What does an Iranian radar operator actually see?

originally posted by: DeathSlayer

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
a reply to: Zaphod58

Correct. BUT Military systems have a programmed Friend or Foe system which assists in identification of the aircraft.

And all civilian aircraft give a Friend signal.

Civilian aircraft do not look like military aircraft for this very reason.

Iran intentionally shot that civilian plane down.

DeathSlayer
a reply to: Zaphod58

Correct. BUT Military systems have a programmed Friend or Foe system which assists in identification of the aircraft.

And all civilian aircraft give a Friend signal.

Civilian aircraft do not look like military aircraft for this very reason.

Iran intentionally shot that civilian plane down.

Not exactly, no. They give off a transponder signal that air traffic control radar sees. Military radar doesn't always look for that signal, it looks for encrypted signals sent out by military aircraft. That's the IFF.

Military aircraft do look like civilian aircraft though. It's a lot cheaper and easier to convert a civilian aircraft into a military aircraft than it is to develop an entirely new military aircraft. They convert civilian aircraft into all kinds of military roles.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Oh, man. That's genuinely smart. I didn't expect that, so I definitely got a good chuckle out of that.

Now these are radar screens that you want to see around civilian aircraft.

Pac-3:



Pac-1/2 and Pac-3:

I think it's important to note that IFF doesn't actually label things as foe. It's either friendly or unknown, and then someone has to attribute whether it is neutral or an enemy.

Watch a show on NatGeo called;
Secrets of Area 51
Declassified information about the top secret US testing facility.

It goes into radar information, project oxcart spawn of u2 and precursor to the blackybird. The show discussed what radar signature cross section is, and explained what radars see. In detail, because the program was designed to defeat it.

Even in the first generation of radar, signatures had very specific identifiers. Last I knew, modern ie within the last couple decades modern, radars could get a cross section on a bubble bee.

The radar operator in Iran, knew exactly what they were shooting at. He even probably had to get permission for lock and also authorisation to launch once locked. Verification.

The radars pick up any deflection in its waves path. Point of origin, or an airport would be obvious because almost all radars since the cold war are overlaid on top a topographic map.

It was not an accidental shoot down. Iran has been doing it for decades yet continue to get away with it.


Ask yourselves why...

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Xtrozero

....... Especially if they don't have a lot of training.

Hold on, the best trained can make a grievous mistake as you will know, as do us all.
You see, that's the same question that is being asked by many, not just here, but also in the press, and broadcast media.

The Telegraph,
"An accidental targeting of this airliner should not have been possible as it was transmitting active identification and position data and had just taken off from Tehran airport under radar control and full contact with Tehran Air Traffic Control, according to a pre-filed flight plan."

www.telegraph.co.uk...

I use that link as an example, While many have also said that there was no reactions or reports of possible hostile incomings from Iran's borders missile defenses some distances away.

This is a case of accidental on purpose, so it's not an accident it's a mistake, training is a proven secondary.

Other considerations are the plane's transponder as a civvy should have been identified by the missile system, we don't have anything from Iran's government on that, nor have the Russians said that capability was inclusive in the modern system that Iran bought from them...aka 'bits left out'.

The message I get, is that even the experts are arguing about this..factor out the ability of the missile system's to identify the aircraft's transponder still doesn't cut the mustard when the plane was flying in a civilian flight corridor as well as it's flight characteristics, and possibly other aircraft as well since the corridor was open and being open begs the question as to why it was not closed to traffic by all the actors, it wasn't.

a reply to: smurfy

Of course they can, and I never said they couldn't.

So, we're trusting the same media that can't tell the difference between a 737 and an A380 to tell us how air defense systems work? Civilian aircraft don't transmit IFF to military systems. They broadcast their transponder ID, but only systems that are set up to read them receive the information. Military systems are set up to read military transponders. Defense systems use other methods that can identify civilian vs military aircraft.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: smurfy

Of course they can, and I never said they couldn't.

So, we're trusting the same media that can't tell the difference between a 737 and an A380 to tell us how air defense systems work? Civilian aircraft don't transmit IFF to military systems. They broadcast their transponder ID, but only systems that are set up to read them receive the information. Military systems are set up to read military transponders. Defense systems use other methods that can identify civilian vs military aircraft.

No reason to be singular then in the case of making mistakes, but I do note you often like to talk about stupid.. and reference the media in reply the media in the same vein..clearly not needed et al.

As for defense systems, media I've looked at, have also clearly been able to extrapolate the wheat from the chaff in their reporting, and they may be, (in consideration to American people's purview) mostly good sources, and those sources include for this thread, interviews with Russian , Ukraine, American military and others by media in a salient manner, with very direct and salient replies, very refreshing actually.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

He sees the rest of his adult life in prison

a reply to: smurfy

I was being singular because the evidence is that Iran and Russia have similar levels of training for their missile defense crews, meaning poor. Iran fired on two commercial aircraft in 2007 and 2008, because they were convinced that attacking aircraft would fly a commercial approach, pretending to be a normal flight.

As pointed out by one person, Iranian crews are almost certainly aware that the opening shots in a US attack are going to kill them. They're not going to want to sit around waiting for confirmation that what may very well be a commercial aircraft is actually an EA-18G launching AGM-88s at them. Given that this flight wasn't on their schedule since it was an hour late, it fell right into the time frame it would take to get there from the base in Qatar, and their training, it wouldn't be hard for them to shoot first and ask later.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: smurfy

I was being singular because the evidence is that Iran and Russia have similar levels of training for their missile defense crews, meaning poor. Iran fired on two commercial aircraft in 2007 and 2008, because they were convinced that attacking aircraft would fly a commercial approach, pretending to be a normal flight.

As pointed out by one person, Iranian crews are almost certainly aware that the opening shots in a US attack are going to kill them. They're not going to want to sit around waiting for confirmation that what may very well be a commercial aircraft is actually an EA-18G launching AGM-88s at them. Given that this flight wasn't on their schedule since it was an hour late, it fell right into the time frame it would take to get there from the base in Qatar, and their training, it wouldn't be hard for them to shoot first and ask later.

It was a hour late, not much reason to believe it wasn't the same flight and number doing all the flight characteristics it should have been doing after even the one hour delay. As for sitting around and waiting..that's your presumption thus far, not exactly well trained is it?

a reply to: smurfy

It's not just mine, I've seen several people that would know better than me say they were likely in a shoot first mentality, and that they aren't exactly the best trained.

Being late has been cited in several shootdowns over the years. An unscheduled radar return could be a civilian flight running late, or it could be a military flight that could be coming to harrass or worse. There's no way for a radar operator to know unless they're listening to ATC talking to the aircraft. It's what happened with Iran 655 and the Vincennes as the most famous incident.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: AaarghZombies

Based on their targeting ability I'd say this:

I can totally see this happening.

Oh my God die Yankee mothership motherbeaches!

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: smurfy

It's not just mine, I've seen several people that would know better than me say they were likely in a shoot first mentality, and that they aren't exactly the best trained.

Well that can't be, the media has been telling us how amazing Iran's military is. You know, like before the 1991 war with Iraq, when Iraq had the 4th best army in the world and it was gonna be a bloodbath! A bloodbath I tell you!

~20,000 Iraqi soldiers killed
Less than 300 coalition soldiers killed

He sees 72 virgins !