Iran military downs US RQ-170 Sentinel spy drone

[shedofdread]

Hmmmm... I know ISAF said what they said but I'm not convinced I'm looking at an actual RQ170 there. Why?
1/ the colour is VERY similar to 2k primer...
2/ those yaw control spoilers - I thought most of those things used split TE devices as they're better from a LO point of view 3/ the airfoil doesn't look quite right. Especially at the tip
4/ My father always tells me "believe nothing you read and only half you see" - wise words, those.

 

[blackstar]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/stealth-drone-highlights-tougher-us-strategy-on-iran/2011/12/07/gIQAF6DkdO_story.html

Stealth drone highlights tougher U.S. strategy on Iran
By Joby Warrick and Greg Miller, Published: December 7

"U.S. officials have described the loss of the aircraft in Iran as a setback but not a fatal blow to the stealth drone program. “It was never a matter of whether we were going to lose one but when,” the former official said, indicating that the CIA had used technologies that it could afford to have exposed."

 

[TAGBOARD]

Hmmmm... I know ISAF said what they said but I'm not convinced I'm looking at an actual RQ170 there. Why?
1/ the colour is VERY similar to 2k primer...
2/ those yaw control spoilers - I thought most of those things used split TE devices as they're better from a LO point of view 3/ the airfoil doesn't look quite right. Especially at the tip
4/ My father always tells me "believe nothing you read and only half you see" - wise words, those.

I believe this is the real deal. Lockheed's been using "split slot deflectors", you see them handling in the video, on other spanloader efforts - rather than split trailing edge devices. These help with yaw control authority, without saturating the aileron channel for roll. I have not seen these in past open source images, so I'm unsure this would be faked.

 

[sferrin]

Looks to be in good condition. Could it be a mock-up?

It's unlikely they'd have thought to add a radar blocker in the inlet of a mockup. IMO it's the real deal.

 

[RP1]

they do not seem keen to show the underside

I wonder if it would reveal damage, thus increasing speculation it crashed without their help - or that they pranged it whilst trying to land. Of course, it could be that the U/C won't come down and it's sat on some ugly trestles.

Will they tell us what's in the bumps?

RP1

 

[Eagle2009]

The odd color is actually makes it look real to me since the known images of the Sentinel show it be painted a rather bland-cream color very much like what we see in the video. This actually makes me wonder about how "stealthy" the Sentinel really is. Is it possible it isn't coated in RAM and is simply made from radar transparent materials like Carbon Fibre/Composites like the RQ-3 Darkstar was originally?

And if it was a mock-up, could you really build such a realistic looking one is just 3 days? Or is it more likely the drone did sustain more damage and they have concealed it.

The damage to the right wing is visible, but still rather minimal considering..Suggesting
1. Height- while the drone is reported to have a ceiling of ~50,000 feet, doesn't necessarily mean it was flying that high at the time.
2. Lift- The design of the Sentinel is a lifting body, meaning it ran out of fuel or lost power it could glide to the ground relatively slowly.
3. Precedent- Remember, when Gary Power's U-2 was shot down it was hit with shrapnel from a S-75 missile and fell from 70,000 feet and yet was large intact when it fell. Now imagine this drone falling from a much lower-height, no SAM damage, and with a more lifting airframe. Another example would be the MQ-1 drone on display in Serbia (like the Predator reported lost because of ice-buildup on the wings). It looks to have little if any damage at all.

This COULD slow done the Sentinel enough that as long as it didn't crash into a mountain-side, it could land quite intact. However I'll be the first to admit the "thing" we see in the video is remarkably good shape even considering all those factors.

And all those reports of the Chinese and Russians wanting to have a look at this drone..I would be a little shocked if the Chinese haven't already sent over an advance team of engineers to see if there is any technology from this drone they would like to study. The Sentinel's stealth technology is likely no better than what China already has, they would likely be more interested in the flight controls and autonomous systems. The Russians will likely be the last to see any wreckage considering how "helpful" they've been to Iran lately.

Iran on the other hand would could use the stealth design elements from the Sentinel in their own UAV/UCAV programs.

 

[Gridlock]

I'm sorry but there's simply no way that thing fell out of the sky. I can only think that


A) It's a mockup based on what they did recover. Seems unlikely.
B ) It's a crashed one, repaired. Again the damage and close ups don't really support this - not for a crashed vehicle anyway. A rough landing, maybe.
C) Somehow they captured this largely intact, be that through a control link hijack or a giant net or whatever.


Evidence to disprove C welcomed...


I'm left wondering just how much proprietary US technology is still secret to those with sufficient "cyber warfare" resources. How else do you hijack a UAV?

 

[RP1]

proprietary US technology is still secret

Or perhaps there was actually little of either in this particular system?

RP1

 

[Stargazer]

Will they tell us what's in the bumps?

Maybe they do, but I don't speak Iranian so I couldn't say!

Now my two cents about the comments above:

ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF IT BEING A FAKE...
- PAINT: this doesn't look like stealth coating at all. Too smooth. Besides the guys would probably not touch it like that if it was sensitive technology.
- MARKINGS: I'm surprised that no markings of any kind can be seen on this aircraft. Surely there ought to be a few low viz notices, maybe even a roundel on the wing.

ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF IT BEING THE REAL DEAL...
- COLOR: it does look like primer coating more than real camo, but let's keep in mind that the best camo over a desert area is... well... overall sand color.
- DETAILS: Some details look too sharp for this to be guesswork.
- LOWER PART: If the aircraft was shot down, it is likely that it shows some damage and also that the undercarriage didn't open. The propagandists would rather pretend they got a craft in perfect condition rather than expose the lower part and admit they compromise all or part of the technology. Besides, if it was a fake, they would have built an all-round mockup, wheel and all.

So to me there is more reason to think it's real than not... But I could be wrong.

 

[GJ33]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/envoy/iran-releases-images-downed-u-spy-drone-171144210.html

Oepsss!
The landing gear area is covered with flags and cammo netting...But what thats a complete A/C!

 

[Orionblamblam]

And if it was a mock-up, could you really build such a realistic looking one is just 3 days?

If you don;t have to exactly replicate a well-known design... yes, it could be done. A half dozen skilled sculptors, carpenters and fiberglassers could get it done, no sweat.

Still, at this point I'd assume it's likely for real. And it's a pity that the onboard W54 self-destruct mechanism apparently wasn't installed.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Its clearly a real RQ-170 (didn't release they were that small) but its also clear that Iran had nothing to do with it crashing down. The obvious damage to the underside and apparant failure of the transverse structure (why the bottom is hidden to hide the dents and support beams) indicates it probably came down in a flat spin. But anyway its no Gary Powers and probably just the tip of the iceberg for the kind of pressure that Iran is under, which is understandable considering the kind of crap they keep pulling.

 

[Grey Havoc]

proprietary US technology is still secret

Or perhaps there was actually little of either in this particular system?

RP1

Built along the same lines as the Polecat was, you mean?

 

[Matej]

It looks real to me too. And it also supports my previous assumption that it is relatively low-tech vehicle that can be used everywhere, without risk of loosing the most valuable technology (something that killed AARS).

 

[AeroFranz]

The paint color was probably chosen to match the background luminance of whatever altitude this was flying at. I was surprised to see no planform alignment whatsoever in the panels on top of the inlet (then again it's probably not critical if you're illuminated from below) and the absence of ANY type of markings. I mean, this thing still needs people on the ground to maintain it, right?
I didn't see anything looking like lights- specifically Yehudi lights- that would have been interesting. then again I am not sure of what they would look like. Probably not like the WWII type.
All in all, the airframe itself is probably not giving away much in term of technology. I wonder about the payload, though.

 

[Eagle2009]

Indeed, the airframe is likely what Iranian aviation engineers will be most interested in, while the Chinese will be more interested in the "brains" that fly the Sentinel and the possible sensors.

Which brings us back to those "blisters". The video actually gives us the best view of the Sentinel to date and I see no other place for a SATCOM antenna than in one of those blisters..So what's in the other one?

 

[quellish]

Its clearly a real RQ-170 (didn't release they were that small) but its also clear that Iran had nothing to do with it crashing down. The obvious damage to the underside and apparant failure of the transverse structure (why the bottom is hidden to hide the dents and support beams) indicates it probably came down in a flat spin. But anyway its no Gary Powers and probably just the tip of the iceberg for the kind of pressure that Iran is under, which is understandable considering the kind of crap they keep pulling.

It's likely that contact was lost, it flew until it ran out of gas, and glided to a rough landing in Iran. It may not have been operating over Iran at all, just pointed in that direction.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Hmmm..

http://defensetech.org/2011/12/07/the-downed-rq-170-and-hezbollah/#more-15602

 

[sferrin]

Its clearly a real RQ-170 (didn't release they were that small) but its also clear that Iran had nothing to do with it crashing down. The obvious damage to the underside and apparant failure of the transverse structure (why the bottom is hidden to hide the dents and support beams) indicates it probably came down in a flat spin. But anyway its no Gary Powers and probably just the tip of the iceberg for the kind of pressure that Iran is under, which is understandable considering the kind of crap they keep pulling.

It's likely that contact was lost, it flew until it ran out of gas, and glided to a rough landing in Iran. It may not have been operating over Iran at all, just pointed in that direction.

You'd think the top of the command list would read, "In the event communications are lost RTB."

 

[Orionblamblam]

You'd think the top of the command list would read, "In the event communications are lost RTB."

Or alternatively, "head to primary target and go kerBOOOOOOM."

 

[Eagle2009]

sealordlawrence,

Except you shouldn't need two SATCOM antennas for that since drones like the Global Hawk, Predator and Reaper can do both those actions with a single antenna.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

It's likely that contact was lost, it flew until it ran out of gas, and glided to a rough landing in Iran. It may not have been operating over Iran at all, just pointed in that direction.

I'm not sure a high aspect ratio flying wing could glide in and belly land without a ground roll and some pretty severe damage to the nose and upper works. Why I'm thinking flat spin and belly flop onto the ground. Also I doubt the plane was lost because of a contact/comms failure. It would fly back to base if so. However a wider systems failure could see it depart from controlled flight and therefore crash in some random place. I'm pretty sure it would have been operating over Iran. Not much point to it otherwise.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Must've cost a fortune to get Gerard Butler and Robert de Niro to appear in that film.

LOL.

They will need Brad Pitt as an old/young/yoda Benjamin Button to fit inside the RQ-170 and steal this back FIREFOX style.

Think in Persian...

 

[RP1]

Built along the same lines as the Polecat was, you mean?

My general theory is that a lot of operational UAVs are being built with high levels of COTS or MOTS equipment and technology. They are operating in low threat environments and are being developed rapidly in a slightly ad-hoc manner. ISTR a BAES presentation listing several UAVs that had been developed and flown in the UK in a very short period of time. All this makes me suspect that the secrecy regarding the systems may sometimes actually be of the "if we don't say, then they won't know it's just XYZ". Of course all this is seperate from the big FutureWar programmes, such as X-47.

Even the mission systems themselves may not be all that sensitive. Optical and CESM / SIGINT receiver systems (sans library) themselves may not represent a particular intelligence coo for, say, the PRC. That being said, one wonders how many C-802s access will cost...

RP1

 

[RP1]

I'm pretty sure it would have been operating over Iran. Not much point to it otherwise.

IIRC the NATO press release just said "western Afghanistan". I wonder if it was being deployed to monitor cross-border traffic, specifically illicit arms transfer? It wouldn't have to be super-stealthy, as it would actually be staying away from any surveillance radars - but having low observables stops the Iranians notifying their associates that they are being monitored. It can also remain on the legal side of the border. Mostly.

What's the AD environment like in Eastern Iran?

RP1

 

[SOC]

What's the AD environment like in Eastern Iran?

Pretty much like the rest of the nation. Swiss cheese for any sort of remotely modern system. Lower altitudes around Natanz are the only really threatening regions thanks to Tor-M1E deployment. But the rest of the nation relies on archaic and aging systems that would be lucky to stop a 747 let alone a modern combat aircraft.

Why not a second satcom, one for payload transmission and one for flight controls?

Hmm. I wonder if the reason they've never released high-quality official images, even after the entire world knows the plane exists, is because it isn't exactly a traditional ISR platform. When you think of ISR you usually think of EO/IR imagery, ELINT, that sort of thing. What if one of those blisters isn't actually solid? What if it's covered in places (or someplace else on the jet is) with a mesh that appears solid from a distance or in a lower quality image, but is actually intended for air sampling? An air sampling platform would be far, FAR more valuable over Iran than any sort of traditional ISR platform.

 

[bcradio]

Some higher res stills of the RQ-170 in Iranian hands can be found here:


http://theaviationist.com/2011/12/08/stealth-pix/

 

[Abraham Gubler]

sealordlawrence,

Except you shouldn't need two SATCOM antennas for that since drones like the Global Hawk, Predator and Reaper can do both those actions with a single antenna.

These aircraft have much larger antennas than the RQ-170 and therefore much higher data rates. These bulges are quite small. Any antenna inside them would only be 30-40cm (12"-16") in diameter.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

IIRC the NATO press release just said "western Afghanistan".

They aren't going to be releasing press statements admitting to invading the airspace of another country. This is just the legitimacy cover for these operations. Everyone in NATO HQ will look away from things as soon as the RQ-170 reaches the western border of Afghanistan and disappears for 4-8 hours or so...

 

[RP1]

They aren't going to be releasing press statements admitting to invading the airspace of another country.

Quite I just didn't want to exclude the possibility that it spends its days running racetracks just on the Afg. side of the border...

RP1

 

[Eagle2009]

sealordlawrence and Abraham,

I hadn't considered the size of the antenna's tho from the dimensions given by Iran the bulges are likely closer to the Predator's antenna size no?

In other news, Iranian news agencies have published the dimensions of the RQ-170, this per FarsNews:

Wingspan- 26 meters
Length- 4.5 meters
Height- 1.84 meters

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.php?nn=9007276581

This makes the Sentinel quite similar in size to Lockheed's other flying wing of late, the P-175 Polecat.

 

[Eagle2009]

Some new still images of said drone per Mehr news:

 

[shedofdread]

On reflection, I'd like to modify my original hypothesis. What we are looking at may be partly an RQ170 and partly a mock-up. If it crashed, I can't see how it suffered so little damage so I'm thinking they got the bits they had and mocked-up the rest and then wafted it over in primer. If you look at the fuselage / wing joints, don't they look a little tatty?

To those who say 'flat-spin' - even that would cause significant damage. The only way they could've got it reasonably undamaged is if it made a controlled, forced landing and they beat ISAF forces to the recovery (tipped-off?). This I doubt because MQ9s have made forced landings and some have been recovered and some destroyed (after removal of some kit) so clearly getting to them is 'do-able'.

 

[Eagle2009]

sealordlawrence,

I too noticed that. It's possible the ring wing broke off (or nearly did) upon it's rough landing and they attempted to patch it up so it would be easier to display. It's also possible the right wing was lost entirely (hence why the officers are only looking at the left wing). To me it further hurts the theory its a mockup considering how much detail they put into it just to slap tap on one wing. So either the right was was damaged and it was patched or as Shedofdread suggested that part of what we are seeing is mockup and part isn't.

When it comes to the recovery, if the Iranian reports about how far it was inside Iran (225+km), covering such a distance in a helicopter for recovery would take close to an hour. I think it's possible Iranian agents in Afghanistan could have figured out a drone was lost and while the CIA/USAF debated on whether to retrieve it or destroy it, Iranian forces found it.

EDIT: I just noticed there is tape outside both blisters. And yet the paint color is the same between the body and wings..That would seem to suggest to me both wings may have sheered off and were patched back on the fuselege. Thoughts?

 

[bcradio]

 

[bcradio]

Is it possible the right wing has been separated, albeit cleanly? Perhaps at a junction where they come off for transport.

 

[Eagle2009]

Quote from a Guardian article out today in which they asked John Pike of GlobalSecurity.org about this drone:

"It looks like a parade float. For one thing, it looked remarkably intact for something that crashed, and the wings are drooping the wrong way.
"On the real thing, the wings go up at the end. This one's wings droop down," Pike said.

Now taking that tape on the wing roots into account..Let's say that both wings broke off during it's fall to the ground or on impact. Iran doesn't want to display a broken drone and decides to try and re-attach the wings for display purposes. Since the wings are no longer secured to the rest of the airframe properly, would they not droop down as Mr. Pike notices?

 

[SidewinderX]

Quote from a Guardian article out today in which they asked John Pike of GlobalSecurity.org about this drone:

"It looks like a parade float. For one thing, it looked remarkably intact for something that crashed, and the wings are drooping the wrong way.
"On the real thing, the wings go up at the end. This one's wings droop down," Pike said.

Now taking that tape on the wing roots into account..Let's say that both wings broke off during it's fall to the ground or on impact. Iran doesn't want to display a broken drone and decides to try and re-attach the wings for display purposes. Since the wings are no longer secured to the rest of the airframe properly, would they not droop down as Mr. Pike notices?

Also, many wings "droop" until you're generating lift. If it's it has a reasonable flexible composite structure, it's very possible that the wings have anhedral on the ground.

 

[antigravite]

It is always interesting to know which characters are on stage.


To be confirmed by farsi-speaking foljks around here, if any...


On the first video release, two military individuals are seen duscussing while examining the downed RQ-170. One is younger than the other. You can tell by the beard appearance. The oldest one seems to be General Qassem Soleimani, commander of Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp (the Qods Force commander).[/size]

 

[Trident]

Its clearly a real RQ-170 (didn't release they were that small) but its also clear that Iran had nothing to do with it crashing down. The obvious damage to the underside and apparant failure of the transverse structure (why the bottom is hidden to hide the dents and support beams) indicates it probably came down in a flat spin. But anyway its no Gary Powers and probably just the tip of the iceberg for the kind of pressure that Iran is under, which is understandable considering the kind of crap they keep pulling.

It's likely that contact was lost, it flew until it ran out of gas, and glided to a rough landing in Iran. It may not have been operating over Iran at all, just pointed in that direction.

Yes, similar to the D-21 which ended up in the Soviet Union.