Skip to comments.Bolton: Iranian Jamming Technology Could Be Worse News Than Downed Drone
Posted on 12/12/2011 6:26:23 AM PST by Just4Him
American officials insist that neither weaponry nor technology brought down a U.S. drone that was flying over Iranian territory earlier this month, but a former U.S. ambassador says if reports are true that Russia provided jamming equipment, the situation becomes all that much worse. "Some reports have said Russia sold (Iran) a very sophisticated jamming system a short time ago," U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton told Fox News on Sunday. "Now, our military says that is not true, it came down because of a malfunction. I certainly hope that's right because if the Russians have provided Iran with sophisticated jamming equipment it means a lot else is at risk too."
Bolton said Congress ought to be concerned if the Iranians are in possession of jamming technology that can bring down missiles, planes and communications and guidance systems "for a whole range of our weapon systems."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Plus, these things MUST have a “go home” function if communication is lost.
Just suppose that the GPS signal is also jammed and the critter doesn’t know where it is much less where “home” is.
John Bolton should have been on the Presidential primary circuit. Plain talking, no nonsense Republican.
I said from the beginning the drone was jammed by the Iranians. Bolton is right if they can jam our drones , they can probably jam our GPS guided cruise missiles.
The Obama family's investment in LightSquared is paying off?
This would actually be a good thing. We’ve been getting too used to fighting against technologically-inferior opponents, and getting dependent upon weapons systems that rely upon nobody being in a position to jam signal reception: GPS-guided bombs, remote-controlled UAVs, etc, etc.
The drone was an early Christmas gift from “O”-bet on it
The jamming is possible, but highly unlikely. At 50,000ft, the energy levels required are just too high to effectively and reliably jam data links and GPS - especially when you don’t know where the victim of your jamming is located.
The antennas are shielded by the body of the aircraft. Then again, it IS theoretically possible.
I think gyros alone can get it close to home where communication can be re-established. Just guessing.
If the Iranians capability was truly “sophisticated” they would never have leaked a word about it, much less boasted. Boasting, evening when heavily cloaked with disinformation, gives the enemy far too much intelligence. If they had leaked the “feat” to the press, surrounded by a bodyguard of disinformation, it would have served their public relations and intelligence objectives far better.
Everything I've heard about this in the press makes me think the Iranians are definitely delighted by their luck, but they are exploiting it like total amateurs and the Western mainstream media is exhibiting its habitual dilettantism.
I’m sure they have a self contained navigation system that they can home too. Rarely do they sorely rely on GPS because it can be blocked.
“The drone was an early Christmas gift from O-bet on it.”
The One doesn’t give Christmas presents. Kwanzaa, maybe. Eid, for sure.
There’s only one way to find out. Send another.
RADAR TECH.: Sir. The radar, sir. It appears to be... jammed.
HELMET: Jammed? Raspberry. There’s only one man who would dare give me the raspberry. Lone Starr!
And the Queen said: If I had testicles, I could be King.
Goddam sensationalist reporting.
Depends on what it's made of. Fiberglass composite is invisible to RF. Carbon and aluminum aren't.
Backup nav systems should let it know pretty much where it is in 3D space.
I too thought the Iranian response was strange. Why publicize the fact they have the drone, especially if it was brought down with jamming technology? They would get a brief public relations bump but reveal a lot about their capabilities.
US ambassadors don’t have clearance for such knowledge, so I highly doubt his guessing is accurate.
Depends on what it’s made of. Fiberglass composite is invisible to RF. Carbon and aluminum aren’t.
We can be confident that a stealth platform does not conduct RF through the wing/body of the aircraft.
A muslim would not miss the brownie points among their own. They brought down a dreaded weapon of the great satan after all.
You still have inertial navigation...assuming that it was part of the system. Counting on GPS to always be there is a single point of failure kind of mistake. Ditto for assuming the satellite links will be there.
This whole episode is curious. Could Iranian radar even detect this thing up in the air? If not, how did they find it - did they somehow recieve and interpret the radio signal controlling the aircraft?
And, judging by its non-wrecked condition, it looks like it did not ‘crash’...so was it ‘jamming’, or was it ‘taking over the controls’?
If the Iranians/Russians are able to do this, it seems there is little they can’t do (I’m thinking satellite communications, etc.).
Wow....still hoping for a Trojan Horse scenario.
How is this possibly a good thing, sure you wrote that right or maybe I am missing your point?
Undoubtedly Pooty sent Iran a jammer.
The good thing would be our early ability to find a good work-around or even a good hard hitting counter-measure.
Who knows what the actual config of the drone nobama gave them was. Probably not setup or equipped like what nobama “thought” he was giving his bretheren, more or less just a way to feel them out. I will give our Mil and CIA more credit than to be as dumb as nobama.
I don’t care what Russia gives them, two things are in play. One, most everything Ruski Mil sucks in real life (excepting AK-47) and if Russia gave them a ballbearing, we can count on the stupid camel jocks to either file on it or pack sand in it.
The classic approach to "stealth" aims to disperse the signal striking the target in multiple directions or absorb the signal to attenuate the reflected signal. That works when the radar transmitter/receiver is in a single location. The new approach is a form of "crowd sourcing" using ganged radar receivers at multiple locations. The "ping" from a transmitter is received by multiple receivers at widely separated locations. That data is correlated to resolve a target. The short answer is that "stealth" is a technology that is nearing its useful life as detection techniques have improved. The advent of an RF rich environment creates an "ocean" through which aircraft must travel. The RF acts as a passive transmitter. If you fly an absorbing object through that "ocean", it creates a detectable disruption. The "ganged" receiver approach can resolve a target that way, albeit with "fuzzier" resolution than a standard radar T/R approach.
BTW, you "beat" the ganged radar by breaking the data links used to "gang" the receivers. That puts your "stealth" back in business. The bad guys have been using buried fiber optic cable for the data links.
Not necessarily. Fiberglass aircraft, for incidence, are almost invisible to radar and it's not because they are absorbing or reflecting RF energy. BTW, I'm also an RF Engineer, I've worked on a couple of stealth projects, specifically range testing various materials for echo signature.
As my old Granddad always told me “Son, use your head for more than just a hat-rack”
Ah, now I get it...duh, must need more coffee!
Thanks for the reply ;)
If they are Jamming GPS signal from Sats,then you not using Freq-Hoping. Also, Frequency Hopping makes it harder to Jam,not impossible you just have to Jam much wider channel. Also,where is guarantee that the Drone was using it, instead something much simpler,because its cheap.
Interesting...sounds like it takes alot of equipment and processign power to ‘defeat’ stealth. No way the Iranians did this by themselves.
Perhaps our pals the Russians have been gently stabbing us in the back.
I'd rather find out our deficiencies in a minor incident against Iran, rather than finding out how vulnerable we are in a major conflict against China.
A go home function ... must have it - it’s so logical... Here’s a take on Obama’s role in NOT getting the drone back:
I've been saying for a while to F-22 fans that if we spend a huge amount of money on it because it's stealthy, and then stealth is defeated, then we're worse of than if we build a much larger number of improved F-15s.
“Not necessarily. Fiberglass aircraft, for incidence, are almost invisible to radar and it’s not because they are absorbing or reflecting RF energy.”
This is not a fiberglass aircraft. Otherwise it would not be necessary for it to have planform alignment, gaussian shaping, edge treatments etc.
There will be 20-30dB of attenuation from ground-level sources - so satcom links, including GPS will be very difficult to jam.
If you make something out of fiberglass you either treat the fiberglass to make it non-transparent with a gradual dielectric gradient coating, or you have to treat everything inside the aircraft - a far more complex challenge. You could make a glider out of fiberglass and it would be very stealthy, it also wouldn’t have any utility or capability.
The drone was an early Christmas gift from O-bet on it
Factoring everything that is public, and the wealth of speculation, for that statement to be true means that Daniel Petraeus, director of the CIA is knowingly involved.
That would go a long way to explain a lot.
“...if we build a much larger number of improved F-15s.”
I agree with you. Stealth depreciates over time as capabilities improve. Sheer numbers and far more ordinance per aircraft is not a bad thing.
The Russians are the probably source of the technology. Pure speculation, but consistent with their demonstrated track record.
It's not carbon, either. Note the dent in the leading edge on the left side. Fiberglass, Kevlar and Carbon composites don't dent like that. There are some rather exotic plastics being used now. I'd guess it's either aluminum or one of those.
Otherwise it would not be necessary for it to have planform alignment, gaussian shaping, edge treatments etc.
There is no "one thing" that encompasses radar stealth. It's a combination of things to reduce radar return signature. Among those are overall shape, material composition, material coatings and on-board electronic countermeasures.
If you make something out of fiberglass you either treat the fiberglass to make it non-transparent with a gradual dielectric gradient coating, or you have to treat everything inside the aircraft - a far more complex challenge.
Actually, if you want to "show up" on radar in a fiberglass aircraft you use a corner reflector, although the engine produces a fairly strong return signature in certain orientations.
You could make a glider out of fiberglass and it would be very stealthy, it also wouldnt have any utility or capability.
The Brazilian Navy and Brazilian Federal Police have been using a fiberglass motorglider called the "Ximango" for coastal patrols and aerial observation for over 25 years. It's cheap to operate and it's very stealthy with no added enhancements. Since Chavez has taken power it's also been used regularly along the border with Venezuela and to monitor narcotics smuggling along the Colombian and Bolivian borders, too. Earlier this year I consulted on a project where a group of investors were considering purchasing the company that manufactures the Ximango. The goal was to develop a stealthy, long range, manned observation platform from the design.
“There is no “one thing” that encompasses radar stealth. It’s a combination of things to reduce radar return signature. Among those are overall shape, material composition, material coatings and on-board electronic countermeasures.”
There are three main elements to low-rcs stealth platforms Size, Shape, Coatings/Treatments. To the extent that you succeed in integrating all these in a successful platform you are as much controlling the signature as you are reducing it.
You still have visual, acoustic, IR to worry about.
Based on pictures of the Ximango, I’d say it’s not particularly stealthy in RCS - at least in the military sense. as a glider, it no doubt is stealthy acoustically, maybe somewhat in IR, and perhaps visually as well. Important for a drug interdiction mission, more than RCS.
A compass and a speedometer can do that.