Trump Assassination of Iranian General Soleimani - IRGC Counterstrike

I have my doubts that somehow Mossad messed up the plain and forced Iranian hand to admit they did it, especially because they denied it at first.

Could be that they had no other or better options at the moment. Feel sorry for Iranians, they turn out to be the losers of this conflict.
 
Sigh, I am quite disappointed with people here. ;-)

With all that is discussed here on the forum… no one has suggested the idea of a cosmic connection! And by that I mean how do we not know that this was not an “other” worldly accident? Anything from an air burst to an asteroid. Something so strange it freaked out trump and his minions which was very obvious to me in his weird stuttering press conference.

Something so strange that the Iranians swallowed their pride(rarely happens), and took the blame?

Didn’t the C’s say somewhere that near the end all the parties involved will bring their forces to the party ready to go but some strange "event" freaks them out? Or am I mistaken?
 
Since the data comes from "flightradar24.com", this must refer to the ADS-B beacons that every plane is sending out every second, containing position data, altitude and so on

Apparently only about 50% of commercial planes worldwide have the newer ADS-B beacons, that are more or less newer versions of transponders that ATC doesn't have to 'interrogate' but that continually send their data.

Anyway, the Tor 1 missile system that supposedly shot down the plane was equipped with a "friend/foe" system which basically means that the system was able to fully identify the plane for what it was: a Ukrainian-flagged commercial airliner.

Why it was shot down is still a mystery and there are missing and conflicting data points about whether or not there was communication from the plane after the missile struck, or if it 'went dark' after it took that sharp right hand turn.

Maybe we'll get more data as time passes, or maybe not.
 
Last edited:
Something so strange that the Iranians swallowed their pride (rarely happens), and took the blame?

No eyewitnesses, no reference to any kind of 'air burst' or meteorite. The plane was quite low (about 1,000m above ground level), so surely houses and individuals in the area would have noticed something. When you shoot down a plane, and know you shot it down, and know that a bunch of other people know that you did, it's not surprising that you'd admit it.

Didn’t the C’s say somewhere that near the end all the parties involved will bring their forces to the party ready to go but some strange "event" freaks them out? Or am I mistaken?

I think you're probably mistaken, at least in your interpretation of whatever text you're referring to.
 
One interesting news bit that I think wasn't touched upon in detail was the claim of the Iranians at the beginning that the flight recorder/black box was severely damaged, so much so that retrieving information from it was apparently either very difficult or impossible. If that claim was true, the question naturally arises why and how it got damaged in that way. As far as I know, it is pretty difficult to destroy a black box in such a way, since they are built to withstand very heavy forces. Has anyone followed up on that?

I came across this information through this short segment of the initial Iranian reactions/statements by the Head of the Iranian Civil Aviation Organization Ali Abedzadeh. Unfortunately I couldn't find any video on the internet that translated it into english. This segment however is translated into german:


The only full versions of his statements I could find are in the following two videos not translated into any other language:



The translation of what he said there out of the german version above is following soon.
 
Last edited:
Der Absturz könnte eine Ablenkung für den Mord sein. Der Bezug zur Ukraine ist merkwürdig. Es gibt jetzt so viele verdeckte Orte, dass Logik fast unmöglich ist. Vielleicht halten wir uns zu sehr an die einzelnen Details, um den Mann hinter dem Vorhang nicht zu sehen. Auf den ersten Blick wirkt das Verhalten aller Beteiligten sehr verrückt und ohne logischen Zusammenhang. Wer profitiert von dieser Situation und wer wird geschädigt? Wer hat welche Ziele? Sollte Trump auf der Seite Israels stehen, erinnert mich der gesamte Prozess an eine Übernahme im Sinne der Ukraine. Ukrainisches Flugzeug - stiller Hinweis auf den Regierungswechsel in der Ukraine. Dazu mit iranischen Bürgern. Dann wäre auch der Vorfall in der Botschaft sinnvoll. Ein Regimewechsel innerhalb des Iran war nicht möglich, vielleicht wurde der Irak missbraucht. Jetzt gibt es diese Massenproteste gegen die iranische Führung. Unterstützt von den USA und Israel. Geht es nur um einen Regimewechsel der anderen Art?

Übersetzt mit www.DeepL.com/Translator (kostenlose Version)
 
The translation of what he said there out of the german version above is following soon.

Here is all that he said translated out of the german translation (with DeepL translate) of the segments of his press conference mentioned above in the first video. The part about the black box I bolted:

"What has been proven to us and what we can say with certainty is that this plane was not hit by missiles. As I said last night, the plane was on fire for more than a minute and a half and was still flying and the position of the plane shows that the pilot had decided to turn back. [...] Boeing has not confirmed this [reports of missile attacks on the plane]. This has been claimed by US politicians and if this is expert opinion they should report it to the ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation), which they are obliged to do, because these reports must land on the ICAO website for the world to see. But this was put into the world by politicians."

Regarding the videos that have recently appeared, he said

"Yes, we have seen these videos - videos that were distributed from there. There were eyewitnesses on the scene who were filming. And they also confirm that the plane was on fire for more than 60, 70 seconds. I looked at these videos and compared these coordinates with what happened on site. But that these videos confirm that the plane was hit by something is not scientifically tenable, that the plane is hit by something and then can fly on for 60, 70 seconds."

"Since the plane was badly damaged, it is difficult for us to retrieve information directly from the black box. We need special software and hardware. We have that software and hardware here in Iran, but if we can't retrieve the information because of the damage to the black box, we will definitely ask other countries for help. This is a normal procedure that is common all over the world. Twelve teams of experts have been formed to investigate this incident. Any information or analysis must be collected by these teams and then handed over to the head of the investigation so that the final result can be announced. But we must remember that three days have passed since the crash and many big tasks have been done in the last few days, most of them have already been done. We have entered into the actual investigation of the incident. This takes time and depends on the speed with which we can retrieve the data from the FDR and CVR (Flight Data Recorder and Cockpit Voice Recorder). Everything depends on it, this can help us a lot. The CAO (Iranian Civil Aviation Organization) cannot speculate. The reason for the accident is still not clear to us, but as we said, it cannot have been caused by missiles".

Here is the german version for reference:

"Was für uns erwiesen und wir mit Sicherheit sagen können ist, dass dieses Flugzeug nicht von Raketen getroffen wurde. Wie ich bereits gestern Abend sagte, stand das Flugzeug länger als anderthalb Minuten in Flammen und flog noch immer und die Position des Flugzeugs zeigt, dass der Pilot beschlossen hatte, umzukehren. [...] Boeing hat dies [Berichte über Raketenangriffe auf das Flugzeug] nicht bestätigt. Dies wurde von US-Politikern behauptet, und wenn dies eine Expertenmeinung ist, sollten sie dies der ICAO (Internationale Zivilluftfahrt-Organisation) übermitteln, wozu sie verpflichtet sind, denn diese Berichte müssen auf der Website der ICAO landen, damit die Welt sie sehen kann. Aber das wurde von Politikern in die Welt gesetzt."

"Ja, wir haben diese Videos gesehen – Videos, die von dort aus in Umlauf gebracht wurden. Es waren Augenzeugen vor Ort, die gefilmt haben. Und diese bestätigen auch, dass das Flugzeug mehr als 60, 70 Sekunden lang brannte. Ich habe mir diese Videos angeschaut und diese Koordinaten mit den Geschehnissen vor Ort verglichen. Aber dass diese Videos bestätigen, dass das Flugzeug von etwas getroffen worden sei, ist wissenschaftlich nicht haltbar, dass das Flugzeug von etwas getroffen wird und dann 60, 70 Sekunden weiterfliegen kann."

"Da das Flugzeug schwer beschädigt wurde, ist die direkte Abfrage von Informationen aus der Black Box für uns schwierig. Wir brauchen spezielle Soft- und Hardware. Wir haben diese Soft- und Hardware hier im Iran, aber wenn wir aufgrund der Beschädigung der Black Box die Informationen nicht abrufen können, werden wir auf jeden Fall andere Länder um Hilfe bitten. Das ist ein normaler Vorgang, der überall auf der Welt üblich ist. Zwölf Expertenteams wurden gebildet, um diesen Vorfall zu untersuchen. Alle Informationen oder Analysen müssen von diesen Teams gesammelt und dann dem Leiter der Untersuchung übergeben werden, damit das Endergebnis bekannt gegeben werden kann. Aber wir müssen beachten, dass seit dem Absturz drei Tage vergangen sind und in den letzten Tagen bereits viele große Aufgaben erledigt wurden, das meiste wurde bereits getan. Wir sind in die eigentliche Untersuchung des Vorfalls eingetreten. Das braucht Zeit und hängt von unserer Geschwindigkeit ab, mit der wir die Daten vom FDR und CVR (Flight Data Recorder und Cockpit Voice Recorder) abrufen können. Alles hängt davon ab, das kann uns sehr helfen. Die CAO (iranische Zivilluftfahrt-Organisation) kann nicht spekuieren. Der Grund für den Unfall ist uns immer noch nicht klar, aber er kann - wie wir schon sagten - nicht durch Raketen verursacht worden sein."
 
Der Absturz könnte eine Ablenkung für den Mord sein. Der Bezug zur Ukraine ist merkwürdig. Es gibt jetzt so viele verdeckte Orte, dass Logik fast unmöglich ist. Vielleicht halten wir uns zu sehr an die einzelnen Details, um den Mann hinter dem Vorhang nicht zu sehen. Auf den ersten Blick wirkt das Verhalten aller Beteiligten sehr verrückt und ohne logischen Zusammenhang. Wer profitiert von dieser Situation und wer wird geschädigt? Wer hat welche Ziele? Sollte Trump auf der Seite Israels stehen, erinnert mich der gesamte Prozess an eine Übernahme im Sinne der Ukraine. Ukrainisches Flugzeug - stiller Hinweis auf den Regierungswechsel in der Ukraine. Dazu mit iranischen Bürgern. Dann wäre auch der Vorfall in der Botschaft sinnvoll. Ein Regimewechsel innerhalb des Iran war nicht möglich, vielleicht wurde der Irak missbraucht. Jetzt gibt es diese Massenproteste gegen die iranische Führung. Unterstützt von den USA und Israel. Geht es nur um einen Regimewechsel der anderen Art?

It looks like you copied, unfortunately, your original text. Here is your translation:

The crash could be a diversion for the murder. The connection to the Ukraine is odd. There are so many hidden places now that logic is almost impossible. Maybe we're too focused on the details to not see the man behind the curtain. At first glance, the behavior of everyone involved seems very crazy and without logical connection. Who benefits from this situation and who is harmed? Who has what goals? If Trump is on Israel's side, the whole process reminds me of a takeover in the spirit of the Ukraine. Ukrainian plane - silent reference to the change of government in Ukraine. In addition with Iranian citizens. Then the incident at the embassy would also make sense. A change of regime within Iran was not possible, perhaps Iraq was abused. Now there are these mass protests against the Iranian leadership. Supported by the USA and Israel. Is it just about a regime change of the other kind?
 
Der Absturz könnte eine Ablenkung für den Mord sein. Der Bezug zur Ukraine ist merkwürdig. Es gibt jetzt so viele verdeckte Orte, dass Logik fast unmöglich ist. Vielleicht halten wir uns zu sehr an die einzelnen Details, um den Mann hinter dem Vorhang nicht zu sehen. Auf den ersten Blick wirkt das Verhalten aller Beteiligten sehr verrückt und ohne logischen Zusammenhang. Wer profitiert von dieser Situation und wer wird geschädigt? Wer hat welche Ziele? Sollte Trump auf der Seite Israels stehen, erinnert mich der gesamte Prozess an eine Übernahme im Sinne der Ukraine. Ukrainisches Flugzeug - stiller Hinweis auf den Regierungswechsel in der Ukraine. Dazu mit iranischen Bürgern. Dann wäre auch der Vorfall in der Botschaft sinnvoll. Ein Regimewechsel innerhalb des Iran war nicht möglich, vielleicht wurde der Irak missbraucht. Jetzt gibt es diese Massenproteste gegen die iranische Führung. Unterstützt von den USA und Israel. Geht es nur um einen Regimewechsel der anderen Art?

Übersetzt mit www.DeepL.com/Translator (kostenlose Version)

German:

Hallo @Nachtweide, könntest du bitte in Zukunft was du hier schreibst zumindest mit DeepL oder Google translate auf Englisch übersetzen und es nicht nur auf Deutsch hier posten? Du wurdest in diesem Thread bereits schon einmal darauf aufmerksam gemacht. Hier wird in Englisch kommuniziert, es wäre also rücksichtsvoll von dir gegenüber den anderen die auch verstehen wollen was du schreibst. Vielen Dank.

English:

Hello @Nachtweide, could you please translate what you write here in the future at least with DeepL or Google translate into english and post it here not only in German? This has already been pointed out to you in this thread before. Here we communicate in English, so it would be considerate of you towards others who also want to understand what you write. Thanks a lot.
 
Based on the gist of this article,

Western intelligence claims about the airliner shoot-down by Iran have been proven correct - after the Iranian authorities owned up to the disaster.
[...]
One unfortunate outcome is the undeserved boost it may give to the credibility of Western intelligence and their media tools. American intelligence in particular is an international disgrace given the lies and fabrications it has spun to enable countless US criminal wars. However, having got the cause right about the Iranian shoot-down this week, there is an exasperating danger that Western intel and its media organs will exploit propaganda value.
[...]
It's a double shame that Western intelligence which has brought so much conflict and grief may now be emboldened to double down on their nefarious work from seeming to have been vindicated about the air crash.
. . . one has to wonder how come they were so positive so fast that Iran had shot the plane down before any confirmed details or investigation had occurred? They knew because they had been fed the cause practically before the event even happened? Something smells . . .

And yes, Trump's usual demeanor during his address regarding the assassination seemed a bit 'off' although if you really listen, he's saying my (U.S.) ___k is bigger and more powerful than yours, so that part wasn't really different. His delivery wasn't flawless as there were a couple of stumbles which is what seemed unusual for him.

The web of intrigue on this one is going to take a while to figure out, if that is indeed possible.
 
Moon of Alabama has some informative comments based on the IRGC statement explaining what went down. This could clear up why exactly the plane was mistaken as a missile, and why the friend/foe system seemingly didn't work. In short, this unit was not integrated with the wider air defense network, with only its own basic radar and a basic radio communication system:


What we know from our investigations and from what our friends explained is that, well, at that night, for example from [Tuesday] evening, the level of preparedness was at wartime conditions; the highest alert level communicated by the integrated air defence to all systems. Under such circumstances, a number of air defence systems was added to Tehran’s air defence ring. The first system – which was behind the incident – was deployed in Bidganeh in western Tehran.
An integrated air defense system provides a full picture of the air situation to all connected units. Fixed radars, defense missile units and command and control centers are connected by secure landlines, not by radio.

But the mobile Tor M1 system responsible for shooting down the Ukrainian airliner was added as a stand alone system. It is an relatively old system. Its operators only had a voice radio connection to other parts of the network. If they had a data connection at all it was also via radio and with very little throughput. The system did not have the full picture of the air situation. Its own radar has a maximum detection range of 25 kilometer (16 miles). In most practical situations it will be a lot less than that. Bidganeh, where the system was deployed, is some 30 kilometer away from Tehran airport. The Tor operator did not know that a civil airplane had just taken off:
At several stages, the Alert Level 3, which is the highest level, is communicated and emphasized to the entire network. So all air defence systems were at highest alert level. For several times, these systems including the one involved in the incident were notified by the integrated network that cruise missiles have been fired at the country. For a couple of times, they receive reports that ‘the cruise missiles are coming, be prepared’.
This is the normal 'fog of war' situation in which misinformation, or electronic interference, causes false alarms and where confusion sets in.
So you see the systems were at the highest alert level, where you should just press a button. They had been told cruise missiles were coming, and the air defence unit engaged in this incident and fired a missile. Now we have arranged an interview with this operator, which will be released soon as part of the plan to publicize the issue. He says in this interview that “we requested for several times that the country’s airspace be cleared of [civilian] flights.’ At the Alert Level 3, this is normal; such requests are made; well our dear brothers didn’t follow up the issue for certain considerations. So the planes fly despite the wartime situation.
This the major political issue, not a military one.

Iran's strategic intent after the U.S. assassination of its national hero Qassem Soleimani was to project defiance to the U.S. Its revenge missile barrage on the U.S. base in Iraq was fired despite harsh U.S. warnings and threats of war against Iran.

The pin point hits on the selected targets, mostly maintenance shacks, was a warning that demonstrated Iran's capabilities. I think it was necessary and worth the risk.

The political level decided that by leaving the airspace open and by showing normalcy it would further its strategic objective. Closing the airspace would have allowed the U.S. to claim that Iran is fearing its response and that it had shown weakness. The decision to not close the airspace was, I believe, strategically correct. But it had tactical costs which turned out to be high.
In those moments when the incident happens, this air defence unit realizes that there is a target – which it identified as a cruise missile – at a distance of 19 kilometres. [...] Given the information sent to this operator – that it is a wartime situation and a cruise missile has been fired – this poor guy identifies it as a cruise missile.
The Tor M1 was developed in 1991. The radar signals it generates are shown on an analog tube-screen. The radar's 'hits' on the screen are difficult to discriminate. At best one has speed, height and direction of a target and must draw conclusion from that. The Boeing jet broadcast the usual civil ADS-B signal but one has to expect that a U.S. cruise missile can and would do the same. The speed of the still climbing Boeing 737 was about 250 knots or 460 kilometers per hour (286 mi/h). That is within the range of the speed of a typical cruise missile. The plane needed a bit less than 8 seconds to fly one kilometer. That left little time for the Tor operator to decide and react.
Well at such a situation, he was obliged to contact, get approval. This is where this operator makes the mistake; but at that moment, his communication system was apparently disrupted – whether because of jamming systems or the high traffic. For that reason, he fails to contact [his commanders]. He had 10 seconds to decide; he could hit or not hit [the target]. Under such circumstances, he decides to make that bad decision; he engages, the missile is fired, and the plane is hit at this place. Then it returns through this track, and here’s the point where it hits the ground.
Radio communication can be unreliable. The people at the other side of the operators call may have been talking to someone else or could not react immediately. Air defense personal is trained to always presume electronic interference by enemy forces. The U.S. has publicly bragged about its cyber-attacks on IRGC systems. U.S. air attacks typically come behind a wave of electronic countermeasures.

Under these circumstances - highest possible alarm level, current warnings of hostile cruise missiles, unknown target flying towards a presumably military objective, lack of communication, little decision time - the operator of the Tor system did what he was trained to do.

...

But there still remains this question:


Additionally, the plane's appearance on his screen should have in no way surprised him - it was the TENTH flight out of Tehran's Khomeini Airport that night. Prior to Flight 752, the last flight movement there was the departure - from the same runway and in the same direction - of QR8408 at 05:39 local time.

Why then was the air-defense operator surprised by this flight?

I guess we'll have to wait until the interview with the operator is released. A couple possibilities: this guy had just started his shift, and hadn't personally seen any of the previous flights. Or with the previous ones, a similar scenario may have played out, but he was able to get radio confirmation not to engage the target. We also need to know the exact timeline of events. When was the announcement made about potential cruise missiles? When had they requested airspace be closed to civilian traffic? Were they at any time under the mistaken impression that airspace HAD been closed?
 
Last edited:
German:

Hallo @Nachtweide, könntest du bitte in Zukunft was du hier schreibst zumindest mit DeepL oder Google translate auf Englisch übersetzen und es nicht nur auf Deutsch hier posten? Du wurdest in diesem Thread bereits schon einmal darauf aufmerksam gemacht. Hier wird in Englisch kommuniziert, es wäre also rücksichtsvoll von dir gegenüber den anderen die auch verstehen wollen was du schreibst. Vielen Dank.

English:

Hello @Nachtweide, could you please translate what you write here in the future at least with DeepL or Google translate into english and post it here not only in German? This has already been pointed out to you in this thread before. Here we communicate in English, so it would be considerate of you towards others who also want to understand what you write. Thanks a lot.

Sorry, I now know where the problem is. I opened the translator page. If I then enter the English text, it automatically translates into German
 
Moon of Alabama has some informative comments based on the IRGC statement explaining what went down. This could clear up why exactly the plane was mistaken as a missile, and why the friend/foe system seemingly didn't work. In short, this unit was not integrated with the wider air defense network, with only its own basic radar and a basic radio communication system:




But there still remains this question:




I guess we'll have to wait until the interview with the operator is released. A couple possibilities: this guy had just started his shift, and hadn't personally seen any of the previous flights. Or with the previous ones, a similar scenario may have played out, but he was able to get radio confirmation not to engage the target. We also need to know the exact timeline of events. When was the announcement made about potential cruise missiles? When had they requested airspace be closed to civilian traffic? Were they at any time under the mistaken impression that airspace HAD been closed?

Yeah, I don't buy MOA's take. Someone "spoofed" his radar or somehow hacked the ADS-B signal to make it look like something else.
 
Edit: just saw your post, Joe, and the following is about spoofing technology, and it may not be reality, yet not dismissing the possibility either.

{from article}
Additionally, the plane's appearance on his screen should have in no way surprised him - it was the TENTH flight out of Tehran's Khomeini Airport that night. Prior to Flight 752, the last flight movement there was the departure - from the same runway and in the same direction - of QR8408 at 05:39 local time.

Why then was the air-defense operator surprised by this flight?

I guess we'll have to wait until the interview with the operator is released. A couple possibilities: this guy had just started his shift, and hadn't personally seen any of the previous flights. Or with the previous ones, a similar scenario may have played out, but he was able to get radio confirmation not to engage the target. We also need to know the exact timeline of events. When was the announcement made about potential cruise missiles? When had they requested airspace be closed to civilian traffic? Were they at any time under the mistaken impression that airspace HAD been closed?
Yes, a lot of questions remain with answers that are just simply human or system error. The operator may have believed exactly what was there to be seen, and it either was or was not a threat, is a question.

As for the "TENTH flight out of Tehran's Khomeini Airport that night" - and given the system described, its age and manual operations, two things occur. One, this system would have been tracking planes night after night for possibly years, so it would be pretty regular occurrence as understanding (unless a new operator). There would be protocols to follow regardless. Two, western forces (Israel particularly), would know millimeter by millimeter the Iranian landscapes weapons systems and countermeasure systems regarding their strengths and vulnerabilities. They might even know some of the codes. This was an old manual system, they would know this, they would have run both aggressive and defensive scenarios?

In regards to the world of countermeasures, being on the outside, we may likely be way behind the eight-ball by years or decades, so there is possibility that sophisticated orchestration to confuse was employed during this period. What could that look like?

Perhaps this (Radar Spoofing):


{briefly}
Degrading Enemy Radars
Radar jamming is a form of electronic countermeasures (ECM), designed to degrade the effectiveness of enemy radar systems. Usually, this is done by emitting radio signals at specific frequencies which impair the ability of radar systems to accurately detect and depict objects in the operational environment. This can generate “noise” in the radio spectrum which will confuse or mislead the enemy and affect their decision-making accordingly.

Popular Types of Radar Jamming

There are multiple types of noise jamming. The simplest is Spot Jamming, which involves concentrating jamming power on a single frequency. In previous eras, spot jamming could be very effective when the military understood which types of radars enemy forces were likely to be using and on what frequencies. While spot jamming can be effective against a specific frequency, all the enemy had to do is switch to another frequency, as frequency-agile radar systems are designed to do, and the jamming was rendered ineffective. As this became feasible, more sophisticated techniques were needed.

Barrage and Sweep Radar Jamming techniques were developed in response to this challenge. Sweep jamming focuses the full power of the jammer one frequency at a time while allowing for quick changes between frequencies. Barrage jamming involves jamming more than one frequency at a time, which certainly “covers more ground” in a manner of speaking, but the power of the jamming is lessened since it is dispersed across multiple frequencies at once. Related techniques like Pulse Radar Jamming have been developed which add an additional layer of protection for friendly forces by obscuring the location from which the jamming signal is emanating.
[...]

The Even More Devious - Radar Spoofing

Radar jamming as a concept is simple, and dangerously effective when it works. Radar spoofing is arguably even more devious. Spoofing is not so much about interfering with the functionality of radar systems, but rather tricking them into displaying inaccurate information to deceive enemy forces. Spoofing systems like the Digital Radio Frequency Memory Units (DRFM) recently ordered by the US Navy can confuse the enemy by replaying captured pulses with a delay, making a target appear to move when it may not be. These units can also trick enemy radars into perceiving more than one target.
[...]

The Next Generation of Radar Jamming & EW Tech

To close the electronic warfare gap, the Department of Defense is investing in new radar jamming technologies. But in the 21st century, it’s not going to be enough to have defense systems in place only. The military must have effective offensive electronic warfare capabilities as well. This is where the Next Generation Jammer (NGJ) comes in.

The NGJ will replace the AN/ALQ-99 system currently integrated into the EA-18G Growler, the Navy’s specialized electronic warfare aircraft. The US Navy recently awarded a $1 billion contract to Raytheon to develop and manufacture the NGJ for the EA-18G. The NGJ is an AESA-based system designed to not only provide awareness of enemy radar and electronic attacks but to jam enemy radar and targeting systems on multiple frequencies at once, especially surface-to-air (SAM) missile systems.
[...]

And perhaps they can spoof a system into seeing an aircraft signature other than it really is?
 
Yeah, I don't buy MOA's take. Someone "spoofed" his radar or somehow hacked the ADS-B signal to make it look like something else.
It's a possibility, but I wouldn't go that far until Iran or the investigation provides some evidence. If it was spoofed, I'm guessing there should be records from the AD system showing this was the case. So far at least, the Iranians haven't suggested that the operator was seeing a spoofed signal. Hajizadeh put the blame on the operator for making the identification:
In those moments when the incident happens, this air defence unit realizes that there is a targetwhich it identified as a cruise missile – at a distance of 19 kilometres. [...] Given the information sent to this operator – that it is a wartime situation and a cruise missile has been fired – this poor guy identifies it as a cruise missile.
He refers to the actual Tor M1 as a "system" in his speech, so by "air defence unit" he is probably referring to personnel in that first sentence. If it WAS spoofed, that might come out in the investigation, in which case the Iranians will be somewhat exonerated in the court of public opinion - having taken full responsibility when it wasn't actually their fault. But until then, there's just not yet enough evidence to say with any degree of certainty.

Also, I haven't been able to find an answer, but does the TOR M1 even have the ability to receive and track ADS broadcasts?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom