Iran claims to have downed a US UAV

a reply to: Zaphod58

Because it isn't designed to penetrate an opponents airspace, so it's not stealthy, and it doesn't have self protection. ...

Okay, so why did it? (not grilling you personally for the answer, more a rhetorical question)

... It's more or less an unmanned U-2, designed to fly slow and high, with a fairly large RCS. Anyone with a SAM system can shoot it down once it gets with in range.

All the more reason to ensure it doesn't ever come into range of a SAM site, wouldn't you think? I'm just not okay with throwing hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money in the toilet. I mean, here is yet another example of something being where it shouldn't have been and getting destroyed, incapacitated or stolen. This is just Iran too, what if this was China, or Russia? We'd be out of hundred million dollar UAV's overnight.

It comes down to accountability for taxpayer funding, and with incidents like these I am not seeing enough of it. Oh sure, some (probably fictitious or low level scapegoat) head will roll somewhere over this incident, but it keeps happening. UAV's, ships, fires, hackings, massive cost overruns, catapults, oxygen systems, propulsion systems, lost secrets, captured technology, etc. It all adds up. Heck, a U-2 only costs $70m, and to the best of my knowledge only a couple of those have been shot down in what, about 50 years?

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: odzeandennz

Yep. That's the reason you let them remove it while making it abundantly clear that if they fail to do so in a timely fashion you will shoot it down.

But if you don't like the heat of American War machines closing in on you, you certainly don't shoot one down. Did you actually think this statement through?

I don't think you know what you're talking about.

a reply to: XCrycek

International airspace has borders with state airspace. We breach Russias and they breach ours all of the time. For some reason they don't try to shoot us down on every breach and we don't try to shoot them down either.

Any way you slice this, Iran is itching for war. It's the only reason for such a disproportionate response.

a reply to: odzeandennz

When Iran has a few missile sites taken out later today and are less capable of defending themselves from another encroachment because of it, then you'll realize I certainly did. Of course, you already realize the logic of what I said is sound, you just don't like it.

At times like this a lot of misinformation flies around about how "badass" Iran's military is.

I'll leave this here for anyone who cares to read.

a reply to: Dfairlite

Russia did shoot down a Korean 747. Russia probably knew it could get away with it.

Russia shot down a U-2 over the USSR.

It has shot at SR-71s over its territory.

Nvm

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: odzeandennz

When Iran has a few missile sites taken out later today and are less capable of defending themselves from another encroachment because of it, then you'll realize I certainly did. Of course, you already realize the logic of what I said is sound, you just don't like it.

Why would the US take out a few missile sites today or any other day? Sounds like the big boy in the playground is just prancing around the playground looking for a bit of action...

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: XCrycek

International airspace has borders with state airspace. We breach Russias and they breach ours all of the time. For some reason they don't try to shoot us down on every breach and we don't try to shoot them down either.

Any way you slice this, Iran is itching for war. It's the only reason for such a disproportionate response.

So Iran should let US penetrate its airpace with spy drones because USA let's Russia breach its airspace?!

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: XCrycek

International airspace has borders with state airspace. We breach Russias and they breach ours all of the time. For some reason they don't try to shoot us down on every breach and we don't try to shoot them down either.

Any way you slice this, Iran is itching for war. It's the only reason for such a disproportionate response.

Iran is not the one "itching" for war. This sounds highly implausible and bizarre. In some alternate reality, the only reality where Iran would be "itching" for war would be where it's got some secret weapon and/or capability/capabilities that it has hidden from the US/the world and is prepared to use against any aggressors/the US.

This, however, is not an alternate reality...

originally posted by: Moley
So it seems certain that Iran has deliberately destroyed a valuable US asset. The BBC are reporting that it was a US Navy MQ-4C Triton.

Is it time to take out the missile battery that fired it, and possibly one or two others? Seems a fair and proportional response.

So that we are all clear, if the us were to declare war on Iran, Iran would retaliate against Israel's civilian population. Iran has sk many missiles and so much artillery that it could overpower the iron done system in minutes. 100,000 dead Israeli in the first day is NOT a price worth paying. It's why Israel hasn't just declared war itself. Plus Iran has chemical weapons. Enough to kill all of israels crops and animals. If Iran thought that it was going to be destroyed it absolutely would do it.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: odzeandennz

When Iran has a few missile sites taken out later today and are less capable of defending themselves from another encroachment because of it, then you'll realize I certainly did. Of course, you already realize the logic of what I said is sound, you just don't like it.

Yes and we can do this because of the power bestowed upon America by the Gods of war...

The US strategically has peace bringing bases all around small defenseless countries ready to bring democracy to the Middle East...


Under Trump, not even Lil Kim nor Maduro are afraid of the threats by the war machine... Our allies doth dwindle.

The tides are turning.

a reply to: roadgravel

Sure it's happened from time to time. Other than the Korean plane the others were war planes, not recon. It has provoked various levels of response.

a reply to: odzeandennz

Bwahaha, that's got to be the most ridiculous thing I've read in quite some time. A lot of wishing going on in that.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk

Okay, so why did it? (not grilling you personally for the answer, more a rhetorical question)

If it did, and sorry but I'm not just going to accept anyone's word that it did, there could have been any number of reasons. The airspace is tight there, so it could have accidentally strayed across the line, the GPS could have been spoofed causing it to go off course, there could have been an issue with the GPS antenna, or several other reasons.

All the more reason to ensure it doesn't ever come into range of a SAM site, wouldn't you think? I'm just not okay with throwing hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money in the toilet. I mean, here is yet another example of something being where it shouldn't have been and getting destroyed, incapacitated or stolen. This is just Iran too, what if this was China, or Russia? We'd be out of hundred million dollar UAV's overnight.

It wouldn't be in range of China or Russia, unless they parked an S400 on their coast, with the extreme long range missiles. As for here, the Straits are very tight airspace. It could have been over a neighboring country, and still been in range of Iranian missiles. The problem is that you have to monitor the seascape in the area, and there's no way to do it easily or safely. A UAV is exactly the right platform to do it.

It comes down to accountability for taxpayer funding, and with incidents like these I am not seeing enough of it. Oh sure, some (probably fictitious or low level scapegoat) head will roll somewhere over this incident, but it keeps happening. UAV's, ships, fires, hackings, massive cost overruns, catapults, oxygen systems, propulsion systems, lost secrets, captured technology, etc. It all adds up. Heck, a U-2 only costs $70m, and to the best of my knowledge only a couple of those have been shot down in what, about 50 years?

More than a couple, unless we're only looking at US flown aircraft. Somewhere around ten total were shot down allowing for all piloted flights.

UAVs are designed to go into dangerous areas, and operate. No, that doesn't mean into Iranian airspace, but places where Iran or another country can reach out and hit them. Far better to lose an unmanned aircraft, even if it does cost a couple hundred million, than risk a P-8A and crew of 9, or a P-3C with a crew of 11. Unless we're going to pull every asset we have back into home waters, and never use them again, there's going to be risk in everything we do. Accidents and incidents will happen. The Straits of Hormuz are not an easy area to operate in, because airspace and waters overlap, leaving a very small area to operate that's considered international. Incidents like this will happen as long as just about anyone is there.

a reply to: Dfairlite

No we don't, and no they don't. Both sides enter the ADIZ, which is not national airspace. It's an identification zone prior to entering national airspace, but is still considered international airspace.

With the surveillance capabilities on the Triton and the more common mission of being a blue water/naval asset. Could it have been monitoring tankers in the area, maybe in response to threats or as a precaution?

a reply to: roadgravel

The SR-71 never overflew Russian airspace, and was never shot at by the Russians. By Russian equipment in other countries, yes, but not by Russians.

There was also a Korean 707 shot down after it blatantly violated Russian territory.

a reply to: XCrycek

Besides the IRGC saying so, what evidence is there that it violated Iranian airspace?

a reply to: blackbird9393

That's exactly what the Triton is designed to do.