6

There is currently contradicting information regarding to the location where the USAF RQ-4 Global Hawk was shot down by Iranian forces, with the US claiming it happened over international waters and Iran that it was within their territory. Guardian info graphic about the drone's location1

Given the drone's size and cruise altitude, I suspect it will be hard to get confirmation of either account by any independent party. However there is one more part to Iran's account:

It is obvious the US has painted itself into a corner, as is evident by the display of the wreckage in Tehran after it was retrieved in Iranian coastal waters off the Kouh-e Mobarak area of Hormozgan Province. This has nailed the American lie, after initial denial that no drone was downed that its aircraft was in international airspace when shot down by Iran.
Soon the devilish American habit of uttering untruth all the time will be further exposed as the dedicated Iranian divers are in the process of recovering the heavy parts of the giant RQ-4A Global Hawk from the depths of the Strait of Hormuz – of course within Iran’s 12 km nautical coastline.

Source: Kayhan

Is the wreckage they have on display authentic? And is it true that they are diving for heavier parts near the coast? And if they actually were retrieving the things from international waters, how well would the US be able to prove it?

  • 3
    @Piro that might be a question for aviation.SE. At any rate according to the US information, the drone wasn't even heading in direction of Iranian space. What I'd find more plausible is that the debris was carried ocean-wards by currents in the strait, and ended up near the Iranian coast to be picked up by them. Presumably there's some scientific information available about the currents. But it would be all moot if Iran was simply lying about where they have the wreckage from, or even showing fake wreckage. – leftaroundabout Jun 22 at 8:14
  • 2
    I am voting to close because this because it is a question about current events, and is therefore not appropriate for Skeptics.SE. The evidence that surrounds this question is in large part just claims and counterclaims from the two governments, which cannot be proven either way. A definitive answer is just not possible yet. skeptics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/2868/… – BobTheAverage Jun 22 at 15:29
  • 2
    @Shadur It was a long range intelligence surveillance drone, so probably long range surveillance. – BobTheAverage Jun 22 at 23:33
  • 1
    @Shadur What was Travon Martin doing a that close to George Zimmerman's house, if not heading into or out of it? – Acccumulation Jun 23 at 3:31
  • 2
    @Mark The glide ratio of a plane is measured assuming perfect conditions, only no propulsion. When a missile blows up part of your plane that's not the case anymore. A really big plane such as a Boeing 747 could maintain a glide ratio higher than 1 after being hit in a not too critical part of the mainframe, but for small planes they are going to go down faster than they move sideways. – Rekesoft Jun 25 at 10:10

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .