It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Lonewulph
It depends on what they shot at it with that determines whether this was a fail or not. Gun shots aren't anything like in the movies. They are extremely hard to pull off, and there's a chance of having target fixation and flying into the target you are supposed to be shooting at. The gun has an extremely limited range, and a narrow window to hit with. Unless you have an advanced HUD that does your lead computing, for you, you're going to miss 8 times out of 10.
Add to that the fact that a Predator is a relatively small target, compared to any fighter or bomber that most pilots train to shoot down, and you have a miss.
Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Beavers
Except that our instrument of war was in international airspace where it had every right to be. What if it had been an RC-135, or a C-17? Or even worse, an A320, or 737? They had every right to fly a Predator in international airspace, wherever they wanted to, without it being shot at.
Originally posted by spy66
If everything is legal in international watter. It can't be illegal to shoot at US drone operating there. Because US laws don't apply there either.edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)
They had every right to fly a Predator in international airspace
I think the Predator only carries four Hellfires
Originally posted by sonnny1
Well Well.
Itchy trigger fingers.
Iran doesn't want war, but isn't this an act of aggression?
be interesting in hearing the Iranian version of events
Unarmed doesn't mean "incapable of carrying weapons". An F-15 flies unarmed all the time over the US. So does a B-52, a B-2, a B-1, etc. That doesn't mean they CAN'T carry weapons, just that on that particular flight, they weren't carrying weapons.