures above.

When you understand the bigger picture, then it is easy for you to read between the lines.

US military is a huge force with multiple branches, and their assets are spread across LAND, SEA, AIR and SPACE around the world. It is not necessary for troops in a particular location to have access to every form of INTEL on the fly; operational realities in a particular location are not necessarily clear to 'distant observers' either, because troops are not reporters.

Col. Sean Ryan pointed out that Iran did not (officially) notify US forces of its intent to utilize ballistic missiles to strike potential targets in a location which was only 3 KM away from their positions. An official communication channel is important between military forces of different countries when they are operating in the same region [precautionary measure]; Russia, Turkey, US and Israel have a deconfliction line in Syria for this purpose. In no way or form, is this an indication that American surveillance agencies were not doing their job at the time, and US forces did not knew that Iranian forces were conducting operations near their positions.

Same soldier also alluded to post-strike damage assessment; this is an SOP of any military force. Troops do not stick to [political] disclosures on the web, to assess situation on the ground. They commit to a thorough post-strike assessment after each operation.

The statement "we see open source reports stating that they were targeting militants it blamed for the recent attack on an Iranian military parade in the Middle Euphrates River Valley" - does not imply ignorance in the battlefield, but to understand who were the targets. More on the lines of what compelled Iran to consider Ballistic missiles to strike a region (these weapons rarely employed to kill some terrorists). Post-strike damage assessment is conducted to distinguish political rhetoric from concrete facts.

He did not mention drones by the way; you are connecting the wrong dots.
A question .
If they were aware of our operation how come before it they would have attacked our drones when they come as near as 50km of the militant they were supporting but this time 7 drone bombed 3km away from their base and they could not even scramble a helicopter ?
About detecting our missile launcher ,the missiles used in this operation were small missiles and their launcher won't look any different from normal trucks .so looking for them by automated algorythm is a little out of question.
 
A question .
If they were aware of our operation how come before it they would have attacked our drones when they come as near as 50km of the militant they were supporting but this time 7 drone bombed 3km away from their base and they could not even scramble a helicopter ?
Do they have to shoot down your stuff each time to prove anything? Minor correction: strikes occurred about 3 miles away.

Iranian forces launched 6 ballistic missiles in total but one of them reportedly malfunctioned:

"Iranian missiles and armed drones strike targets near American and other coalition forces only add to that danger. Reports that one of the Qiam missiles might have failed, sending a portion falling back to earth after launch, only further highlight the potential for even an accident to spark some sort of conflagration."

Source: http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...missiles-hit-targets-in-syria-near-u-s-forces

Of-course, Iranian sources will conceal such information.

Iranian drones struck additional number of targets [AFTER] the initial strikes involving ballistic missiles:

"A field commander with a group backed by Iran in the area of Syria where the strikes occurred, reached over social media and speaking on the condition of anonymity in line with the group’s policy, said that Iranian drones had fired rockets at the Islamic State military headquarters, shortly after the missiles struck."

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/world/middleeast/iran-isis-missile-syria.html

"Immediately after the missile attack, the IRGC flew no less than seven armed drones to further pound the headquarters and gatherings of the “mercenaries of global arrogance,” according to the statement."

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/world/middleeast/iran-isis-missile-syria.html

Do US forces have the capabilities to detect such stuff while in motion? ABSOLUTELY

I have written a comprehensive response earlier, explaining such stuff in great detail. Additional information below:

unmanned-aircraft-system-fundamentals-24-728.jpg


Image on the left show Global Hawk long-range surveillance drone tracking (and processing) the activities of an AC-130 Gunship in real-time in Afghanistan, in the night, via its onboard EO/IR sensor system. You can notice the engines of that aircraft illuminating in the infrared spectrum.

Global Hawk is one of the most powerful airborne surveillance assets in the world, and it can detect and track movements of any airborne asset from considerable distances, and is known to operate over Syrian airspace. Infographic of its capabilities:

with-a-rolls-royce-engine-bird-strike-resistant-wings-and-a-slew-of-other-payloads-the-whole-aircraft-weighs-32250-pounds--heres-what-its-carrying.jpg


Emphasis mine. 360 degree EO/IR coverage coupled with 360 degree AESA radar coverage. Target acquisition ranges are classified but stated to be long--range.

Please keep in mind that EO/IR sensor systems are among the [very] few options suited to track stealthy targets which can fool conventional radar systems. This is why US have invested a great deal (trillion+ USD) on EO/IR sensor technologies in order to make them exceptionally powerful for surveillance operations, but they do not export this stuff to other countries. Even Russian EO/IR technologies pale in comparison.

You might also need to take a look at the capabilities of F-35 and E2D Advanced Hawkeye platforms - both of them have incredibly powerful EO/IR capabilities of their own. In fact, E2D Advanced Hawkeye is arguably the most powerful AWACS in its class with a unique (hybrid) radar system optimized for detecting VLO targets. Although no Iranian drone is VLO per American standards. Other countries are not even close to US in developing this kind of stuff.

---

Since US forces are stationed in Syria, American surveillance apparatus is expected to be active in the region. Now what kind of airborne platforms were operating near the location of strikes when they occurred, is not clear to me. However, this is not my point.

My point of contention is straightforward since the beginning in response to a claim made by another member that Saegheh's were likely on auto pilot to remain undetected:

"How would you know? Nobody (from the other side) will tell you whether the drone was being watched or not. Keep in mind that USAF is up there patrolling Syrian airspace very often. They have a good view of the activity over Syrian airspace (hint: electro-optical equipment), and even F-22A Raptors are known to patrol Syrian airspace."

U.S. Army Colonel Sean Ryan, a U.S. Central Command spokesperson just mentioned that NO-NOTICE strikes occurred in the region. This translate to Iranian forces not [OFFICIALLY] alerting US forces about their intentions to conduct a major operation near their positions. In no way or form, this imply that US forces in the region did not knew what was happening near them and what assets were involved. You are misreading a simple statement.

I have nothing else to say.

About detecting our missile launcher ,the missiles used in this operation were small missiles and their launcher won't look any different from normal trucks .so looking for them by automated algorythm is a little out of question.
High resolution SAR imaging platforms can tell a TEL apart from another vehicle because due to differences in their physical structures, and the structure of a ballistic missile itself.

"At the same time, an unnamed U.S. source also informed CNN that the strikes had come “within three miles” of American forces, which are currently engaged in operations with local partners against ISIS in the vicinity of Haijin. The same individual said that the United States had used satellite intelligence to observe Iranian forces moving mobile launchers into position in the country’s Kemansheh province."

Source: http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...missiles-hit-targets-in-syria-near-u-s-forces

Does not matter how small your missiles were, SBIRS EO/IR platforms can easily detect and track their movements in near real-time. Not going to enlighten you further - I have written a comprehensive response earlier, explaining this stuff to the best of my abilities. Go through it and enlighten yourself. Either you will understand, or you will not.
 
Last edited:
Do they have to shoot down your stuff each time to prove anything? Minor correction: strikes occurred about 3 miles away.

Iranian forces launched 6 ballistic missiles in total but one of them reportedly malfunctioned:

"Iranian missiles and armed drones strike targets near American and other coalition forces only add to that danger. Reports that one of the Qiam missiles might have failed, sending a portion falling back to earth after launch, only further highlight the potential for even an accident to spark some sort of conflagration."

Source: http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...missiles-hit-targets-in-syria-near-u-s-forces

Of-course, Iranian sources will conceal such information.

Iranian drones struck additional number of targets [AFTER] the initial strikes involving ballistic missiles:

"A field commander with a group backed by Iran in the area of Syria where the strikes occurred, reached over social media and speaking on the condition of anonymity in line with the group’s policy, said that Iranian drones had fired rockets at the Islamic State military headquarters, shortly after the missiles struck."

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/world/middleeast/iran-isis-missile-syria.html

"Immediately after the missile attack, the IRGC flew no less than seven armed drones to further pound the headquarters and gatherings of the “mercenaries of global arrogance,” according to the statement."

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/world/middleeast/iran-isis-missile-syria.html

Do US forces have the capabilities to detect such stuff while in motion? ABSOLUTELY

I have written a comprehensive response earlier, explaining such stuff in great detail. Additional information below:

unmanned-aircraft-system-fundamentals-24-728.jpg


Image on the left show Global Hawk long-range surveillance drone tracking (and processing) the activities of an AC-130 Gunship in real-time in Afghanistan, in the night, via its onboard EO/IR sensor system. You can notice the engines of that aircraft illuminating in the infrared spectrum.

Global Hawk is one of the most powerful airborne surveillance assets in the world, and it can detect and track movements of any airborne asset over Syrian airspace from considerable distances. Infographic of its capabilities:

with-a-rolls-royce-engine-bird-strike-resistant-wings-and-a-slew-of-other-payloads-the-whole-aircraft-weighs-32250-pounds--heres-what-its-carrying.jpg


Emphasis mine. 360 degree EO/IR coverage coupled with 360 degree AESA radar coverage. Target acquisition ranges are classified but stated to be long--range.

You might also need to take a look at the capabilities of F-35 and E2D Advanced Hawkeye platforms - both of them have incredibly powerful EO/IR capabilities of their own. In fact, E2D Advanced Hawkeye is arguably the most powerful AWACS in its class with a unique (hybrid) radar system optimized for detecting VLO targets. Although no Iranian drone is VLO per American standards. Other countries are not even close to US in developing equipment with matching capabilities so far.

---

Since US forces are stationed in Syria, American surveillance apparatus is expected to be active in the region. Now what kind of airborne platforms were operating near the location of strikes when they occurred, is not clear to me. However, this is not my point.

My point of contention is straightforward since the beginning in response to a claim made by another member that Saegheh's were likely on auto pilot to remain undetected:

"How would you know? Nobody (from the other side) will tell you whether the drone was being watched or not. Keep in mind that USAF is up there patrolling Syrian airspace very often. They have a good view of the activity over Syrian airspace (hint: electro-optical equipment), and even F-22A Raptors are known to patrol Syrian airspace."

U.S. Army Colonel Sean Ryan, a U.S. Central Command spokesperson just mentioned that NO-NOTICE strikes occurred in the region. This translate to Iranian forces not [OFFICIALLY] alerting US forces about their intentions to conduct a major operation near their positions. In no way or form, this imply that US forces in the region did not knew what was happening near them and what assets were involved. You are misreading a simple statement.

I have nothing else to say.


High resolution SAR imaging platforms can tell a TEL apart from another vehicle because due to differences in their physical structures, and the structure of a ballistic missile itself.

"At the same time, an unnamed U.S. source also informed CNN that the strikes had come “within three miles” of American forces, which are currently engaged in operations with local partners against ISIS in the vicinity of Haijin. The same individual said that the United States had used satellite intelligence to observe Iranian forces moving mobile launchers into position in the country’s Kemansheh province."

Source: http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...missiles-hit-targets-in-syria-near-u-s-forces

Does not matter how small your missiles were, SBIRS EO/IR platforms can easily detect and track their movements in near real-time. Not going to enlighten you further - I have written a comprehensive response earlier, explaining this stuff to the best of my abilities. Go through it and enlighten yourself. Either you will understand, or you will not.
I still didn't get why they shoot shahed 129 when come near the groups they support ,but let Saegheh and Simorgh operate 3 mile away from their base ?
and another question why those near real-time surveillance can't stop houthis from firing their missiles ? or hamas from firing their rockets . by the way did USA actually shown any evidence of tracking those launcher or just made some claims without evidence?
 
Blanket statements like these are meaningless. Reconnaissance satellites are becoming more powerful and capable with passage of time, with relevant upgrades in a series of BLOCKS (and periodical replacements), just like in the case of other military assets. To put things in perspective, SAR imaging resolution have increased to 2 cm by now, and complex EO/IR operations (e.g. midcourse discrimination) are possible in the Earth Shadow at present.

However, every single platform have mission-specific limitations (specializations); this is why different types of reconnaissance satellites are developed and deployed, to address operational and functional limitations of a single platform (there is no such thing as one-shoe-fit-all).

Different types of reconnaissance satellites:-

1. Optical Imaging
2. Electromagnetic Spectral Imaging - EO/IR (Infrared and Ultraviolet)
4. Radar Imaging - SAR
5. Laser Imaging
6. SIGINT
7. Hybrid solutions
8. Oceanic*
9. Special purpose (e.g. tracking other satellites)

*Interesting read: https://www.wsj.com/articles/as-new...444?ns=prod/accounts-wsj&ns=prod/accounts-wsj

Reconnaissance satellites exist and function in the form of constellations (networks). They provide extensive coverage of agenda-relevant developments around the world while working in tandem (from multiple angles and perspectives), to relevant ground control stations where such information is processed by powerful computers for desirable ends.

Radar-Family-Tree.jpg


Satellite communications is also an area where significant advances are taking place, and these advances are reshaping modern-era battlespaces in ways like never before. By now, all reconnaissance satellites have digital communications capability with relevant ground control stations (no need for 'recorded films' to be extracted from satellites like in the Cold War era); information processing-time is also reducing in accordance with the advances in computing technologies (near real-time satellite-driven surveillance for certain ends is possible now). Some reconnaissance satellites have onboard information processing capabilities and can even talk to each other for a mutual objective.

General information about military-specific satellite communications in this link: http://www.defence-and-security.com...of-military-satellite-communications-6097723/

---

I do not know much about others but I shall inform you that Radar imaging (SAR) and Electromagnetic spectrum imaging (EO/IR) reconnaissance satellites are MOTION SENSITIVE. They certainly have limitations in this respect because they are designed to track movement of certain types of objects [not everything in the world]. Their tracking capabilities are only a part of the story; satellite data processing software systems [in the relevant ground control stations] do the MAGIC.

"Within five weeks, the first Onyx—also designated 3101 for the satellite program number (3100) and the mission
number (one)—used its on-board rocket engines to reach its operational orbit. It then transmitted its digital imagery,
with resolution in the five-to-10-foot range, to its ground station at White Sands, N.M.

The imagery helped monitor Soviet SS-20 missile movements, transportation of nuclear weapons, and other nighttime Soviet military activities. It also assisted in monitoring Iraqi tank movements during Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm." - Jeffrey T. Richelson (2009)

Radar imaging satellite can detect moving targets on the ground; radar pulses reflecting off moving targets has a different Doppler shift than that of the radar pulses reflecting off the surface around them. Through high-quality signal processing, differences in Doppler shift can be detected and used to highlight locations of moving targets.

An SBIRS EO/IR class satellite is equipped with two types of sensor systems (scanner and starer) - multi-function platform. It can obtain a lock on a particular object with SCANNER sensor and track its movement with STARER sensor in near real-time (extremely fast refresh rates).

2018-11-07-22_13_36-window.png


"The scanning sensor continuously scans the earth to provide 24/7 global strategic missile warning capability. Data from the scanner also contributes to theater and intelligence missions. The step-staring sensor, with its highly-agile and highly-accurate pointing and control system, provides coverage for theater missions and intelligence areas of interest with its fast revisit rates and high sensitivity."

Source: https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104549/space-based-infrared-system/

"SBIRS GEO-1 carries a scanning sensor similar to, but more agile than, the already-deployed SBIRS HEO sensor, and a staring sensor. The scanning sensor will generally provide global surveillance, with the staring sensor intended to interrogate areas of interest around the globe with even more enhanced sensitivity and revisit time. Support to the theater missile warning mission, missile defense mission, technical intelligence mission, and the evolving battlespace awareness mission area, were the drivers for design of the GEO staring sensor. As a result, it will provide very fast re-pointing ability, high sensitivity, and small revisit time for areas of interest, as well as for tracking dim ballistic missiles to booster burnout. The staring sensor will also provide a mode of operation that allows it to continuously stare at a site with very high refresh rate, as well as flexibility in spectral band selection. Enhanced sensitivity and revisit time from the SBIRS sensors bring opportunity for earlier detection of missile launches, higher confidence detection of new dimmer and shorter-duration events, and more accurate estimation of missile trajectory parameters."

Source: http://science.dodlive.mil/2011/05/05/modern-missile-defense-sbirs-satellite-set-to-launch/

SBIRS satellite design (notional):

SBIRS-design.png


Some information about the capabilities of these satellites below.

Now, satellites have their role in providing meaningful INTEL, but is this the end? No. Long-range surveillance drones are known to patrol near global flashpoints and they can plug potential gaps in the coverage of satellites in such regions [if necessary]. To give you an idea:

"Among the largest UAVs in use for tactical and ISR applications is the Global Hawk (Fig. 1) from Northrop Grumman. Considered a high-altitude, long-endurance (HALE) UAV, it is designed to provide near real-time ISR over large geographic areas. The electronics on board the Global Hawk are designed to match its impressive flight capabilities, with run times exceeding 32 hours. It is designed to carry an Enhanced Integrated Sensor Suite (EISS) payload, as well as an Airborne Signals Intelligence Payload (ASIP) for long-range detection and intelligence gathering.

The Global Hawk’s EISS contains a synthetic-aperture-radar (SAR) system, a moving target indicator (MTI), an electro-optical (EO) digital camera, and an advanced infrared (IR) sensor. All of these detection systems operate using a common signal processor, with the on-board computer enabling simultaneous operation of the SAR and MTI, coupled with the capability of transferring ISR data to warfighters in real time."

Source: https://www.mwrf.com/systems/uavs-keep-eye-enemy-movements


Constellation of SBIRS class EO/IR platform:

SBIRSDSP-Constellation.jpg


3rd party modeling:

SBIRS1.png


Constellation of Mercury class SIGINT platform:

high-altitude-sigint.png


In fact, some satellites are SIGINT and SBIRS in the same package (SBIRS HEO layer).

Constellations of Optical imaging, SAR imaging and Laser imaging reconnaissance satellites exist separately from the aforementioned. Largely unknown experimental platforms out there as well (ghost platforms). Above all, different types of reconnaissance satellites are in different orbits such as HEO, GEO and LEO to provide consistent coverage of mission-relevant developments on the surface in various regions of interest at a time.

And who knows what so many supposedly commercial satellites are equipped with and doing? Some are too high-end for commercial applications only. To give you an idea:

"Satellites—like DigitalGlobe’s WorldView-3 orbiter—can be used to take photographs in the shortwave infrared spectra, for example, detecting a clandestine reactor that is putting off heat. Electro-optical and radar satellites could help complete the picture. (That’s one of the ways that the U.S was able to find Iran’s previously secret underground nuclear facility in 2009." - Tim Mak (Daily Beast)

Open advertisement: https://mdacorporation.com/docs/def...ial-services/radarsat-2-products.pdf?sfvrsn=2


The responsibility of controlling, and processing information received from reconnaissance satellites, is undertaken by the Air Force Space Command: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Force_Space_Command

38,000+ individuals, at 88 locations, are involved in AFSC missions (highly trained and vetted). They have supercomputers and numerous failsafe arrangements at their disposal to manage their tasks on a 24/7 basis (routine tasks are fully automated, and experts concentrate on analyzing information in large part).


I [honestly] do not have the time (and energy) to explain to you the scale and scope of American surveillance operations. One can write a thesis on this subject, and it won't be enough. But I will give some pointers.

Take a look at how many satellites are up there (active at the moment): https://www.nationalgeographic.com/...hingYou-satellites_ai2html-desktop-medium.jpg

Now suppose that a country turns into a battlespace (e.g. Iran); then in this situation, reconnaissance satellites will not be the only layer of surveillance. A range of powerful airborne surveillance assets from USAF and USN will join the show, and do the needful. Under these circumstances, the subject country is essentially *uc*e*.

Some of the most powerful (long-range) airborne surveillance platforms such as Global Hawk, MQ-9 Reaper, RQ-180 (VLO; top secret) and X-37B are known to complement surveillance operations over the regions [of interest] from time to time (to plug 'remote sensing' coverage gaps, and more), even in peacetime situations.

FYI: https://www.mwrf.com/systems/uavs-keep-eye-enemy-movements

RQ-180 feature the very best of VLO technologies in existence, and is so capable in its missions, that it is yet to leave a trail of its activity over any region it has operated since 2014. This is a ghost platform among UAV.

This is an excellent read: http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...ica-keeps-watch-over-north-korea-from-the-sky


All of them are [more than] early warning systems in reality, and they are powerful enough to obtain a lock on even a tank shell in motion.

"Because SBIRS high-fidelity sensors, which are said to be at least three times as sensitive as older systems, it is rumored that these satellites can detect and possibly track many other things than just ballistic missile launches. These speculations include surface-to-air and air-to-air missiles, artillery fire, and even aircraft in flight."

Source: https://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/these-are-the-doomsday-satellites-that-detected-the-exp-1737434876

2018-11-07-22_14_31-window.png


LockheedMartin_SBIRS_Photo.jpg


“What SBIRS brings in capability…is the ability to find dimmer targets with shorter burn times, and those are representative of the tactical threats we see both in Asia and in the Middle East today.” - Col. Dennis Dennis Bythewood

The older generation DSP was this much capable:

"DSP not only successfully detected ICBM launches, but was sensitive enough to detect tactical missiles and even Soviet bombers on afterburner." - SatelliteObservation.net

SBIRS platform have an experimental LEO layer as well - STSS satellites [2 in total, to provide STEREO coverage of stealthy objects in motion from birth-to-death]; these are among the most powerful in existence by any measure - and these are not defunct (intentional disinformation), but better than ever (upgrades). You also need to keep in mind hybrid solutions in a constellation (SBIRS HEO layer). On the whole, SBIRS platform pack lot of surprises.

You need to think on the lines of what a constellation can do on the whole (not on the lines of what a single satellite can do).

Next step is to think above a constellation; multiple constellations working together for shared ends (multi-spectral imaging; hyper-spectral imaging; and more). Simply put, American satellite-driven surveillance capabilities - ALONE - offer virtually persistent coverage of important developments around the world. Think on the lines that this surveillance is non-stop and the entire geography of Earth is mapped. Think on the lines of how much information they have amassed over the course of years. Think about what they have learned from commercial uses of GPS and smartphones.

And next step is to think about long-range surveillance drones complementing surveillance operations of reconnaissance satellites in a region of interest. There isn't a damn thing that can operate undetected over Syrian airspace given the amount of attention it is receiving from US forces in the region.

Back to this point of mine:

"How would you know? Nobody (from the other side) will tell you whether the drone was being watched or not. Keep in mind that USAF is up there patrolling Syrian airspace very often. They have a good view of the activity over Syrian airspace (hint: electro-optical equipment), and even F-22A Raptors are known to patrol Syrian airspace."

I have connected the dots for you.


Who is high on Hollywood now?

FIRST: Satellite movement tracking is literally open-source activity in current times (part-time hobby of some); thanks in part to such efforts, Iran (or any country) does not need to do much on its own in this regard.

SECOND: Efforts to tag (illuminate)/blind reconnaissance satellites with particle beams (lasers) is not a new phenomenon [this is Cold War era stuff]. However, this is not Star Wars either.

Any country that can launch its own satellites is likely to have Satellite Laser Ranging (SLR) technology at its disposal, to track their movements with a high degree of precision. This is important for both scientific and defense applications, and a number of satellites are equipped with retroreflectors to facilitate SLR activity (cooperative satellites).

FYI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satellite_laser_ranging

I am aware of Chinese and Iranian experiments to illuminate a reconnaissance satellite or two [happened in 2006 and 2011 respectively]; SLR efforts in reality.

Excellent read: https://www.princeton.edu/sgs/publications/sgs/archive/17-1-Butt-Effects-of-Chinese.pdf

Satirical piece of writing: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...us-satellites/2011/10/03/gIQAHvm7IL_blog.html

Problem is that reconnaissance satellites are among the non-cooperative types by design, and heavily shielded on top. Ranging them can be useful in regards to tracking their movements [under the right circumstances], but blinding them and/or damaging them is far from easy. Continue to read below.

THIRD: Reconnaissance satellites are [always] designed with potential threats in mind - [always]. They can be a billion+ USD a piece and a chunk of this cost goes into shielding each from extreme forms of stresses (and potential threats) via special substances and design approaches.

To give you an idea:

"Lacrosse is a nuclear war, laser, and battle hardened spacecraft to the extent possible. The spacecraft carries in addition one auxiliary earth imaging IR payload instrument of some kind also in addition to its Harris Corp. (Air Force Magazine, Aerospace World, 3/1986, p. 28) primary gimbals mounted imaging phased array radar deployable dish which is resistant to interference. The open mesh dish was designed to prevent earth or space based interference of its imaging radar that is not possible with flat plate imaging radars."

Source: https://www.globalsecurity.org/space/systems/lacrosse.htm

Reconnaissance satellites are subjected to extreme forms of stresses before deployment: https://warisboring.com/testing-satellites-by-nuking-them/

Look at this infographic:

SBIRS_Infographic_Square.jpg.pc-adaptive.full.medium.jpeg


Some reconnaissance satellites are even equipped with efficient deflectors (e.g. MISTY class).

FYI: https://gizmodo.com/5162837/misty-stealth-satellite-hides-perfectly-while-watching-you

Cold War with USSR was a great teacher, and (laser shielding) is a thing.

---

Certain elements tend to sensationalize certain developments for public consumption [efforts to maintain the HUBRIS of vulnerabilities] because their agenda is seek FUNDS from politicians to improve existing assets, and to develop new assets. You might have noticed that media was being flooded with reports of China thrashing the shit out of US in a hypothetical fight not long ago because 2019 DEFENSE BUDGET was pending approval.

Mission accomplished: https://militarybenefits.info/2019-defense-budget/ (Approval process was incredibly smooth too, LMAO)

---

There is no cost-effective method to defeat a reconnaissance satellite. HTK approach is most reliable, but easier said than done. Reconnaissance satellites tend to move in the MACH 22 - 24 range, feature alert mechanisms, and can change course on the fly. US is deploying a special type of maneuverable satellite which can serve as a kill vehicle in space: MiTEx micro-satellites [but this is an incredibly challenging endeavor in itself]

Did it ever occur to you that why Iran is unable to prevent reconnaissance satellites from uncovering its secrets?

REMINDER

"Satellites—like DigitalGlobe’s WorldView-3 orbiter—can be used to take photographs in the shortwave infrared spectra, for example, detecting a clandestine reactor that is putting off heat. Electro-optical and radar satellites could help complete the picture. (That’s one of the ways that the U.S was able to find Iran’s previously secret underground nuclear facility in 2009." - Tim Mak (Daily Beast)

Numerous observations

https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/satellite-images-iran-builds-s-300-missiles-sites
https://www.thenational.ae/world/me...new-missile-site-at-mashhad-airfield-1.784046
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB439/

Keep in mind that strategic facilities tend to be DENIED spaces for observation on the surface (and otherwise) - in any country. They feature a large number of jamming and camouflaging arrangements as well. However, reconnaissance satellites are designed to observe such spaces and render their defensive arrangements invalid.

Images of Iranian, Pakistani, Indian, Chinese, Russian and North Korean strategic facilities - are virtually impossible to obtain from standard equipment. Try to operate a UAV near a Iranian strategic location and see what happens [unless you work in one].

Even powerful commercial solutions such as Google's GeoEye-1 have caught lot of INTERESTING developments in the act around the world. And these solutions are exploding in numbers: https://www.satimagingcorp.com/

---

In case of war with US (God forbid), reconnaissance satellites will be the least of your concerns. USAF and USN will step in and will not only blanket Iranian airspace with their powerful EW measures, but deliver volley after volley of kinetic strikes to degrade Iranian defenses to the point that they will become insignificant. To give you an idea, Iraqi armed forces were reduced to using couriers for communications during the course of SHOCK & AWE campaign.

USAF and USN can establish a battlespace-relevant airborne surveillance layer as a substitute for satellite surveillance, should the need arise.

Good luck with laser-blinding each reconnaissance satellite out there. Facepalm.


Take a good look at my disclosures above.

When you understand the bigger picture, then it is easy for you to read between the lines.

US military is a huge force with multiple branches, and their assets are spread across LAND, SEA, AIR and SPACE around the world. It is not necessary for troops in a particular location to have access to every form of INTEL on the fly; operational realities in a particular location are not necessarily clear to 'distant observers' either, because troops are not reporters.

Col. Sean Ryan pointed out that Iran did not (officially) notify US forces of its intent to utilize ballistic missiles to strike potential targets in a location which was only 3 MILES away from their positions. An official communication channel is important between military forces of different countries when they are operating in the same region [precautionary measure]; Russia, Turkey, US and Israel have a deconfliction line in Syria for this purpose. In no way or form, is this an indication that American surveillance agencies were not doing their job at the time, and US forces did not knew that Iranian forces were conducting operations near their positions.

Same soldier also alluded to post-strike damage assessment; this is an SOP of any military force. Troops do not stick to [political] disclosures on the web, to assess situation on the ground. They commit to a thorough post-strike assessment after each operation.

The statement "we see open source reports stating that they were targeting militants it blamed for the recent attack on an Iranian military parade in the Middle Euphrates River Valley" - does not imply ignorance in the battlefield, but to understand who were the targets. More on the lines of what compelled Iran to consider Ballistic missiles to strike a region (these weapons rarely employed to kill some terrorists). Post-strike damage assessment is conducted to distinguish political rhetoric from concrete facts.

He did not mention drones by the way; you are connecting the wrong dots.

Very informative! Thanks... Two questions:

Do USA have the ability to watch a real-time video stream in different day and night, adverse weather situations? I mean in some hollywood movies you see they show CIA officers have real time video stream of certain locations such as a house. Is that really practical? I,m talking about real time video stream..

Second question is that is there any third party proof showing US has in fact posses such capabilities? I am not talking about the existence of their numerous sats here.. I mean the way they claim to even lock on a moving target as small as a tank or a fighter jet from GEO heights... I mean every producer promotes their products in their catalogs... But is there any verified studies proving their level of quality and capability?
 
Back
Top Bottom