Japan Chooses F-35 For Next Generation Fighter Jet - Page 4

#31 12-22-2011, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ze-Jamz

Agreed
I suggest we get off the 'it cannot be hacked routine' though..even jamming a so called secure signal is bad enough.

A signal being secure has nothing to do with its ability to be jammed. That's like saying you can hack a person's computer, but instead all you did was cut the power to his house.

As for "it doesn't look like it crashed" Read this.

http://ko6bb1.multiply.com/journal/i...._._._Old_news

They have been careful to not show off the underside of the UAV and it's pretty obvious from some of the pictures that one of the wings has been reattached, had putty applied, and repainted to look intact.

High Resolution Photo: http://cencio4.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/3.jpg (notice the giant seam in the wing)

It seems to me that it was a crash landing that left the unit intact.

Ze-Jamz · #32 12-22-2011, 05:12 PM

Yea sry should of worded it differently, I understand that.

What I'm saying is being able to jam the signal is bad enough.

Yes I have seen the damage you talk about, still doesn't seem like a crash though to me..more like an attempted botched landing hence why I'm saying IMO there was a bit more involved than just a signal being jammed in the first place.

We're never know anyhow..not for a while

trashcanman · #33 12-22-2011, 06:46 PM

http://info.publicintelligence.net/U...larWarfare.pdf is an interesting read. Section 2.4.4 deals with GPS jamming that I posted about and not the comms links

Quote:

2.4.4 Threat to Position, Navigation, and Guidance

There is a wide range of methods that a determined adversary can use for
attacking RPA guidance and navigation systems. The report mentions here only three
categories of threats without going into the details:
Small, simple GPS noise jammers can be easily constructed and employed by an unsophisticated adversary and would be effective over a limited RPA operating area.

GPS repeaters are also available for corrupting navigation capabilities of RPAs.

A US Air Force study identified this as a potential threat. If you would prefer to believe what employees of the manufacturers who make handsome profits from these programmes say then that's up to you

#34 12-22-2011, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ze-Jamz

Yea sry should of worded it differently, I understand that.

What I'm saying is being able to jam the signal is bad enough.

Yes I have seen the damage you talk about, still doesn't seem like a crash though to me..more like an attempted botched landing hence why I'm saying IMO there was a bit more involved than just a signal being jammed in the first place.

We're never know anyhow..not for a while

Jamming is not hard, and if done properly is impossible to counter. This isn't representative of their abilities, only that the Russians have lent them some of their jamming hardware. Another analogy would be the guidance signal being like a conversation between two people in a language you have never heard of. What the Iranians most likely did was scream really loud next to the conversation. The didn't hear anything the two were saying, they didn't control what either of them said, all they did was drown out their conversation.

Again the damage issue:

That UAV is designed for high fuel efficiency and flight stability, two things that are important for long loitering times over its intended targets. When it's fuel load is expended that thing is going to be very light. Given it's shape, it is going to have excellent glide characteristics, and the on-board avionics are going to keep it level. As it runs out of fuel it's going to start a very controlled glide towards the ground. Maybe only one time out of 10 it might land as intact as it did, (which shows signs that a wing was severed).

Iran is very, very far behind in electronic intelligence and lacks the technical expertise and the equipment to hack a drone. This is not meant as a racial slur against them, it's just the environment in the country since the revolution has not been very conducive to training people in these matters. They are catching up, but are still very far behind.

Viking · #35 12-23-2011, 06:56 AM

Yea, that's exactly the way that I would program an expensive ultra secret drone spying over other nations territory.

1: If we lose connection fly in circles until reestablished.
2:If still no connection wait for fuel to run out, still flying in circles.
3:When fuel is out glide carefully to ground and try to make a good landing. NOT!

I think it would be: If lose contact fly home! If cannot go home self-destruct!

And about all the rednecks in bars claiming they "know" what happened but cannot tell: BS!
If you are cleared to get that kind of info you don't share! Not even with family or friends! PERIOD!

Viking

swiss · #36 12-23-2011, 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by speculum jockey

Jamming is not hard, and if done properly is impossible to counter. This isn't representative of their abilities, only that the Russians have lent them some of their jamming hardware.

You do realize what that means?
If you can jam a drone you can also jam cruise missiles, smart bombs possibly even airplanes - worst case even direct where you want them to fly to.
This is the stuff James Bond movies are made of and much worse than the loss of a drone.

Quote:

I think it would be: If lose contact fly home! If cannot go home self-destruct!

I think all spy equipment built during the past 60 years had this routine - but not the this new high tech gadget, odd.

Quote:

If you are cleared to get that kind of info you don't share! Not even with family or friends! PERIOD!

Something I can confirm, my uncle worked for the BND he never spoke about his job - and we really tried hard; made him drunk etc. - not a chance.
All we could get in those years was the fact he once instructed Mujahideen on Stingers.