3 ms·
even though they are different models, Iran captured a fully intact RQ-170 back in 2011 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–U.S._RQ-170_incident https://en.m.
by foolfoolz 7y ago
even though they are different models, Iran captured a fully intact RQ-170 back in 2011
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–U.S._RQ-170_incident https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran–U.S._RQ-170_incident
- ncmncm 7y agoSimilar shape, very different aircraft.
- m0zg 7y ago"Claimed to have reverse engineered". LOL. I doubt even a US company with full access to the most advanced ITAR controlled tech and equipment could produce one, even if supplied with full blueprints, let alone "reverse engineered" something like this. The thing took cumulatively several decades to figure out. You can't reverse engineer it in a few months. USSR couldn't even reverse engineer the downed U2, a much, much simpler plane, even though at the time it was roughly on par with the US technologically. They struggled with it for a couple of years and canceled the plane. They did use the material science in some of their later planes though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_S-13 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beriev_S-13
- goatinaboat 7y agoThe article you link to suggests it was cancelled because satellites were better able to fulfil its mission.
- m0zg 7y agoThat's a solid excuse as excuses go, but remember that this was in the 60s, and spy satellites had to send down landing capsules with _film_ back then, and, therefore, had very limited usable life. They were also extremely expensive, difficult to control, and the USSR wasn't really known for its brilliance in optical tech.