Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Iran Claims To Have Downed Another US Drone

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the sir-we're-still-counting dept.

The Military 219

AmiMoJo writes "The Iranian military says it has captured an unmanned U.S. drone aircraft in its airspace over Gulf waters. The Revolutionary Guards said they had brought down a ScanEagle — one of the smaller, less sophisticated drones employed by the Americans. The U.S. said it was looking into the reports." (The U.S. response so far, also reported by Reuters and others, seems to be "We're not missing any drones.")

cancel ×

219 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42178675)

The Revolutionary Guards said they had brought down a ScanEagle

But the movie "Argo [wikipedia.org] " taught me that Iranian Revolutionary Guards are just bumbling idiots who can't tell their heads from their asses in several completely fabricated scenes! Larry, Moe and Curly have more wherewithal than the Revolutionary Guard! No way they could outsmart American engineering!

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (2)

singingjim1 (1070652) | about 2 years ago | (#42178717)

North Korea found a Unicorn Lair. Iran isn't too far removed from N Korea in the "truth in journalism" arena. I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but pics or it didn't.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (0, Flamebait)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 2 years ago | (#42178765)

"US isn't too far removed from N Korea in the "truth in journalism" arena."

FIFY, Citizen.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (4, Funny)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 2 years ago | (#42178933)

Oh, please. The US may lie in the press, but it's nothing compared to what North Korea does. Our media doesn't say shit like on the day Obama was born, there was a double rainbow over the White House and a cold shiver went down Chuck Norris' spine. There's no comparison.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42178999)

"Our media doesn't say shit like on the day Obama was born, there was a double rainbow over the White House ..."

It was -a- white house in Nigeria.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (4, Funny)

s13g3 (110658) | about 2 years ago | (#42179331)

No... there's a lighthouse in the middle of Prussia. A white house in a, Red Square.

I'm living in films for the sake of Russia, a kino runner for the DDR, and the 52 daughters of the Revolution turn gold to chrome.

But seriously, lyrics to old goth songs notwithstanding... I know a lot of my fellow Americans are naive about a lot of things, but comparing our media, bad as it is, to China or Russia's, much less to North Korea's, of all places, is at best naive in the extreme, and a good sign someone has been drinking kool-aid they shouldn't be.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (2)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#42179033)

Our media doesn't say shit like on the day Obama was born... a cold shiver went down Chuck Norris' spine.

I dunno, Glenn Beck does still have a radio show.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (2)

dugancent (2616577) | about 2 years ago | (#42179085)

Glen Beck isn't media, he is entertainment. Same as Limbaugh.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (3, Insightful)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#42179197)

Glen Beck isn't media, he is entertainment. Same as Limbaugh.

Good luck convincing their audiences of that.

Audiences which include some highly influential people...

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42179245)

And he's no true scotsman, too right?

Good work citizen! All our statements are true except for the lies!

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (1)

chill (34294) | about 2 years ago | (#42179597)

If nothing else happens other than he doesn't appear in a kilt, I am grateful.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (1)

TheP4st (1164315) | about 2 years ago | (#42179051)

Our media doesn't say shit like on the day Obama was born, there was a double rainbow over the White House and a cold shiver went down Chuck Norris' spine.

Stop being silly. Chuck Norris don't have cold shivers he give the media cold shivers

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (3, Interesting)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about 2 years ago | (#42179391)

Oh, please. The US may lie in the press, but it's nothing compared to what North Korea does. Our media doesn't say shit like ...

Decades ago, when I was a kid, the US press printed similar outrageous statements about China. Then I grew up, I learned how to read and write Chinese, and I lived in China for several years. Out of curiosity, I went back and read some of those reports in the original Chinese. What they actually said was NOT what the US press reported, but instead was the use of metaphor or some idiom like "raining cats and dogs" that was never supposed to be taken literally. The US press was twisting the meaning of the words to intentionally make the Chinese look stupid.

I do not speak or understand Korean, but I strongly suspect that that same thing is happening. So your example of the Koreans lying is probably really an example of the USA lying about what the Koreans are really saying.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (0)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 2 years ago | (#42179531)

Or maybe your personal experiences are blinding you to what is going on in a completely different country. I work in the intelligence community, and I can assure you that the state media does in fact put out ridiculous things and is reported by multiple independent sources.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (3, Interesting)

Seeteufel (1736784) | about 2 years ago | (#42179601)

Of course. Still the North Korean regime is outrageous. What you find stunning are the American double standards: The President publicly admits that they have a Killer drone program to assasinate persons in third countries (without permission of the third country). That would be clear case of state terrorism and I would expect the President to be taken to the International Court of Justice as a killer or at least into custody. But he doesn't even have to resign. There are no consequences. They are very public about that. No shame, no doubts. Where is the institutional resistance? Absent.

Now, the longer perspective is that this is peanuts compared to the bombine and human suffering in past (undeclared) wars. Probably it would not even be possible anymore to imagine a war in the proportions of Vietnam these days. Targeted drone killings sound more humane than Dresden and Hiroshima. Those who carry the crimes out say it was an order. And when someone bombs their base he becomes a "terrorist". That is the whole hypocrisy. So maybe the standards and principles are wrong, not the practise.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (1)

davydagger (2566757) | about 2 years ago | (#42180053)

of course.

It still bears no weight on the original argument.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | about 2 years ago | (#42179445)

The difference?

US is BETTER at it. The art of subtlety - lying through context, false assumption and obfuscation.

If you want a good view of the situation, read Glen Greenwald over a period of time, and follow FAIR's "On The Media".

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 2 years ago | (#42179587)

I've actually read several books from Norman Soloman, Noam Chomsky, and others about the media in the US. No doubt the US lies. I was just pointing out it's not in the same league as North Korea in the seer audacity and unbelievabality.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (0)

Forty Two Tenfold (1134125) | about 2 years ago | (#42179451)

No, but they do say 19 Saudis with box-cutters framed themselves into hijacking airliners and flew them into airplane-collision-proof buildings. One of them survived. And that the department of defense couldn't imagine this happening, when everyone else have been wondering for years why this scenario hadn't been played yet. [thetruthnews.info] And stuff.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (2)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 2 years ago | (#42179709)

You know, it's odd that when Saudis were involved in 9/11 everyone jumped tot he conclusion that Saudi Arabia must be involved. But when 2 Iraqis were involved with the '93 World Trade Center attack, I don't hear the same claims that Iraq must have been involved. Weird, right? Then when Iraq was tied to the '94 Bojinka plot, the '95 OKC Bombing, and the '98 Embassy attacks, it was just of series of weird coincidences.

BTW, the World Trade Center was built to withstand direct collisions with the largest plane built at the time, I believe the 717. 30 years later, planes were much bigger.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42180005)

You have Fox News and the national enquirer and people who believe in both of them!

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (1)

singingjim1 (1070652) | about 2 years ago | (#42179247)

Funny. Stupid post, but funny.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (1)

davydagger (2566757) | about 2 years ago | (#42179997)

Actually, despite how bad the mainstream American press is, they are still pretty far removed from Iran, NK, China and Russia, in "Truth in journalism"

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (2)

localman57 (1340533) | about 2 years ago | (#42178885)

North Korea found a Unicorn Lair. Iran isn't too far removed from N Korea in the "truth in journalism" arena. I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but pics or it didn't.

Gawker has a picture. [gawkerassets.com]

Personally, I think it looks photoshopped, but opinions may vary.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (2)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about 2 years ago | (#42178945)

Right, except that last time this happened Iran was telling the truth (well, part of it at least) and the US was lying.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (1)

Zocalo (252965) | about 2 years ago | (#42179283)

Yeah, "Obviously photoshopped pics, or it didn't happen", Iran!

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (0)

dywolf (2673597) | about 2 years ago | (#42179395)

you mean the supposed RQ drone?
that was unpainted?
only had the top surface visible?
and showed no signs of any damage or use? (pristine shiny skin with no blemishes that all aircraft develop even after only a single flight, even if its just from insect splatter)

that basically looked like a mockup constructed from shiny plastic?

you mean that one?

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42179115)

From what I read, they reportedly found a sign that said "Unicorn lair" (assuming they've correctly translated, and/or catered for linguistic drift over the centuries since). It doesn't mean there were ever actual unicorns thereabouts. Could've been a stuffed narwhal maybe?

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (4, Insightful)

M. Baranczak (726671) | about 2 years ago | (#42178925)

Actually, "Argo" gave the Guards more credit than they deserved. The movie threw in a lot of fictional Hollywood bullshit to make it look like the diplomats escaped with seconds to spare, with the Guards hot on their tails. In real life, the Guards were completely oblivious - they had no idea it happened until they saw it on TV.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42178995)

Actually, "Argo" gave the Guards more credit than they deserved. The movie threw in a lot of fictional Hollywood bullshit to make it look like the diplomats escaped with seconds to spare, with the Guards hot on their tails. In real life, the Guards were completely oblivious - they had no idea it happened until they saw it on TV.

That's how you feel? I would rather have my image be that we did not know about the six who escaped rather than we were bedazzled by storyboards from a movie and let them go. What a shitty Rah Rah Rah USA #1 movie ... there's a difference between the people being lost in the masses of an airport and having them right in front of your face and being too stupid to figure it out.

Re:But But But "Argo" Taught Me ... (0)

M. Baranczak (726671) | about 2 years ago | (#42179219)

What a shitty Rah Rah Rah USA #1 movie

No argument there.

I think the inter-agency conversation went like (5, Funny)

HPHatecraft (2748003) | about 2 years ago | (#42178699)

CIA: [sounding official] Uh, everything's under control. Situation normal.
Pentagon: What happened?
CIA: [getting nervous] Uh, we had a slight weapons malfunction, but uh... everything's perfectly all right now. We're fine. We're all fine here now, thank you. How are you?
Pentagon: We're sending a squad up.
CIA: Uh, uh... negative, negative. We had a reactor leak here now. Give us a few minutes to lock it down. Large leak, very dangerous.
Pentagon: Who is this? What's your operating number?
CIA: Uh...

Re:I think the inter-agency conversation went like (0)

Bacon Bits (926911) | about 2 years ago | (#42178751)

Well that certainly sheds new light on the "Aren't you a little short for a storm trooper?" line.

Re:I think the inter-agency conversation went like (5, Funny)

dkleinsc (563838) | about 2 years ago | (#42178889)

That was after another conversation that went like this:

Pentagon: What happen?
CIA: Somebody shot down us the drone. We get signal.
Pentagon: Main screen turn on. It's you!
Ahmadinajad: How are you gentlemen? All your tech are belong to us! You are on the way to destruction.
Pentagon: What you say?
Ahmadinajad: You have no chance to survive make your time. Ha ha ha ha!
Pentagon: Take off every MiG. We know what you're doing. Move MiG. For great justice!

Re:I think the inter-agency conversation went like (1, Offtopic)

khr (708262) | about 2 years ago | (#42178923)

It was a boring conversation anyway...

Al-taqqiya (-1, Flamebait)

benjfowler (239527) | about 2 years ago | (#42178707)

Muslims lie. The Iranians think they're at war with the world, and they lie and bluff repeatedly to protect their shitty theocratic regime. They'll say *anything*, because we are dirty kuffar unbelievers -- while they are weak, they'll lie, evade and deceive, but if they ever get strong, they'll crush us without hesitation, because to them, we are not quite human.

Re:Al-taqqiya (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42178777)

People lie; their religion is irrelevant.

Re:Al-taqqiya (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42178783)

Somewhat concernedly you could actually replace "Muslims" and "Iranians" with "Americans" in your post, and it would still sound plausible.

Re:Al-taqqiya (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42178823)

Muslims lie

I modded you flamebait for this. I don't necessarily disagree with the rest, but you can't make blanket statements like that. It's not part of the religion itself to carry on like this, and, much as I dislike so much of the Islamic philosophy, I have known many Muslims who are kind, honest, thoughtful and don't think ill of those outside the religion. It's not helpful to anger or to try to incite hatred in others.

Re:Al-taqqiya (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42178879)

Muslims lie

I modded you flamebait for this. I don't necessarily disagree with the rest, but you can't make blanket statements like that. It's not part of the religion itself to carry on like this, and, much as I dislike so much of the Islamic philosophy, I have known many Muslims who are kind, honest, thoughtful and don't think ill of those outside the religion. It's not helpful to anger or to try to incite hatred in others.

And in replying to this post (while logged in) even anonymously, you have undone your moderation. The xenophobe's post is now at 0 instead of its deserved -1. Time to wait for another moderator to come along and readjust.

Re:Al-taqqiya (1)

pjabardo (977600) | about 2 years ago | (#42178847)

Just like they lied when they captured a drone, apparently intact, a while ago.

Right... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42178709)

With rocket-powered unicorns from North Korea?

Even if it's true, the drone they're talking about is a commercial product -- we sell it to any ally who wants one.

I guess ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42178713)

I guess Iran got another license for Photoshop?

Re:I guess ... (3, Funny)

InfiniteWisdom (530090) | about 2 years ago | (#42179343)

Yes, the previous copy they bought is in use. They are busy wiping Israel off the map.

Re:I guess ... (1)

michelcolman (1208008) | about 2 years ago | (#42179759)

They probably just downloaded it using bittorrent. How do you think they got infected with StuxNet?

Drones? (5, Insightful)

TWX (665546) | about 2 years ago | (#42178735)

From the summary: "The U.S. response so far, also reported by Reuters and others, seems to be 'We're not missing any drones.'"

How could any one entity tell? At this point there's the CIA, the FBI, the ATF, the NSA, the SS, the regular Army, the Army Rangers, the Navy, the Marines, the Seals, the Air Force, the Coast Guard, the State Department, the DoD, Mercenaries (ie "Civilian Contractors"), and Sheriff Joe Arpaio all with drones. Could any one entity speak for all of those at this point?

Re:Drones? (5, Informative)

Bios_Hakr (68586) | about 2 years ago | (#42178953)

Combined Air Operations Center. They'll know. One agency monitoring everything including, but not limited to, commercial airliners, military flights, private planes, U(C)AVs, and even (in some cases) model airplanes and rockets.

Now, as to if the CAOC would tell Reuters anything other than the time of day, that's anyone's guess.

Re:Drones? (1)

DeathToBill (601486) | about 2 years ago | (#42178957)

I thought for a moment you'd slipped 'SS' in there as a joke...

Re:Drones? (1)

M. Baranczak (726671) | about 2 years ago | (#42179347)

Social Security?

Re:Drones? (1)

TWX (665546) | about 2 years ago | (#42179545)

Secret Service, actually. I hadn't figured on that one getting confused.

Re:Drones? (1, Insightful)

crazyjj (2598719) | about 2 years ago | (#42179001)

If you believe the CIA (and you would have to be a pretty epic moron to), they're not even flying drones over Iran. Do you really think they would admit that one of the drones that they're *not* flying over Iran just got shot down?

Re:Drones? (1)

timeOday (582209) | about 2 years ago | (#42179739)

If Iran produces photos of the drone, then the CIA will argue it was over international waters, not Iranian airspace. You read it here first.

Damn! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42179029)

...and Sheriff Joe Arpaio all with drones

If Sheriff Joe got one of his drones all the way to Iran, then I have newfound respect for the man!

Re:Drones? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42179055)

These aren't the drones you're looking for?

Re:Drones? (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 2 years ago | (#42179059)

I doubt Sherrif Joe is flying anything near Iran. Nor would the Secret Service, NSA, FBI, or ATF. The remaining entities on your list all talk to each other, all share the same airspace, and all report to one authority. This is why we have Combatant Commands. The Commander for U.S. Central Command has authority and cognizance over everything in that theater. Back in the day, like WWII, we had a War Dept and a Dept of the Navy and they didn't work together very well. Now we have one Defense Dept and regional Combatant Commands to manage interagency coordination such as this. It's still possible someone didn't manage their inventory well and I guess the U.S. might deliberately lie to cover up the loss of one small tactical UAV, but if the U.S. is saying they didn't lose one, that's the way to bet.

Re:Drones? (1)

Flytrap (939609) | about 2 years ago | (#42179091)

Wasn't the response to the loss of the first drone initially similar... that is, until the Iranian's put it on display.

So, now the waiting game starts... we want visual confirmation before we will admit to having lost yet another drone.

Re:Drones? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42179731)

It's pretty well established that what they put on display was a mock-up. While it doesn't change the fact that they did down that particular drone, it is important to point out that they were still utterly full of shit when it came to announcing the details. Remember that this is the same country which just got caught shopping a four-year-old image of a Japanese quad-copter in an attempt to show off its drone-manufacturing prowess.

Re:Drones? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42179161)

The specific quote, glossed over by many news organizations, is that the Navy isn't missing any drones. Since they were the only US entity authorized for operations in the area in question, that should cover all the bases, but other branches are in the process of checking their inventory anyway.

Isreal remains mum (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42179641)

probably should also check that skynet^W google isn't missing any drones.

Re:Drones? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42179421)

Official response to a question by a reporter: "All U.S. drones are within operating areas, not above Iran. All are using the latest mapping technology from our private partners, such as Apple."

Re:Drones? (1)

michelcolman (1208008) | about 2 years ago | (#42179783)

Actually, come to think of it, this may just be one of Apple's mapping drones that strayed off course. Wouldn't be the first time that happened...

Propaganda (1)

ShaunC (203807) | about 2 years ago | (#42178741)

The Iranian press agency is starting to remind me more and more of Saddam's Minister of Information. "The rivers are running with the blood of infidels! We have shot down another drone!"

Re:Propaganda (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42178859)

The Iranian press agency is starting to remind me more and more of Saddam's Minister of Information. "The rivers are running with the blood of infidels! We have shot down another drone!"

I just remember you the "RQ170" drone!

Re:Propaganda (2)

Ukab the Great (87152) | about 2 years ago | (#42179123)

Or they'll parade around the drone on TV giving it premium fuel and coercing it to look grateful in an attempt to show how benevolent they are to their prisoners.

Of course that's their response. (1)

JustAnotherIdiot (1980292) | about 2 years ago | (#42178811)

I'd honestly be more concerned if they actually admitted to missing one.

Re:Of course that's their response. (2)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 2 years ago | (#42178941)

It's not missing, it has stealth capabilities so advanced it can even affect inventory systems. The only known countermeasure is counting on your toes.

Re:Of course that's their response. (1)

dk90406 (797452) | about 2 years ago | (#42178971)

"Not missing any drones" == "All drones accounted for"
That may well be "200 in our bases and one shoot down and in the water at coordinates (...)."
It is all a matter of interpretation.

Re:Of course that's their response. (1)

idontgno (624372) | about 2 years ago | (#42179675)

"Not missing any drones" may mean "Yeah, it's gone, but I don't miss it. It was always a cruel faithless bitch. It's gone forever, and and I'm, like, FREE, man. Free for the first time in YEARS." <slugs down another bourbon>

Re:Of course that's their response. (1)

pjabardo (977600) | about 2 years ago | (#42179213)

They will eventually. First they will deny it. Then they will say that the drone experienced mechanical problems and was destroyed and after a while they will recognize that the Iranians really have the drone but they didn't shoot it down or anything, some random problem downed it. At least that's what happened the last time.

These arn't the drones you are looking for. (4, Funny)

DarthVain (724186) | about 2 years ago | (#42178821)

Those aren't the drones we are looking for. Move along.

Looks Legit? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42178825)

This video looks a lot more legit than the last one.

But, the displayed machine is remarkably intact.

I'm wondering if this video isn't of a Scan Eagle at an air or weapons show.

Bag limit? (2)

kurt555gs (309278) | about 2 years ago | (#42178835)

Isn't it drone season over there?

Re:Bag limit? (4, Funny)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 2 years ago | (#42179083)

Wabbit season.

Re:Bag limit? (5, Funny)

mrmagos (783752) | about 2 years ago | (#42179163)

Drone season, fire!
...
You're despicable.

Who else has drones droning around Iran? (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about 2 years ago | (#42178845)

Maybe Israel . . . ? Or maybe the UK . . . ?

Newsflash: This is not an achievement (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42178851)

Why does anyone care?

Sorry, I shouldn't be like that. So...let me get the facts straight here. A country that is well known for saber rattling without anything to back it up may or may not have shot down an incredibly slow flying, cheap, pilotless, unstealthed drone that is specifically purpose-built to get shot down so we don't have to risk more expensive planes and pilots. That's it, right?

Just out of curiosity, how are the Kardashians doing today? I mean as long as we're acting like unimpressive bullshit is news, might as well go all the way.

Let me know when they shoot down an F-22 Raptor or a B-2 Spirit. Until then, non-news. I mean hell, this is exactly why we use drones in the first place - so we don't have to risk either pilots or much more expensive planes to do this stuff. Let them shoot down 1,000 more for all I care. Just more american workers in american aircraft factories with more work to do. Nobody dies, and it benefits our domestic economy. By all means Iran, PLEASE, shoot down some more easy targets so we can mass-produce some more replacements for them.

Re:Newsflash: This is not an achievement (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42178901)

Just out of curiosity, how are the Kardashians doing today? I mean as long as we're acting like unimpressive bullshit is news, might as well go all the way.

Coincidentally, the Kardashians are still alive and well. Perhaps this was the drone with their name on it?

Re:Newsflash: This is not an achievement (1)

SilentStaid (1474575) | about 2 years ago | (#42179169)

I'd watch the 3 act play that begins with Robert Kardashian protecting the innocent ex-football star, falling from grace, and then the drone that fails to kill him before the time vortex allows him to unleash his spawn upon the world...

Oh wait, only Iran is allowed to make shit up on the internet?

Also, I smell a Tony.

Re:Newsflash: This is not an achievement (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42179233)

Sorry, man you got that wrong, "A country that is well known for saber rattiling without anything to back it up may or may not have shot down a slow drone." you are implying that the United States shot down the drone?

Re:Newsflash: This is not an achievement (5, Insightful)

canadiannomad (1745008) | about 2 years ago | (#42179291)

Let them shoot down 1,000 more for all I care. Just more american workers in american aircraft factories with more work to do. Nobody dies, and it benefits our domestic economy.

Please stop saying that building something with non-renewable resources and blowing it up improves the economy.
http://economics.about.com/od/warandtheeconomy/a/warsandeconomy.htm [about.com]
or
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window [wikipedia.org]

what's so special about downing a drone ? (1)

charlesrg (945432) | about 2 years ago | (#42178873)

Sometimes they fail on their own. Aren't they built to fail ?
Some can barely be launched.
Even the ones that should know how to operate then fail too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaIVcwVWps4 [youtube.com]

Re:what's so special about downing a drone ? (1)

Flytrap (939609) | about 2 years ago | (#42179491)

As far as I am aware, when a drone fails it crashes... or automatically returns to base
Both the first drone and the ScanEagle appear to be fairly intact. I highly doubt that we are landing drones on Iranian runways.

time for retribution (1)

Xicor (2738029) | about 2 years ago | (#42178949)

i believe it is long past the time that we should have just carpet bombed them back to the stone age.

Well thankfully... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42178979)

...they didn't capture one of our manned drones.

You can't spoof military M-code GPS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42179069)

I wish Iran would stop insulting our intelligences. You can spoof plaintext GPS in consumer hardware, but you can't spoof military M-code GPS. It is protected by RSA public key encryption, so unless the Iranians obtained the RSA private keys of US military GPS satellites they cannot fool any drone.

Or maybe Iran cracked RSA's impossibly hard prime factorization problem? Maybe they have quantum computers that did it right ?

Re:You can't spoof military M-code GPS (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42179787)

But you can intercept the signal, delay it sightly, then re-broadcast it using a directional antenna so that the drone picks up your (stronger) signal. The slight delay makes the drone think it is further away from the satellite, therefore you can make it believe that it is anywhere you want it to be (and therefore override its autopilot).

Simple Explanation (1)

hduff (570443) | about 2 years ago | (#42179159)

They shot down their own drone clone.

Pics or it didn't happen... (1)

ilsaloving (1534307) | about 2 years ago | (#42179361)

Oh wait, Iran keep photoshopping those. Ok, let's just leave it at "it didn't happen" to save everyone wasting their time.

BBC Images show an undamaged ScanEagle drone (1)

Flytrap (939609) | about 2 years ago | (#42179389)

The "captured" ScanEagle drone was clearly not shot down... and its pristine structure indicates that it didn't crash either.

Doesn't it concern everybody that Iran appears to be able to capture these drones out of the sky and land them fairly intact... with minimal to no exterior damage.

Does this give credence to Iran's claim that they are able to take over the controls of a drone and land it relatively safely without too much structural damage?

Is it possible that they could override the controls of a cruise missile as it enters their airspace... and send it back from whence it came... gasp!

I understand the logic of having a more powerful ground transmitter that overwhelms the week satellite transmitted signals used to control drones and missiles... but that is still a far cry from actually overriding the controls of a sophisticated drone and tricking the drone into believing that it is still receiving legitimate instructions.

Don't all drones have an automatic "return to base" command as soon as they lose contact with their controllers... at the very least they should have a self destruct.

Re:BBC Images show an undamaged ScanEagle drone (1)

Bieeanda (961632) | about 2 years ago | (#42179489)

No, because Iran has been caught doctoring and outright stealing images for propaganda purposes on multiple occasions. Occam's razor indicates that, as usual, they're full of shit.

Re:BBC Images show an undamaged ScanEagle drone (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | about 2 years ago | (#42179817)

They probably just bought one on Ebay.

The reality is... (1)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | about 2 years ago | (#42179417)

http://www.airhogs.com/ [airhogs.com] has a test facility in Iraq. 7 year old boys are considerably more abusive on flying drones then Iran is.

US Not the Only ScanEagle Operator in Region (3, Informative)

Koreantoast (527520) | about 2 years ago | (#42179425)

Just to politely point out that the United States is not the only ScanEagle operator in the region. Several coalition nations including Canada, Poland, Australia and the Netherlands operate ScanEagle platforms and could very well be using them in theater to support operations in Afghanistan. Also, this particular type of drone is not as big of a deal; considering it was originally designed to help fishermen find schools of fish, this isn't exactly the pinnacle of drone technology.

CIA? (1)

SwashbucklingCowboy (727629) | about 2 years ago | (#42179453)

On the one hand, the CIA is not likely to admit they've lost a drone.

On the other hand, Iran has a well documented history of lying about its accomplishments.

Hard to determine the truth here...

This wouldn't of happened (1)

Dyinobal (1427207) | about 2 years ago | (#42179757)

This wouldn't of happened if they had bought from a Gallente design instead of these knock offs.

Meanwhile in UAE... (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | about 2 years ago | (#42179789)

A UAE sheikh complained that some delinquent Iranian children had shot one of his prize eagles and is claiming 10 billion Dirhams blood money...

No big deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42179853)

ScanEagles have been captured nearly intact before, after crashing in Iraq, by irregular forces. There is no real intelligence value in the UAV itself as most parts are commercially available. This does appear to be a real ScanEagle that likely crashed into the water (note that the prop isn't damaged). It is not a US Navy or USMC UAV as it is lacking the proper markings ( US roundel and "Navy").

Self Destruct? (1)

treerex (743007) | about 2 years ago | (#42179959)

One has to wonder why these machines don't have some form of self-destruct mechanism built in for situations where they are legitimately shot down or otherwise captured.

Or perhaps it's a nefarious CIA plot to sneak a Stuxnet-like virus into Iran's C&C infrastructure:

Tech 1: We have successfully downloaded the ROM from the drone into our systems. Allahu-Akbar!

Tech 2: Huh. Why have our radar and air defense systems suddenty gone off-line?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?