US shoots down second Iran-made armed drone over Syria in 12 days

The one thing I didn't know about the F-14 was that the Pilot with the most ATA kills was Iranian, but, that also makes perfect sense. Iran uses them to engage ATA, the US Navy avoided that whenever possible. The other thing I suppose I didn't know was about the race car driver that used brake fluid designed for the F-14, but that's less about the plane and more about the engineering teams.

As far as the Qaher goes, there are three things that immediately stood out to me. The first being is that the plane is clearly modeled after the F-22. They can claim it isn't, but the design, and the shape/hull angles clearly emulate the F-22. Second, the downward pointing wingtips. That would actually expand it's radar profile, not diminish it. The engineers surely would know this, so the decision to do it anyway is a curiosity to me. Lastly, all 5th and 6th gen fighters use Thrust Vectoring, Delta Canards, or both. The Qaher 313 uses neither. This severely diminishes maneuverability and minimum turn radius. Again, I'd have to ask why?

I understand the plane is in testing, and if these are things that are yet to be added, I can understand it. I'm still very confused by these three things though.

 

I am not an expert, but my understanding is that the Qaher is designed for quick take off and to fly low beneath radar. And that is why its wing is shaped as it is. It helps it in this regard, even if it otherwise diminishes its stealth qualities.

 

I suppose that's a possibility, but you'd be taking an awful risk by developing an aircraft with a flight ceiling of under 5,000 feet.

 

Iran's military doctrine and emphasis is almost the exact opposite of America's. Our forces are designed to complement and accentuate Iran's asymmetric and guerrilla tactics, aimed at offsetting Iran's obvious disadvantages against a technologically superior military like the US. The Qaher is supposed to fit that doctrine and those tactics.

 

I don't disagree, the nations that generally win engagements come up with new and unique ways of fighting. It's still a risk, but it's a risk that could very well pay off for the way an Iranian War is fought. If you want to look at some other risks, take the F-35. There's no telling whether that... thing... is going to be worth all the money that was poured into it. In fact, I fully expect the 6th Gen Su-47 to obliterate it in pretty much every category.

 

So we are in a nation we have no right, according to international law to be in, and we shoot down drones and planes, with the plane being Syrian. Well, the nation I served in the late 60s is without a doubt a rogue and criminal nation who thinks international law is for other nations but not us. This is clear, and we are a clear and present danger to every other nation on earth.. Heil Hitler seems appropriate. Crimiinals are criminals no matter where you find them. And I live in a criminal nation that has no resemblance to what our founders created, and our constitutional is only fit to wipe our arses on. This is a irrefutable truth. We are not a constitutional republic anymore but an oligarchy run by criminals who we keep sending back to DC. The stupid, dumbed down, American people are complicit in this criminality just like the german people under hitler were complicit. We went from a principled good nation to an evil empire. And so many americans seem to love it. I just hope there is some eventual justice in this cosmos. I hope there is a creator of judgment so the guilty truly get what they got coming.

 

Sure do. The freedom and human rights indexes for that country have always sucked under the Assads.

It's not their fault their people rose up against them? Heck, the Lebanese rose up against Assad - this ain't Bashar's first rodeo.

And let me ask you this: When's the last time you saw a democracy that respects the human rights of its citizens wind up like Syria is today?

That's been going on for years. You'll have no problem finding the reports...

Which bombing was that?

I don't doubt that the Iranians and their proxies are fighting ISIS now, and I'm sure they've been fighting Jabhat Fatah al-Sham (formerly known as Jabhat al-Nusra) and other Sunni jihadist groups for quite some time.

That's an interesting theory.

I'm particularly curious how things are going to work out for the Syrian Kurds. They've carved a nice little enclave out for themselves and I presume it links up to the autonomous zone in Iraq. I'm not sure the Turks are going to allow that to persist...

 

International reaction to the National Coalition was generally positive. The six member states of the Gulf Co-operation Council (GCC) were first to recognise it as "the legitimate representative" of the Syrian people, followed by France, the UK, EU and US.

In December 2012, 100 countries at the Friends of the Syrian People conference in Marrakech also recognised the coalition. Absent were Russia, China and Iran, which have backed President Assad or blocked action by the UN Security Council.

Despite its international support, the National Coalition has suffered many of the problems experienced by the SNC, on which it is still dependent operationally and organisationally, including internal divisions and outside interference......snip~

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-15798218

Thus ends that BS argument that we are in a nation we have no Right to be in. What confused you as to who was recognized as the Legitimate representative of the Syrian People by over 100 countries?

Hows that International law for other Nations, but not us.....look now? Now who Invited the US in again?

 

I think the future will probably lie, not so much with manned aircraft, but UAVs (drones) which are being developed with greater sophistication and capability. Both the US and Iran are working on drones which would be able to win dog fights against manned aircraft. And the great thing about drones is that they can be produced and operated with much less costs and without the risk and worries of protecting a pilot's life.

Incidentally, here are a couple of videos showing Iran's version of the RQ 170, which Iran brought down in 2011 by commandeering and without causing damage to it. Iran quickly reverse engineered the drone, even though the US said Iran wouldn't be able to do so. And a large number of those drones are now built and being operated by Iran. However, unlike the Shahed 129 and the Mohajer drones which are a regular presence over Iraqi and Syrian skies and which are supplied to Hezbollah, these Iranian stealth drone have not been seen in combat yet. That is also true of a couple of other drones Iran has developed which are quite interesting but seem to represent the kind of technology Iran doesn't want risking in foreign hands at this stage.
Video of Iran's Saeghe stealth drone in flight tests in 2014


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-replica-of-us-stealth-rq170-sentinel-drone-flying-in-video/

Video showing mass production of the stealth Sagheh drone.

 

We are there to fight ISIS, who have taken your city. Raqqa is factually not in Syria, at this moment. It is an ISIS city, that is not under your control. Being upset that we are in Raqqa, fighting the people that took it from you, is akin to the French being mad when we fought Germans in Paris.

If you want to attack us directly, in our fight against terrorism, bring it on. It would finally give us the excuse we need, to undo Obama's failed policy in Syria. This war has gone on far too long, and the only thing keeping it going, is Assad being the leader.

 

What's the point of tanks again? Also, why are you developing weapons that humans have to drive? The future is in unmanned vehicles.

 

Where do they store the suicide vests?

 

That is the future. But for the present, Iran needs to also strengthen its regular conventional forces.

In the meantime, this video will show you some of Iran's robotic equipment for its ground forces, including unmanned tanks and armored vehicles.

 

I disagree that Iran needs to bolster tank capability. They are already one of the most powerful nations, in that region. Nothing you can ever do will match US power, but you don't need that much anyway, for your goals.

 

Without the US, Wahhabi Arabia and company would not count for spit as far as being able to pose a threat to Iran. But with the US, besides America's own forces scattered throughout the region in various bases, Iran also needs to worry about the forces of its allies and sidekicks. In this regard, and to put things in some perspective for you, Wahhabi Arabia (aka Saudi Arabia) already - even before Trump's mega deal with them - was not only the world's largest importer of weapons but had the 3rd highest military budget in the world after only the US and China and either tied or ahead of Russia and everyone else.

In the meantime, talking about unmanned military equipment in my last post, Iran also has a vigorous unmanned military program for its naval forces. One example is Iran's Ya Mahdi fast attack boat. As the US regularly confronts Iran's fast attack boats in the Persian Gulf as part of its policy and posture to intimidate Iran and see if Iran blinks, this boats will eventually completely change the equation.

 

This is a cool video showing Iran practicing its swarming tactics using small attack craft, missiles, and special forces against a mock up of a US aircraft carrier which Iran built for these exercises.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/06/21/downing-drones-syria-us-iran-war/103063850/
Downing of drones in Syria threatens to draw U.S., Iran further into war

p.s.
I don't think it would be a pretty war for either side, certainly not for Iran, but almost as certain, neither for the US which - unlike Iran - would be involved in a "war of choice". The latter something that makes all the sacrifices, costs, risks and dangers which the Israel lobby in cahoots with the Wahhabis want to impose on America all the less inexplicable. The latter and their mouthpieces, of course, will want to pretend it will be a cake-walk, putting much of their propaganda effort in that direction. But that is something that no one who has any clue about what war with Iran entails could possibly believe.

 

25% of Syria has escaped the country or dead, no one knows how many were unable to vote because of the conflict but its obvious that holding elections in such reality is a cruel joke only Arab doctators can pull.
Such a leader is not ment to be deposed but eliminated - if that's the objective, I'm sure everyone knows his regime will secure Damascus residents and its elimination means massacre so removing Assad entirly is not considered, that doesnt mean he is legit.

 

If I was an American I would pay much more notice to the Iranian boy that's raised to hate America the way only Muslims can than the Israeli or Saud lobby, if a war does break it will be because Iran actions in the ME given they declared themselves to be a bitter enemy of America in spite of Obama sucking up to them.

 

Iraq war started for the wrong reasons and had catastrophic results we know, Iraq had about the same ethnic religous problems Syria has, Iraq was dealt with a swing that was meant to end terror in the region and it backfired but in Syria no one touched till Assad called in support from Lebanon and Iran and by that time it was too late because the FSA crumbled, that Senetor Mc'cain hugged a few Jihadists and gave them some rifles is not what made a diffrence, however if the American president stepped in early and threatened Assad I think the Russians would have worked to replace him soon and this war could have end, the reality is no one wanted to touch Syria just make a mess of it by supporting on and off diffrent groups for a bit of intersts and abit of morality but actually making things worse, makes me wonder if Saddam was not touched and his men (that form ISIS today) were left alone - would the world be safer if they had modern weapons and better orgenized ? what if the "Spring" reach them ? no way to know not doing anything is better than doing something.

 

The Pentagon loonies are trying to out-macho president Putin. Pathetic, isn't it! Just like children who are budding bullies? I remember a recent thread entitled 'which is the most dangerous country in the world?' but I never got around to reading it . . . was The Good Ol' U S of A at the top? If not it should be.

I expect someone will accuse me of 'working for the Kremlin' now -

 

The US would have a hostile nuclear Cuba with such an approach, the Russians love their children too, its not a reason to allow a genocide in Syria go unchecked.

 

You can't attack our ships with your little rubber rafts dude. We maintain air superiority over our vessels. You won't get close enough to harm them, in an open war scenario. All you got is perhaps the initial sneak attack, then you are done. As for carriers, you can't get within miles of those, as everyone knows.

This is the problem with Iran. They think because they are powerful by the standards of the region, that they are somehow a match for the most powerful military in the history of mankind. It's just a ridiculous notion, in my view.

 

Iran builds various large naval vessels, such as the Damavand and Jamaran frigates, the Besat and Fateh submarines, or the Persian Gulf destroyer it is building, but what worries the US navy isn't Iran's larger vessels but its smaller fast attack boats along with Iran's anti ship missiles and midget submarines. Basically, these smaller vessels fit into Iran's naval doctrine in terms of how to best fight the US using swarming tactics. The US invested in countering these tactics and has begun employing various systems to defeat them, but US military officials and analysts recognize that the US navy would still be vulnerable to such tactics.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/12/washington/12navy.html?mcubz=0

Incidentally, this was a few months ago in case some of you think Trump and Obama make any difference.

This report was from last year, although the incident was in 2015.