I'm sorry but your explanation of Iran finding out the course of the UAV is as unlikely as them actually taking direct control of the bird.
Mr. Ash,
I was not an explanation. Just an opinion about how the events could have been transpired.
Lets assume that Iranians know exactly when each UAV is scheduled to fly every day for the next year.
It does not have to exactly. Within radios of 30 km will suffice for a heavy burst of X-band radar to break up the SAT link.
Their flight schedule does not give them any additional insight on their mission, route, altitude, speed, point of entry or exit. And it's not like Kandahar is close to Iranian border where they can make a presumption of all the points of entry.
It had to be taken off from some where, Kadahar is not too far away for RQ-170's mission radios. Also you are neglecting the "inroute" observers scattered around western Afghanistan. As I mentioned earlier this tactic have been studied, practiced and done with Serbs.
And even, if Iranians knew when the UAV was expected to reach Iran in order for them to deploy their jamming device they needed to be able to detect the radar evading machine.
True, but you are allocating too much of credit to Sentinel's low radar observability, although there are multiple LO characteristics built into the airframe but it is meant or built to be as stealth as F-117 or B-2, it is a tactical reconnaissance bird, not strategic. Just look at the leading edge of wings close to the wing roots, it resembles the 747's wing configuration than razor sharp leading of F-117 or B-2
The difference between RQ-170 and F-117 is that even if your radars can't detect the F-117 you can still hear it and see it in the air and direct your missile toward it. But if you can't see the RQ-170, can't hear it and can't detect it with radar then how are you going to disrupt its electronics with a brief pulse of electromagnetic radiation?
Comparatively Sentinel will leave larger RCS than F-117 due to reason I mentioned above.
Also why can't you hear it? According to the literature available in the net, it has identical jet engine as the engines installed on CRJ-200.
Unless you want to revise your theory to that of Iran using a continues (not a brief, pulsating) radiation for minutes to hours and thus being able to disrupt any incoming UAV. But even if that were the case one would expect the drone to crash at the border and not deep within Iran's territory.
For one very compelling reason. Deep inside Iran will make it lot harder to U.S special Op team to get in, destroy the craft and dash out. Assuming the craft was traveling 800 kmph then the radiation burst pulsating once every 10 second could disrupt the SAT link. Also consider the color, it is obvious it was meant to fly in day time in low altitude.
Then, even assuming that they somehow got the hold of the intel regarding this specific UAV's mission, route, etc and assuming that they used a brief pulsating electromagnetic radiation to disrupt the bird's electronics and communication it still does not explain why the UAV would not crash to pieces
It is impossible for me to explain this specific circumstance, but being in aviation for so long I know that not all crashes end up with a plane in pieces. This one is an example.
http://www.f-106deltadart.com/71fis_PilotlessLanding_580787.htm
or have it's contingency system destroy the machine in the air. For a 3 ton machine to glide and land flawlessly on its belly without breaking a wing or even causing a big dent it means that its main electronic and aviation system must have been working properly at the time of landing!
Jury is still out on contingency system. You know how congress make funds available for these toys, the lesser the expense the easier to pass.
Also we don't know if the wings did not break off. Check the pic. below and notice the tape over where the wing roots meet the fuselage.
Looking at all the pix broadcast by irib and other IRR mouthpiece I have no doubt in my mind that the craft has belly landed with no landing gears being extended.