Did Iran “shoot down” a US stealth drone? That’s the question of the day. While the political consequences seem the center of most articles, the big questions bugging me are:
- The drone may have been brought down intact. This means the bleeding-edge tech of the RQ-170 Sentinel may be in good enough health to be reverse engineered by Iran (or other interested parties, which is every nation). My previous post about The Drone Wars touched on the topic of drone customers buying just one drone in order to reverse engineer it. For Iran, they certainly would not have been able to purchase one of these drones, but now they have one at no cost. Talk about low cost R&D.
- The drone may have been “jammed.” This illustrates the potential of future techwars, which I already wrote about in: Electromagnetic Pulse Weaponry: Forget science fiction, read the news. In addition to getting the stealth drone for free, the tech used to bring down the plane may show the Achilles heel of remote operation of drones. Pulse weapons and hacked controls could indeed render drones useless, making the old fighter pilot the superior technology, for the time being. You cannot override the controls if a pilot holds the actual stick rather than a joystick in Nevada.
- A proxy cyberwar in Iran already seems to be happening. Recall the Stuxnet virus, which was a sophisticated targeting of Siemens software that controlled the centrifuges of Iran’s nuclear program. Fast forward to the possible “jamming” of a “stealth” drone. Two points here: a stealth drone should not be detected. Second, the capability to jam the stealth drone shows advanced tech not just in the United States, but also in Iran (and Iran’s tech partners, whoever that may be).
These three points came to mind immediately, and this event is reminiscent of the 1960 U-2 spy plane incident (when Russia took down a United States U-2 and after the US denied the spy plane, the USSR produced the American pilot Francis Gary Powers – oops).
America has a feeling of technical superiority, and I share the sentiment, since DARPA and the idea machine of the US seem unparalleled. When the Stuxnet virus incident occurred, I heard a lot of chuckling and “serves ‘em right” rhetoric within the walls of the US. There was a sense of good old American can-do inventiveness. Indeed, stopping the proliferation of nukes is a cause to celebrate. However, the United States does have the potential for losing this technical edge, particularly if other countries can reproduce and jam stealth drones. Moreover, Stuxnet showed the way for every country, and the idea of a virus attack on the US instilled much fear recently when it appeared an attack had occurred on an Illinois water facility. In other words, be careful what you wish for, and apparently what you smile about, too. Having the edge today may not be the case tomorrow. Science and technology travels fast in the internet age, and this may be particularly true in countries where the educational system values math and science over football.
For a terrific read on cyberwar and “the next war”, check out P.W. Singer’s book Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century.
If you like future tech, check out my novel Accelerating Returns. The Law of Accelerating Returns states that technology in the coming century will be so “rapid and profound it represents a rupture in the fabric of human history.” On one side will stand those who welcome radical advancement in technology, versus those on the other side who attempt to subvert and destroy it. This is the story of the coming struggle.
Image: Wikipedia
Follow Me…