Quote from: tvbcof on June 20, 2019, 11:42:41 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on June 20, 2019, 11:27:37 PM

Quote from: tvbcof on June 20, 2019, 10:36:00 PM

...
If the drone had it's transponder on, the track is easily available. If it had the transponder off, it was up to no good and a threat which should not be tolerated.

The nation who was flying a drone without a transponder .....

Says who? You?

Says anyone who cares about the safety of people using the airspace. That's what transponders are for. What kinds of activities would one be doing with their transponders turned off? How long would a transponder-less spy craft be permitted to buzz around over the U.S.....

Depends on where it was, what class of airspace it was it, and what altitude.

Quote from: tvbcof on June 20, 2019, 11:42:41 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on June 20, 2019, 11:27:37 PM

Quote from: tvbcof on June 20, 2019, 10:36:00 PM

...
If the drone had it's transponder on, the track is easily available. If it had the transponder off, it was up to no good and a threat which should not be tolerated.

The nation who was flying a drone without a transponder .....

Says who? You?

Says anyone who cares about the safety of people using the airspace. That's what transponders are for. What kinds of activities would one be doing with their transponders turned off? How long would a transponder-less spy craft be permitted to buzz around over the U.S. before it was neutralized (assuming it wasn't part of a self-inflicted false-flag operation like 9/11?)

Some people we know in that region are totally cool with switching off their transponders and hiding behind U.S. aircraft, Russian aircraft, and general civilian aircraft in order to get into position to launch an attack. Some people consider that to be a cowardly tactic which puts innocent lives at risk while the perps seem to feel that it is a demonstration of their superior intellect. They think, I guess, that nobody else would be 'smart' enough to think of such a thing.

No, your assumptions regarding purpose, intent, and typical usage of transponders are all wrong.

Government owned aircraft are not bound by regulations covering manned aircraft.

Second, regulations concerning transponder use is changing, with ADS-B being required by year end, and regulations regarding UAV have been in a constant state of change for twenty years.

Third, your assumptions regarding Mal-intent being a reasonable assumption if a transponder was off is nonsense.

Fourth, the obvious use of high altitude surveillance in that area is to observe and record any more ship attacks, such as the recent unprovoked attack on the oil tankers. Apparently Iran does not want that. Of course, they can't stop it, and after this we'll likely double down on observation.