|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
May 20th 04, 05:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
fudog50 wrote in message . ..
My point exactly,,,while what he is doing is ok,,,posting it to the world is suspect,,,especially his motives? Give it a rest fudog, there's nuthin classified here. Mr Stern's posts are entertaining...Thats it!! 
|
|
#2
May 20th 04, 05:27 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
You're right, I'll give it a rest,,,there is nothing
classified,,, like I said sensitive maybe,,just a normal reaction to this stuff due to years on the pointy end during the cold war,,,try to post that stuff in the 80's,,, While it may be that you feel you are free to post any kind of sensitive **** on here because of an ego thing, and it is totally unclassified,,,just remember, our friends used to be our enemies, and just as fast as it changed,,, it could change again. Like I said,,,just another piece of the puzzle. Go ahead and keep showing the world how CONOPS are performed in a military ATC environment and the pattern of the COMMS, very smart. "Military" is the key word here, and if you still feel it's ok to post to the world our military Comms during a time of war, then keep going, then we will see who's side you are on. You seem to forget that "usenet" is the entire world, not just some people here in the states you are trying to impress. On 19 May 2004 21:01:25 -0700, (sameolesid) wrote: fudog50 wrote in message . .. My point exactly,,,while what he is doing is ok,,,posting it to the world is suspect,,,especially his motives? Give it a rest fudog, there's nuthin classified here. Mr Stern's posts are entertaining...Thats it!!
|
|
#4
May 22nd 04, 06:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I suppose that my distress at following OPSEC apparently only
applies to us military folks. I guess it is ok for civilians to violate "OPSEC' during time of war? (whether you agree or not, we are at war, where is your patriotism? Why make it any easier for any potential enemy?) Wouldn't it be horrible if the enemy used even a miniscule part of your military A/C comms to add into a tactical strike? It's your conscience now, can you live with it if even a minute piece of your posting of CONOPS is used to plan an attack? I'll give it rest,,,,just think twice about posting military CONOPS during time of war,,,again,,you are 100% in violation of current "OPSEC" guidelines. On 21 May 2004 17:53:52 -0700, (miso) wrote: It's really sad that they are still running single engine Cessna's in the war on drugs given we lost two such planes in Columbia and US citizens are still being held hostage from one of the crashes. I wasn't aware the US had any of those Caravans registered in their own name, rather than hide behind a shell corporation like "One Leasing". As always, a nice job in mil air coms by Mr. Stern. (AllanStern) wrote in message ... Monday, 17 May 2004 Interesting comms today: some concerning one of the nation's newest acft, the F/A-22 now at Tyndall AFB, and some about the good old days when "The Real Stuff" was going on at Cape Canaveral, and I was there. AIR TRANSPORT 400: DC-8, Little Rock (USAF Contractor) 8:58am: Lands Patrick. Later departs to Antigua, then to Ascension - both USAF Eastern Test Range downrange sites. [133.75] N4667B: CE-208B Cessna Caravan, US State Dept, Intl Narcotics Mission/Air Wing, Patrick AFB. 9:17am: Departs Patrick. 2:50pm: Lands Patrick. [133.75] HAWK 85; F/A-18D, Beaufort MCAS VMFA(AW)-533 9:44am: Transitions area to Mayport NAF [269.3, 273.55] MAKOs 11, 12: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 10:01am: Arrives to work at Avon Park Bombing Range. [292.2, 138.125] SHARK 21: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 10:25am: Arrives to work at Avon Park Bombing Range. 10:45am: RTBs to HST. [292.2, 307.1, 139.8] AX 186: C-130T, Andrews AFB VR-53 "Capitol Express" 10:31am: Area transition. Might be C-40 acft replacing VR-53's C-130Ts, as noted by Sandy in Colo recently. [133.475, 132.15] BRONCO 01: OV-10D, US State Dept US State Dept, Intl Narcotics Mission/Air Wing, Patrick AFB. 10:45am: Departs Patrick (flight of 2). 4:12pm: Lands Patrick. [133.75] AKULA 31: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 10:52am: Single ship, arrives at Avon Park Bombing Range. [292.2, 307.1] JOLLYs 11, 12: HH-60G Pave Hawk Helos, Patrick AFB 920RQW 11:51am: Departs Patrick; approaches at KMLB, Patrick. [269.375] PJ 610: P-3C, Whidbey Island NAS VP-69 "Totems" Sqdn 12:10pm: Lands Patrick. [269.375] HQ 475: SH-60B, Mayport NAF HSL-46 "Grandmasters" Sqdn 12:30pm: Area transition. [132.65] VDA 4813: AN-124, Volga Dnepr (Contractor) 2:30pm: Departs NASA-KSC Shuttle Landing Facility. This huge Ukrainian transport had RONd previous night after bringing large aerospace cargo. Note RON at SLF instead of CCAFS whose runway is closed for construction. [128.55, 132.65, 124.8, 133.3] VAMPIRE 72: F/A-22, Tyndall AFB 325FW 43FS 2:45pm: Touch and go at Patrick on apparent fam flight through area; remains at low altitude (and therefor VHF freqs). This is my first snag of comms from an F/A-22. Was a bit too low and fast for me to get into my camera window. Tyndall is USAF's only F/A-22 schoolhouse; so I expect to see more of them. Made a wonderful shallow swooping pass over my house off of Patrick's Rnwy 20 before heading south along the coast. I LIKE this plane. Looks like it loves to roll. [133.75, 1312.65, 132.25] SHARKs 21, 22, 23: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 3:00pm: Strafing at Avon Park Bombing Range. [292.2, 285.725, 139.8] MAKO 11 Flight: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 3:00pm: Hitting tgts at Avon Park. 3:04pm: MAKO 11 has to RTB HST with problem. 3:40pm: Balance of flight RTBs. [292.2, 285.725, 307.1, 269.3, 239.25, 370.9, 322.5] SHARK 89: C-130. 3:39pm: Area transition, to waypoint Nassau. [119.825] LIMA LIMA 38: P-3C Jacksonville NAS VP-30 "Pro's Nest" Sqdn. 3:45pm: Area transition. [133.475] ZANTOP 757: Zantop Intl (Charter), Ypsilanti MI 5:27pm: Area transition. Those of us who were here in the 1960s Hey-days of the space program, remember the ever-present Zantop acft at Patrick AFB, supporting operations. ZANTOP 757 engaged in some great reminiscences about those days; this pilot flew flights into Patrick in the old days, and the 133.475 ATC was controlling flights back then. Nice to hear them chat and to feel the nostalgia of my days during the Gemini missions and the Saturn-Apollo moon-landing flights. I used to monitor the action right from the beach in those days. BOLT 13: KC-135R, MacDill 6AMW. 10:03pm: En route to Homestead. [133.475, 119.825, 132.25] AL STERN Satellite Beach FL (28-11N 80-36W) monitoring Patrick AFB (KCOF) NASA-KSC Shuttle Landing Fac (KX68) Avon Park Bombing Range (KAGR) Cape Canaveral AFS (KXMR) JSTARS E-8 Acft Integration Facility, Melbourne IAP (KMLB) Worldwide Military HF Communications Life Member: Missile, Space and Range Pioneers. http://hometown.aol.com/allanstern/m...age/index.html (My Freqs) http://hometown.aol.com/scanaddict/index.html (My Equipment)
|
|
#5
May 22nd 04, 01:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Security is the responsibility of the originator of the message. The
feds can make their signals secure any old time they want to. If you monitored GHFS (or whatever they renamed it) during the active part of the war (before POTUS landed on the carrier and declared it over), you heard plenty of scrambled signals. [ANDVT or something like that] Blaming a civilian with a scanner for intercepting your message is about as responsible as telling the old lie that the dog ate your homework. Any foreign spook who wants this info will not depend on the net but will simply set up shop and do the job himself (or herself as the case may be). fudog50 wrote in message . .. I suppose that my distress at following OPSEC apparently only applies to us military folks. I guess it is ok for civilians to violate "OPSEC' during time of war? (whether you agree or not, we are at war, where is your patriotism? Why make it any easier for any potential enemy?) Wouldn't it be horrible if the enemy used even a miniscule part of your military A/C comms to add into a tactical strike? It's your conscience now, can you live with it if even a minute piece of your posting of CONOPS is used to plan an attack? I'll give it rest,,,,just think twice about posting military CONOPS during time of war,,,again,,you are 100% in violation of current "OPSEC" guidelines. On 21 May 2004 17:53:52 -0700, (miso) wrote: It's really sad that they are still running single engine Cessna's in the war on drugs given we lost two such planes in Columbia and US citizens are still being held hostage from one of the crashes. I wasn't aware the US had any of those Caravans registered in their own name, rather than hide behind a shell corporation like "One Leasing". As always, a nice job in mil air coms by Mr. Stern. (AllanStern) wrote in message ... Monday, 17 May 2004 Interesting comms today: some concerning one of the nation's newest acft, the F/A-22 now at Tyndall AFB, and some about the good old days when "The Real Stuff" was going on at Cape Canaveral, and I was there. AIR TRANSPORT 400: DC-8, Little Rock (USAF Contractor) 8:58am: Lands Patrick. Later departs to Antigua, then to Ascension - both USAF Eastern Test Range downrange sites. [133.75] N4667B: CE-208B Cessna Caravan, US State Dept, Intl Narcotics Mission/Air Wing, Patrick AFB. 9:17am: Departs Patrick. 2:50pm: Lands Patrick. [133.75] HAWK 85; F/A-18D, Beaufort MCAS VMFA(AW)-533 9:44am: Transitions area to Mayport NAF [269.3, 273.55] MAKOs 11, 12: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 10:01am: Arrives to work at Avon Park Bombing Range. [292.2, 138.125] SHARK 21: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 10:25am: Arrives to work at Avon Park Bombing Range. 10:45am: RTBs to HST. [292.2, 307.1, 139.8] AX 186: C-130T, Andrews AFB VR-53 "Capitol Express" 10:31am: Area transition. Might be C-40 acft replacing VR-53's C-130Ts, as noted by Sandy in Colo recently. [133.475, 132.15] BRONCO 01: OV-10D, US State Dept US State Dept, Intl Narcotics Mission/Air Wing, Patrick AFB. 10:45am: Departs Patrick (flight of 2). 4:12pm: Lands Patrick. [133.75] AKULA 31: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 10:52am: Single ship, arrives at Avon Park Bombing Range. [292.2, 307.1] JOLLYs 11, 12: HH-60G Pave Hawk Helos, Patrick AFB 920RQW 11:51am: Departs Patrick; approaches at KMLB, Patrick. [269.375] PJ 610: P-3C, Whidbey Island NAS VP-69 "Totems" Sqdn 12:10pm: Lands Patrick. [269.375] HQ 475: SH-60B, Mayport NAF HSL-46 "Grandmasters" Sqdn 12:30pm: Area transition. [132.65] VDA 4813: AN-124, Volga Dnepr (Contractor) 2:30pm: Departs NASA-KSC Shuttle Landing Facility. This huge Ukrainian transport had RONd previous night after bringing large aerospace cargo. Note RON at SLF instead of CCAFS whose runway is closed for construction. [128.55, 132.65, 124.8, 133.3] VAMPIRE 72: F/A-22, Tyndall AFB 325FW 43FS 2:45pm: Touch and go at Patrick on apparent fam flight through area; remains at low altitude (and therefor VHF freqs). This is my first snag of comms from an F/A-22. Was a bit too low and fast for me to get into my camera window. Tyndall is USAF's only F/A-22 schoolhouse; so I expect to see more of them. Made a wonderful shallow swooping pass over my house off of Patrick's Rnwy 20 before heading south along the coast. I LIKE this plane. Looks like it loves to roll. [133.75, 1312.65, 132.25] SHARKs 21, 22, 23: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 3:00pm: Strafing at Avon Park Bombing Range. [292.2, 285.725, 139.8] MAKO 11 Flight: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 3:00pm: Hitting tgts at Avon Park. 3:04pm: MAKO 11 has to RTB HST with problem. 3:40pm: Balance of flight RTBs. [292.2, 285.725, 307.1, 269.3, 239.25, 370.9, 322.5] SHARK 89: C-130. 3:39pm: Area transition, to waypoint Nassau. [119.825] LIMA LIMA 38: P-3C Jacksonville NAS VP-30 "Pro's Nest" Sqdn. 3:45pm: Area transition. [133.475] ZANTOP 757: Zantop Intl (Charter), Ypsilanti MI 5:27pm: Area transition. Those of us who were here in the 1960s Hey-days of the space program, remember the ever-present Zantop acft at Patrick AFB, supporting operations. ZANTOP 757 engaged in some great reminiscences about those days; this pilot flew flights into Patrick in the old days, and the 133.475 ATC was controlling flights back then. Nice to hear them chat and to feel the nostalgia of my days during the Gemini missions and the Saturn-Apollo moon-landing flights. I used to monitor the action right from the beach in those days. BOLT 13: KC-135R, MacDill 6AMW. 10:03pm: En route to Homestead. [133.475, 119.825, 132.25] AL STERN Satellite Beach FL (28-11N 80-36W) monitoring Patrick AFB (KCOF) NASA-KSC Shuttle Landing Fac (KX68) Avon Park Bombing Range (KAGR) Cape Canaveral AFS (KXMR) JSTARS E-8 Acft Integration Facility, Melbourne IAP (KMLB) Worldwide Military HF Communications Life Member: Missile, Space and Range Pioneers. http://hometown.aol.com/allanstern/m...age/index.html (My Freqs) http://hometown.aol.com/scanaddict/index.html (My Equipment)
|
|
#6
May 22nd 04, 04:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, miso
confessed the following: Security is the responsibility of the originator of the message. "Shack!" Blaming a civilian with a scanner for intercepting your message is about as responsible as telling the old lie that the dog ate your homework. To piggyback "miso" further... It's part of that old, "Loose lips sink ships" mantra...which "fudog50" seems to be addressing when he asked: I guess it is ok for civilians to violate "OPSEC' during time of war? Clearly the answer is an emphatic, "Well, duh!" Allan's posting is after the fact...historical if you will. IOW he's not giving out real-time or advance intelligence. Under your concern for OPSEC how much time must pass before it would be permissible for Allan to post? Again "fudog50" lamented: (whether you agree or not, we are at war, where is your patriotism? Why make it any easier for any potential enemy?) Wrapping the flag AKA patriotism around your argument kinda gives you some moral high ground. By your use of patriotism, folks opposed to aspects of the Patriot Act or GWB/Cheney/Rove/Rumsfeld are un-patriotic. Wouldn't it be horrible if the enemy used even a miniscule part of your military A/C comms to add into a tactical strike? Awww come on now "fudog50" now you're just pandering. Put your thinking cap on and contemplate probable targets and tactics. Think those islamist ****s are going to go for a "fat juicy" civilian airliner or an agile, mobile, and hostile military target? Juvat
|
|
#7
May 23rd 04, 10:43 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I dunno Juvat, you tell me, what is their next strike?
It's not worth even arguing anymore, people are gonna do what they want because they have inflated ego's and because they can. And most people that have never been on the pointy end will ever understand. I give up, keep posting MiLCOMS in Florida and y'aLL keep supporting him, have fun. On Sat, 22 May 2004 15:37:37 GMT, Robey Price wrote: After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, miso confessed the following: Security is the responsibility of the originator of the message. "Shack!" Blaming a civilian with a scanner for intercepting your message is about as responsible as telling the old lie that the dog ate your homework. To piggyback "miso" further... It's part of that old, "Loose lips sink ships" mantra...which "fudog50" seems to be addressing when he asked: I guess it is ok for civilians to violate "OPSEC' during time of war? Clearly the answer is an emphatic, "Well, duh!" Allan's posting is after the fact...historical if you will. IOW he's not giving out real-time or advance intelligence. Under your concern for OPSEC how much time must pass before it would be permissible for Allan to post? Again "fudog50" lamented: (whether you agree or not, we are at war, where is your patriotism? Why make it any easier for any potential enemy?) Wrapping the flag AKA patriotism around your argument kinda gives you some moral high ground. By your use of patriotism, folks opposed to aspects of the Patriot Act or GWB/Cheney/Rove/Rumsfeld are un-patriotic. Wouldn't it be horrible if the enemy used even a miniscule part of your military A/C comms to add into a tactical strike? Awww come on now "fudog50" now you're just pandering. Put your thinking cap on and contemplate probable targets and tactics. Think those islamist ****s are going to go for a "fat juicy" civilian airliner or an agile, mobile, and hostile military target? Juvat
|
|
#8
May 23rd 04, 10:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Miso,
It's not the intercepting of the message that worries me, no problem there. It's what is then done with it that disturbs me,,, By the way Advanced Narrow Band Digital Voice Terminal in itself is not scrambled, just a means of SATCOM. There are a few systems used by us, including DAMA, which includes wideband, but the associated crypto gear is what "scrambles" it. How do you know how a foreign spook will get his info? Our current enemy (terrorists) might get it anywhere. This is just another piece of the puzzle, and under OPSEC guidelines, is just wrong. (read up on OPSEC procedures then tell me how irresponsible I am) On 22 May 2004 05:07:10 -0700, (miso) wrote: Security is the responsibility of the originator of the message. The feds can make their signals secure any old time they want to. If you monitored GHFS (or whatever they renamed it) during the active part of the war (before POTUS landed on the carrier and declared it over), you heard plenty of scrambled signals. [ANDVT or something like that] Blaming a civilian with a scanner for intercepting your message is about as responsible as telling the old lie that the dog ate your homework. Any foreign spook who wants this info will not depend on the net but will simply set up shop and do the job himself (or herself as the case may be). fudog50 wrote in message . .. I suppose that my distress at following OPSEC apparently only applies to us military folks. I guess it is ok for civilians to violate "OPSEC' during time of war? (whether you agree or not, we are at war, where is your patriotism? Why make it any easier for any potential enemy?) Wouldn't it be horrible if the enemy used even a miniscule part of your military A/C comms to add into a tactical strike? It's your conscience now, can you live with it if even a minute piece of your posting of CONOPS is used to plan an attack? I'll give it rest,,,,just think twice about posting military CONOPS during time of war,,,again,,you are 100% in violation of current "OPSEC" guidelines. On 21 May 2004 17:53:52 -0700, (miso) wrote: It's really sad that they are still running single engine Cessna's in the war on drugs given we lost two such planes in Columbia and US citizens are still being held hostage from one of the crashes. I wasn't aware the US had any of those Caravans registered in their own name, rather than hide behind a shell corporation like "One Leasing". As always, a nice job in mil air coms by Mr. Stern. (AllanStern) wrote in message ... Monday, 17 May 2004 Interesting comms today: some concerning one of the nation's newest acft, the F/A-22 now at Tyndall AFB, and some about the good old days when "The Real Stuff" was going on at Cape Canaveral, and I was there. AIR TRANSPORT 400: DC-8, Little Rock (USAF Contractor) 8:58am: Lands Patrick. Later departs to Antigua, then to Ascension - both USAF Eastern Test Range downrange sites. [133.75] N4667B: CE-208B Cessna Caravan, US State Dept, Intl Narcotics Mission/Air Wing, Patrick AFB. 9:17am: Departs Patrick. 2:50pm: Lands Patrick. [133.75] HAWK 85; F/A-18D, Beaufort MCAS VMFA(AW)-533 9:44am: Transitions area to Mayport NAF [269.3, 273.55] MAKOs 11, 12: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 10:01am: Arrives to work at Avon Park Bombing Range. [292.2, 138.125] SHARK 21: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 10:25am: Arrives to work at Avon Park Bombing Range. 10:45am: RTBs to HST. [292.2, 307.1, 139.8] AX 186: C-130T, Andrews AFB VR-53 "Capitol Express" 10:31am: Area transition. Might be C-40 acft replacing VR-53's C-130Ts, as noted by Sandy in Colo recently. [133.475, 132.15] BRONCO 01: OV-10D, US State Dept US State Dept, Intl Narcotics Mission/Air Wing, Patrick AFB. 10:45am: Departs Patrick (flight of 2). 4:12pm: Lands Patrick. [133.75] AKULA 31: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 10:52am: Single ship, arrives at Avon Park Bombing Range. [292.2, 307.1] JOLLYs 11, 12: HH-60G Pave Hawk Helos, Patrick AFB 920RQW 11:51am: Departs Patrick; approaches at KMLB, Patrick. [269.375] PJ 610: P-3C, Whidbey Island NAS VP-69 "Totems" Sqdn 12:10pm: Lands Patrick. [269.375] HQ 475: SH-60B, Mayport NAF HSL-46 "Grandmasters" Sqdn 12:30pm: Area transition. [132.65] VDA 4813: AN-124, Volga Dnepr (Contractor) 2:30pm: Departs NASA-KSC Shuttle Landing Facility. This huge Ukrainian transport had RONd previous night after bringing large aerospace cargo. Note RON at SLF instead of CCAFS whose runway is closed for construction. [128.55, 132.65, 124.8, 133.3] VAMPIRE 72: F/A-22, Tyndall AFB 325FW 43FS 2:45pm: Touch and go at Patrick on apparent fam flight through area; remains at low altitude (and therefor VHF freqs). This is my first snag of comms from an F/A-22. Was a bit too low and fast for me to get into my camera window. Tyndall is USAF's only F/A-22 schoolhouse; so I expect to see more of them. Made a wonderful shallow swooping pass over my house off of Patrick's Rnwy 20 before heading south along the coast. I LIKE this plane. Looks like it loves to roll. [133.75, 1312.65, 132.25] SHARKs 21, 22, 23: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 3:00pm: Strafing at Avon Park Bombing Range. [292.2, 285.725, 139.8] MAKO 11 Flight: F-16C, Homestead JARB 482FW 93FS 3:00pm: Hitting tgts at Avon Park. 3:04pm: MAKO 11 has to RTB HST with problem. 3:40pm: Balance of flight RTBs. [292.2, 285.725, 307.1, 269.3, 239.25, 370.9, 322.5] SHARK 89: C-130. 3:39pm: Area transition, to waypoint Nassau. [119.825] LIMA LIMA 38: P-3C Jacksonville NAS VP-30 "Pro's Nest" Sqdn. 3:45pm: Area transition. [133.475] ZANTOP 757: Zantop Intl (Charter), Ypsilanti MI 5:27pm: Area transition. Those of us who were here in the 1960s Hey-days of the space program, remember the ever-present Zantop acft at Patrick AFB, supporting operations. ZANTOP 757 engaged in some great reminiscences about those days; this pilot flew flights into Patrick in the old days, and the 133.475 ATC was controlling flights back then. Nice to hear them chat and to feel the nostalgia of my days during the Gemini missions and the Saturn-Apollo moon-landing flights. I used to monitor the action right from the beach in those days. BOLT 13: KC-135R, MacDill 6AMW. 10:03pm: En route to Homestead. [133.475, 119.825, 132.25] AL STERN Satellite Beach FL (28-11N 80-36W) monitoring Patrick AFB (KCOF) NASA-KSC Shuttle Landing Fac (KX68) Avon Park Bombing Range (KAGR) Cape Canaveral AFS (KXMR) JSTARS E-8 Acft Integration Facility, Melbourne IAP (KMLB) Worldwide Military HF Communications Life Member: Missile, Space and Range Pioneers. http://hometown.aol.com/allanstern/m...age/index.html (My Freqs) http://hometown.aol.com/scanaddict/index.html (My Equipment)
|
|
#9
May 23rd 04, 12:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
After an exhausting session with Victoria's Secret Police, fudog50
confessed the following: Miso, It's not the intercepting of the message that worries me, no problem there. It's what is then done with it that disturbs me,,, By the way Advanced Narrow Band Digital Voice Terminal in itself is not scrambled, just a means of SATCOM. There are a few systems used by us, including DAMA, which includes wideband, but the associated crypto gear is what "scrambles" it. This is too funny to pass up. Ummm, were you the guy lamenting about posting information about our techniques? And here you've decided that this does NOT violate OPSEC...this is a hoot! How do you know how a foreign spook will get his info? Our current enemy (terrorists) might get it anywhere. Hmmm if I were an spook maybe I'd challenge your knowledge and say "you don't know what the f*ck you're talking about," and hope your ego gets in the way and you share a little more of your information, nothing classified mind you. Too funny. This is just another piece of the puzzle, and under OPSEC guidelines, is just wrong. (read up on OPSEC procedures then tell me how irresponsible I am) LOL...clearly the information you shared has no value because you would never violate OPSEC protocols. Juvat
|
|
#10
May 22nd 04, 04:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article , fudog50
wrote: I suppose that my distress at following OPSEC apparently only applies to us military folks. There is a school of thought that says OPSEC means never say anything about anything. This is particularly true at the tactical level. At the operational and strategic levels, the say-nothing policy neither works in a democratic society, nor even necessarily helps military operations. I can point to any number of military fiascoes -- Pearl Harbor, Desert One -- where overemphasis on security inside the military led to disaster, because people who needed a full picture didn't have it. Even with properly classified data, the balance between overclassification and real security is a constant juggling act. Realistically, to make substantial use of open source material, one has to have a significant analytic capability. Esepcially when dealing with a free society, the amount of data often provides its own security -- it overwhelms the analysts. fUSSR intelligence personnel have stated quite often that one of the reason the fUSSR depended on spies rather than open-source is that there was too much open source, and also they never knew when open source might be disinformation or cover. In a previous post, I gave some examples of what a competent analyst would do variously if he were considering using this data, and, indeed, whether an analyst might re-task collection guidance to provide the data through different means. I would be interested in your specific responses to these specific points on the value of the data in question, rather than lectures on patriotism. I guess it is ok for civilians to violate "OPSEC' during time of war? (whether you agree or not, we are at war, where is your patriotism? Why make it any easier for any potential enemy?) Wouldn't it be horrible if the enemy used even a miniscule part of your military A/C comms to add into a tactical strike? By that logic, no information about anything, including the behavior of national leaders, should ever be made available. As I say, there is a balance. It's your conscience now, can you live with it if even a minute piece of your posting of CONOPS is used to plan an attack? EVERYTHING in counterintelligence planning is a balancing act. In military operational planning, there has to be a good deal of staff support, and willingness to listen to the intelligence people, before lots of open source becomes relevant. I don't think EVERYONE in Iraqi intelligence was incompetent, but Saddam wanted to hear what fit his preconceptions. I would seriously question how much open source intelligence is done by terrorists. I would especially doubt they are likely to have the kind of analyst that stays concerned with following US air operational technique over a long period. The US and USSR did, as did some other powers -- but when resources are limited, he who tries to track everything quickly becomes overwhelmed. Traditionally, the glory jobs in intelligence are in collection, not analysis, which led to situations such as an audit during Viet Nam, showing that DIA was about 400 file drawers behind in looking at collection reports, and it still kept coming. I'll give it rest,,,,just think twice about posting military CONOPS during time of war,,,again,,you are 100% in violation of current "OPSEC" guidelines.
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Florida Mil Comms Logging - Sunday 9 May 2004 | AllanStern | Military Aviation | 0 | May 10th 04 05:06 AM |
| Mil Acft Comms Log, Florida - Friday 30 April 2004 | AllanStern | Military Aviation | 0 | May 1st 04 07:12 AM |
| Florida Military Comms Log - Thurs 15 Apr 2004 | AllanStern | Military Aviation | 1 | April 17th 04 08:38 PM |
| Military Comms, Florida, Sat 10 Apr 2004 | AllanStern | Military Aviation | 0 | April 12th 04 07:36 AM |
| Mil Comms Logged in Florida, Friday 9 Apr 2004 | AllanStern | Military Aviation | 0 | April 10th 04 07:33 AM |
Hybrid Mode
