![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Signal jamming a factor in future wars, general says
Saddam Hussein's failed attempt to jam U.S. Global Positioning System navigation signals during the Iraq war is an example of the growing danger of space warfare, the Air Force's top space commander said yesterday. at http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...0137-1548r.htm |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Signal jamming a factor in future wars, general says Saddam Hussein's failed attempt to jam U.S. Global Positioning System navigation signals during the Iraq war is an example of the growing danger of space warfare, the Air Force's top space commander said yesterday. at http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...0137-1548r.htm Yes, wasnt it rather funny how trying to jam signals is just a big homing beacon too? They figured quite quickly how to make a weapon to home right on in that jamming signal. Those "jammers" were eliminated rather quickly. Ron PA-31T Cheyenne II Maharashtra Weather Modification Program Pune, India |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yes, wasnt it rather funny how trying to jam signals is just a big homing
beacon too? They figured quite quickly how to make a weapon to home right on in that jamming signal. Those "jammers" were eliminated rather quickly. I doubt it,how could thousands of low cost jammers be eliminated quickly? Even if they could be eliminated eventually cost benefit outcome of a such operation would not be very favorable. Such jammers cost less than one Grand and Iraqis had only 6 or 7 of them,thanks to international embargo. So its not very hard to imagine what whould happen if they had 6000-7000 instead of 6 or 7. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Chad Irby wrote:
snip Unless you spend a lot more money on them, they're also very vulnerable to the newer EMP weapons. In WWII the real secret weapon (proximity fuses) could only be used over water until mid 44,in the UK with the V1 and not over enemy territory intil the start of 45. The reason was fear of of copying a dud shell as the allies had more to lose. What is the better target for EMP weapons a GPS jammer or the NY stock exchange? The "piles of cheap low-power jammers" idea is nice, as long as you don't have to keep using them. At a rough guess the cost for a 1W jammer using cellphone components would be ~$5, just keep sending them up with balloons (add $1). -- regards jc LEGAL - I don't believe what I wrote and neither should you. Sobriety and/or sanity of the author is not guaranteed EMAIL - and are not valid email addresses. news2x at perentie is valid for a while. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]() jc wrote in message ... Chad Irby wrote: snip Unless you spend a lot more money on them, they're also very vulnerable to the newer EMP weapons. In WWII the real secret weapon (proximity fuses) could only be used over water until mid 44,in the UK with the V1 and not over enemy territory intil the start of 45. The reason was fear of of copying a dud shell as the allies had more to lose. Actually, proximity fuses did not have the "self-destruct" mechanism, therefore they would explode when hit the ground. Hence the limitation. What is the better target for EMP weapons a GPS jammer or the NY stock exchange? The "piles of cheap low-power jammers" idea is nice, as long as you don't have to keep using them. At a rough guess the cost for a 1W jammer using cellphone components would be ~$5, just keep sending them up with balloons (add $1). Well, it is a bit under-estimated. I don't know much about how GPS works (electronically), but I know it has commercial and military channels/ frequencies and commercial and military encoding. For civilian use, optimum accuracy is receiving three GPS signals from three satellites (somebody correct me if I am wrong, but I read it somewhere for more expensive GPS devices for use, let's say in aviation) for elevation and position. As you travel, the sattelites "switch" (just like GSM) control. Is it a same frequency/coding? I don't know, but it is sure as hell that if you manage to jam one channel, there are other two sats. Jam the other two signals, there is one. In the meantime, your GPS receiver "struggles" to get signals from the other two. And we are talking about civilian device. What method are you going to use-noise or deceptive jamming? Read the history of updates of "AN-ALQ" devices-or just one! Noise? In that case, you are a flashbulb, and you will be attacked with alternate weapon on jamming station. The band is narrow AFAIK, so if your opponent knows what to "listen", you're toast. Deceptive jamming. Well, it is not analogue signal anymore but digital and probably encoded signal-actually, it IS encoded even for the civ use in the matter of digital design-and probably scrambled in mil use. Thus, you have to "doctor" the signal. Actually, signals -three satellites, remeber? You can go to make this simmilar to tripled digital FBW system on, let's say, F-16. Well, if you have failure on one channel then other two will feed the aircraft with flying info, or in this instance, the weapon itself. Two of them gone, you have one channel and two duds and you think that the flying computer thinks that all three are duds? Wrong. Even your modem has sufficient let-me-check-if-this-is-wright capabilities (CRC, CS) so it is possible to imagine that FBW computer might have something simmilar. And your jamming signal has to feed the encoded and encripted digital channel switchig-multiple sattelite signals with false data, and it is desirable to feed them with something meaningful to drive the weapon away, not to owerflow it with garbage. And it's been a long time since F-16 digital FBW was designed (I actually don't know is it possible to fly it on one channel, but I would require it that it would! ![]() Oh, the output power. In the Battle of Britain, there was a German bombing device called X-Gerat. Basically, you had three signals for guidance, based on the Lorentz blind-landing system (Morse dots-too left of course, dashes-too right of course, single tone-on course), and the offset signal to mark the bomb dropping. Once discovered, it was jammed by the Brits by sending "dashes". Well, it sometimes worked (and it seems it worked well!) but there were cases that the crew was able to depict the jamming-slight but ear-noticeable change of modulation or change of volume and to offset it. Or back to Your cell phone-it can "sense" the distance from the GSM station-actually, my Motorola CD920/930 has a hidden option that, when activated can measure and display the DISTANCE from the GSM broadcast (albait in very weird units ![]() if you send a "heroic" signal which is by magnitude stronger then satellite signal, the system might think "this is too powerful", or "this is too close" and simpy switch to something else. Remember, expirienced LW pilots were able to depict the false signals. And code-breaking is not a trivial thing; put a password to a MS-Word-file that is, let's say 5 characters long and try to crack it with some program designed to do it, let's say Advanced Office Password Recovery. Yeah, it will eventually break it, but count how long it will take! Also, You have A GPS and GLONASS (a Soviet GPS); while GLONASS is reportedly in a bad shape, as far as I can remember India (I am really not sure!) uses BOTH systems which might suggest that it is not in such bad shape after all. While I am not aware of Russian GPS bombing/missile systems in use, some of their (export?) weapon systems use both. I agree that we are talking about the weapon (figter, bomber, cruise missile or JDAM) that might not have all the "offset" capabilities that I have mentioned here; I might not even be correct in numerous things. Actually, you will need a (really, really) good sample either of the good portion of the knowledge how -military- part of the system works or the system itself. And once you develop a system, it will certainly not be of the cell-phone size but rather of an underwing or wingtip pod size, weight and cost. Nele NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Denyav" wrote in message ... Yes, wasnt it rather funny how trying to jam signals is just a big homing beacon too? They figured quite quickly how to make a weapon to home right on in that jamming signal. Those "jammers" were eliminated rather quickly. I doubt it,how could thousands of low cost jammers be eliminated quickly? Even if they could be eliminated eventually cost benefit outcome of a such operation would not be very favorable. Such jammers cost less than one Grand and Iraqis had only 6 or 7 of them,thanks to international embargo. So its not very hard to imagine what whould happen if they had 6000-7000 instead of 6 or 7. Isn't it true that the "jammers" they found in Iraq, were only good for small area jamming? By the time the weapon got within that area, it was probably too late to prevent it hitting its target due to ballistics etc? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Signal jamming a factor in future wars, general says
Saddam Hussein's failed attempt to jam U.S. Global Positioning System navigation signals during the Iraq war is an example of the growing danger of space warfare, the Air Force's top space commander said yesterday. at The General seems to be very much preoccupied with historical victories aganist Iraq,Afghanistan,Greneda,Panama,Somali,Zambia etc. If I were in his shoes I would be much more concerned about some EM transmissions that could not even be intercepted,much less be jammed. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Gee, now why didn't they think of the possibility of GPS system jamming
twenty years ago when they invented it? Do you really think that was overlooked? The general sounds like he was just creating a strawman argument to justify more DOD budget money! WDA end "Mike" wrote in message om... Signal jamming a factor in future wars, general says Saddam Hussein's failed attempt to jam U.S. Global Positioning System navigation signals during the Iraq war is an example of the growing danger of space warfare, the Air Force's top space commander said yesterday. at http://www.washtimes.com/national/20...0137-1548r.htm |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , W. D. Allen Sr.
writes Gee, now why didn't they think of the possibility of GPS system jamming twenty years ago when they invented it? Do you really think that was overlooked? Let's split the difference and say it got lost somewhere along the way. (Otherwise, why would CCM against GPS jammers be a profitable business, if the system was inherently resistant?) The general sounds like he was just creating a strawman argument to justify more DOD budget money! Are you claiming it *isn't* easy to jam many GPS receivers? -- He thinks too much: such men are dangerous. Julius Caesar I:2 Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Boeing Boondoggle | Larry Dighera | Military Aviation | 77 | September 15th 04 02:39 AM |
Pentagon admits Environment source for future wars | Aerophotos | Military Aviation | 5 | February 23rd 04 01:33 PM |