Skip to comments.Is U.S. Drone Shown on Iran TV Real?
Posted on 12/08/2011 3:49:56 PM PST by gandalftb
The aircraft shown on Iranian television today likely was not the American stealth drone that crashed in Iran last week, as the Iranian government claimed, but was likely just a model, U.S. officials told ABC News.
Today U.S. officials said the drone did not land intact.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
By taking measurements from the video, assuming the men were 6 foot tall, the "aircraft" wingspan can be no more than 30 feet. The wingspan of a RQ-170 is no less than 46 feet.
Look at the seam where the wings join the fuselage. Is Lockheed Martin using duct tape or putty to cover the seam? The RQ-170 has no seam there because that's where the wheel wells are underside.
The color is all wrong. The intake grill is wrong.
If it was shot down or crashed, where's the damage?
If it was directed to land, how could they control it without crashing. They would show pictures of it on the ground with wheels down.
We know that the UAV ran out of fuel and crashed.
This isn't just a fake, it's a cheesy fake.
On the news it said the CIA or some government agency said it was ours; also that Obama didn’t want to get it back clandestinely so’s not to upset Iran. Smell test?????
I took one look at the original picture that was published, and thought it was a fake.
Yeah, like the photo shop image of rocket launches they released showing a faked extra rocket.
It is far larger than the Iranian fake.
fake?...figures, with our overwhelmed above his pay grade President
It's positively EdWoodian
Apparently those on the ground wanted to destroy what was left but were overruled by someone who did not want to enflame the Iranians. What?
My thinking would have put a JDAM on target...whther wrecked or partially intact. And if the Iranian Revolutionary Guard was already there, all the better. It's way past time we paid them back with large interest for killing US soldiers in Iraq in border incursions there.
We’ve already admitted that we are conducting UAV sorties over E Iran and the Iranians have been complaining.
The RQ-170 has an internal electronically armored homing ability to return it to base. This RQ-170 ran out of fuel, loitering over the target area.
We certainly could have cratered it with a JDAM, we would know it’s crash position because the RQ-170 would be pinging its GPS constantly, even after it went to ground. We can target and release JDAMs 35 miles up range from 35K+ altitude from any number of stealth aircraft.
I wondered when I saw the picture how it looked like it had simply landed on an airfield. I think maybe they knew one had gone down and decided to make the most of it. Alternatively they got the thing but the wreckage would not be identifiable in a picture so they made their own. A fellow I work with makes exquisite model planes out of foam dinner plates and such that are near perfect scale models. It doesn’t take him a terribly long to do it. On some he works from pictures and finds out the measurements later but already has them right. He is a not bright person and I wish he could figure out how to sell that talent.
Can this administration ever be honest about...anything?
The hussein dunce nixed the idea of destroying it.
It could be there is something on that drone we want them to have so they will think they have something real. The Pueblo incident seems to have been something like that. We allowed the Norks and thus the Russians to capture a code machine they needed that included a back door so that we could read their stuff for a long time after.
Well, the color is wrong and the leading edge looks funny.
OK everybody, what’s cheesier and more laughable, let’s vote:
Iran’s fake RQ-170
Obama’s goofball cover story
I’m trying to remember the last propaganda picture the Iranians used showing a new ‘weapon’ that they were going to use. It had the flags draped in the background (same set-up) and ,I swear, the thing they showed looked like it had been spray painted with gold. Wish I could remember that picture. It was pretty laughable and cheesy. All that was needed was the ‘wheel spinners’ and it would have been complete.
There was no time to make a model after the crash.
The putty/tape is VERY easy to explain.
They cut the wings off to quickly transport it by truck and whisk it away from the landing site before we got smart and tried to locate and destroy it.
That’s HOW you move an aircraft fast, you take the wings off by any means necessary. It has no rivets or aluminum weld lines which means it is made of a modern composite. It’s easy to just saw through it. I have a lot of experience with fiberglass and carbon fiber aircraft.
Is this a smaller scaled proof of prototype that was fitted with false electronics or "other" intel gathering data equipment to get a leg up on the Iranians?
Could this even be the Mossad?
If they punking Wackmadinajob and all his minions it would laugh for days...
Don’t change the title of articles.
All stories I’ve read say they do have one. But then, the fat lady hasn’t sung yet.
Then you're not looking hard enough.
What is the black line extending from the outboard opening of the wheel-well that extends from the forward corner of the wheel well along the bottom surface of the wing, around the leading edge of the wing and over the upper surface of the wing if not a seam?
The fact that they are masking the landing gear from view is a tip off that theirs is a fake. The landing gear would give away a fake.
Oops! The title to this article was:
“Is U.S. Drone Shown on Iran TV Real?”
The original article I started to post had the following headline:
“Iranian Drone ‘Looks Like A Fake,’” With the following link:
ABC has more credibility and I forgot to change the title. Thanks for catching that.
Ja, aber das is b4 Das Komputer flugzeug Kontrol, nicht wahr?
I know it was probably a rhetorical question, but....
Irans fake RQ-170: While certainly laughable, it's the typical, expected cheesy move of a third-rate despotic, whack job regime.
Obamas goofball cover story: It's the typical, expected cheesy move of a third-ra.....ummmm.....I'm not laughing, how about you?
Ja, natürlich, aber die Aerodynamik kann nicht betrogen werden.
at .47 in the video you can see damage on front of the wing ,looks like cardboard or paper
My thinking would have equipped it with a self-destruct device to be activated after a known interval since the last contact. IOW, if it's real, we meant for them to find it.
Oh, sorry for the poor formatting there, guess I need to use paragraph tags too (sigh).
Even if this drone is real, it’s not going be flight-worthy because they don’t have the software and hardware to start it up and get it in to the air. Once it’s rolled out of the hangar, it might be able to become tracked by satellite back here.
Your creditors are happy (China), your contractors are happy, your Taxechusetts/Calipornia congressthugs are happy to spread the pork...
What's not to like?
Good eyes, that appears to be an assembly seam, outboard of the wheel wells. The Iranians copied that seam but covering it with putty or duct tape, per the video, is just comical.
If they had the real deal the seam would be flawless like the photo.
BTW, look at the width of the aileron on the trailing edge of the wing. Compare that with the size and location of the ailerons on the video fake.
The RQ170 might have; Elevons, Flaps for Landings and Drag / Split Ailerons some for role control but more for drag on landing. Just like the B-2 and F117, But the Iranians pulled up some spoilers too....
I was thinking that there could be a moveable mass (with an additional real function) in the drone to change the cog (and attitude) without external surface changes. Or they could fool with the power. Who knows?
So, we gave them the Pueblo and the code machine knowing full well they would start using the code machine for their own purposes without knowing that we were following their every transmission via the "back door".......
Right.....makes sense to me.
Ouch, a satire hit @ Rayethon if my memory is correct, any others?
Our UAVs have gimballed thrust nozzle on their engines and obtain attitude control from that too.
However, at low speed such as landing and takeoff you need wing surface control.
Is that a giant reading a newspaper at the planes 1:00o’clock position?
The model can be purchased on line for about $30.78. It would be a simple matter to scale it up from there.
Maybe they downloaded the paper version you can build and upscaled it!
"If it was shot down or crashed, where's the damage?"
What do you make of this?:
"John Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a consulting firm, said he would have expected far more damage if the aircraft had hit the ground in an uncontrolled crash. But Richard F. Healing, an aviation consultant and former member of the National Transportation Safety Board, said many unmanned vehicles were basically gliders, with large wings relative to their weight. If it ran out of fuel, he said, a drone might come down gently and be damaged only lightly if it did not hit a tree or building."
Between Taxechusetts and California, you've got Raytheon, Loral, General Death, Northrop, Turkeys Running Wild, Teledyne, Huge Air Crash... Yeah, I know, a lot of those companies are gone but a lot of the operations are still intact. It's been a while, and I'm glad of it. :-)
I don't miss military electronic components manufacturing one bit. Gad what a wasteful cesspool of corruption that was! It's absolutely amazing anything we made actually worked in the field. Every one of those companies makes more money in selling paperwork than they do in selling hardware. Not a page of it does more than assure that the part meets spec. It does NOT mean that it will work when installed. Hell, I knew one guy who reportedly shipped empty components with fraudulent data knowing that they would fail incoming inspection at the customer end. He did it because the penalties for being late were worse than the warranty replacement plus the cost of making fakes! I almost got fired for explaining to a customer why we he was having problems with one of our parts because of the last lead bending operation. Our sales guys were trying to get them to do it and lying through their teeth in the process. One cracked lead was $3,600 bucks down the tubes and they'd do so unless you babied them. So then the customer puts them in a missile?
I hated those people. Whether the stuff works is a life and death matter and they treated it like a meaningless game. I've worked in MIL-Spec houses that weren't like that, but it seemed that the bigger they got the worse it was.
My AF job 40+ years ago was the AF version(C-47s, C-135s) of what those sailors were doing on Pueblo. One of the older guys in the unit made some suggestions.