Hacker News Reader

Comment by kbob | Hacker News Reader

Oldest mistake in the book: since the adversaries dress differently, speak a different language, and are a different race, assume they must be idiots.

The WSJ reporter fell into the same trap: Iraqis and Afghans couldn't have figured out how to tap a video feed on their own; they must have had Iranian help.

View on HN

This is the mistake that allowed the Serbs to shoot down a Stealth bomber; aircrews communicating on open channels.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-10-26-serb-stealth_x...

"At times, they acted like amateurs," Dani said, listing some ways the Serbs managed to breach NATO communications security, including eavesdropping on pilots' conversations with AWACS surveillance planes.

A bit of a nitpick, but no stealth bomber has ever been shot down. That was a stealth fighter.

Agreed, but philosophically, is it still a stealth fighter if the guy the flying it is stupid enough to effectively turn off some of the technology?

OK, so they shot a smaller, faster moving target. The original point still stands.

It was an F-117. Yes, most "F" aircraft are air-to-air fighter aircraft. However F-117 is mostly used to attack ground targets, so it's "F" should be more like an "A" (If you want to nitpick that is ;-) )

Actually, they are both subsonic aircraft and have a very similar top speed. The F117, however, has a larger radar cross signature, which makes it appear as a larger aircraft than the B2 in a radar return.

Closest thing I can find to a cite is [1] which indicates they have similar sized returns, about the size of a hummingbird (!).

[1] http://www.answers.com/topic/stealth-technology

It's been a decade since I read much about it, but this site states that the F-117 has a radar cross section of 30 square centimeters while the B-2 has an RCS of 14 square centimeters.

http://www.deagel.com/Long-Range-Attack-Aircraft/B-2A-Spirit... http://www.deagel.com/Strike-and-Fighter-Aircraft/F-117A-Nig...

The F designation was used to get more highly qualified pilots. (Lots of pilots would rather fly an "F" than an "A")

Though no-one knows for sure, it's also been rumored that the fighter designation was done as a security measure to hide the true purpose of the aircraft, or that the F-117 designation existed in early planning documents and was simply never changed once the aircraft became a reality.

It's also not the first attack aircraft to carry a fighter designation; the F-111 long-range attack aircraft also carried that designation (though in that case it was because the aircraft was originally meant, in part, to fill an Naval air-defense fighter role).

No need to shoot down a stealth bomber; they fall out of the sky on their own. Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZCp5h1gK2Q

According to Wikipedia, that is how you turn $737M into smoke.

leading some officials to conclude that militant groups trained and funded by Iran were regularly intercepting feeds.

The officials came to that conclusion, not the WSJ. Also, see @pmorici's answer.

Well by that reasoning the reporter should think the Iranian's are idiots as well so what you're saying makes no sense.

Iran has nuclear technology now, so they're no longer idiots, just evil dobaddies.

Nobody claimed this was logical or reasonable...

> Iran has nuclear technology now, so they're no longer idiots, just evil dobaddies.

As opposed to other "smart" countries that have nuclear technology but are noble dogoodies?

I rather think it was the classic pointy-haired boss mistake. "I can't understand this video feed stuff, so those towel-heads shouldn't be able to either!"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com