Slashdot Mirror
U.S. Deploys Satellite Jamming System
CNN has an article about a ground-based satellite jamming system that "uses electromagnetic radio frequency energy to knock out transmissions on a temporary and reversible basis, without frying components". Is this just another old school EM jamming technique, or something new? Of course they won't say, citing "operational security" concerns.
"The device appears to have been put into service considerably earlier than had been projected by the Air Force as recently as February.
At that time, a long-range planning document, dubbed the Transformation Flight Plan, said such a system would let the United States by 2010 "deny and disrupt an adversary's space-based communications and early warning" of attack."
That's the way to beat the enemy to the punch - make them think you're 5+ years away from ready, then DEPLOY!
uses electromagnetic radio frequency energy to knock out transmissions on a temporary and reversible basis, without frying components
Is it possible to knock out transmissions on a reversible basis while frying components?
Now, jamming the downlink is harder, but if you hit the satellite with enough power on any band, it'll freak out. With a highly directional antenna, you could even take out only a specific satellite.
Satellites do have to deal with ionizing radiation and can't have enough shielding to totally block it, so they're equipped to reset themselves when they get `stuck' because some IC got hit with a stray alpha particle -- because it's not *if* it will happen, it's *when*.
Of course, if you hit the satellite with enough power, you may actually damage it. If that happens, you just play dumb. Sure, it may have happened while the satellite was over the US (or a US base, or US ship), but that was just a coincidence, right?
I guess a new school jamming technique might be to actually hit it with ionizing radiation (typically X and gamma rays, and high energy electrons and protons (often with some neutrons in the form of an alpha particle) but these are generally attenutated greatly by the atmosphere (and the charged particles diverted by our magnetic field), so this would be hard to do from the ground. But I guess if you can make it strong enough, or do it from a tall mountain/plane flying above most of our atmosphere ...
Two relatively expensive terrorist tools I'd like to hear more about:
1) ground-based satelite-destroyers.
2) space-based satelite-destroyers.
Can you imagine the damage to the American psyche if all the TV- and other-entertainment- satellites were knocked out at once? There'd be great moaning and gnashing of teeth while America waited a few months or years for replacements to go up.
Imagine if that happened in the middle of the Superbowl?
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Not likely. If you assume that the jamming approach is to beam noise at the satellite in the frequency range it's designed to accept, then the power required to jam its receiver compared to what is required to damage the thing is at least a couple of orders of magnitude (factors of 10) different.
Jamming the satellite's transmissions in a certain terrestrial location simply involves having localized noise generators in the same frequency band as the satellite in question. Or, for world-wide coverage, just launch a satellite(s) in a compatible orbit to the target satellite, and broadcast away.
Less is more.
For the moment the Russians have a far more capable space program than we do and the Chinese have a bigger industrial base. We can eventually beat the Russians with technology, but not in the short term. But with all our collective money funding the war in Iraq, we would not be able to out-produce or out-spend the Chinese.
I think all it will end up doing is spurring Russia and China into matching the threat. Hopefully we don't find out the hard way that their space capabilities have improved beyond our ability to catch up.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Since satellites generally use a few watts to a few tens of watts, and generally use low-gain antennae, it wouldn't take more than a couple of hundred reflected watts to do the job. Say a hundred kilowatts of transmission at the ground.
The chilling implication here: you can only really jam satellites that use low-gain antennae -- e.g. comsats and "cheap" satellites. Anyone who anticipates this type of jamming for a point-to-point communicating bird can just use a high gain antenna to send all their transmitted power straight to the ground station. Another way around, especially for a comlink bird or something that can't use a beam to punch through the noise, would be to use "stealth" planar-panel technology on the satellite. If the satellite presents a flat face to the Earth, the jamming signal will be coherently reflected and probably won't affect the transmission much (except for an unlucky receiver who is in the reflected beam).
So, er, this is probably good for knocking out comsats and academic satellites -- but foreign spy satellites will probably be pretty hardened against it before too long from now.
Note: I'm not a military space insider -- just an astrophysicist. These ideas occurred to me in about 30 seconds, so you can bet anyone with his/her own space program already thought of 'em too.
*sighs* Okay, so all this "homeland security for terrorists" stuff has developed a critical and highly expensive need for us jamming their SATELLITES?
Ya know, I'm not really any form of conspiracy theorist, but when I do see something capable of blocking communications by the government on domestic ground, I want to go re-read the Constitution. The only certainty about such a thing was that it was funded for a purpose, so would someone explain to me what a valid purpose for such a thing would be?
Well, I'm just wondering how accurate that thingy is. I mean, it's a long reach from Colo. Springs, CO, USA to high geostationary orbit. And it's getting progressively crowded up there with each day. What are the odds of friendly fire? I bet EU or Japan would be very pissed if their cellphone service went down because USA tried to hit Russian network? Not to mention the fact that modern sattelite communications networks rely on large numbers of sattelites - and hitting all of them might prove to be a rather challenging task.
Also, I'm very curious about the modus operandi of that thing - I mean, I would assume it's 'direct fire' energy weapon of some sort, meaning its area of effect is greatly limited by horisont and, especially if the thing is in Colorado Springs, natural obstacles such as Rocky Mountains. In case the weapon, instead, employs physical carrier-based weapons such as special warheads on PTS (Planet To Space) missiles, the accuracy is questionable, and capability of hitting multiple targets sucessfully even more so?
'...computers in the future may have only 1000 vacuum tubes and perhaps weigh 1.5 tons...' Popular Mechanics, 03/49'
No, I want the US to act civilized. I don't unconditionally support a country, and you wanting the US to be unfair is a slippery slope and dangerous. So should the US commit war crimes? Open a few more Abu Ghraibs? The US would likely win (in the short run), but they would no longer be the moral leader or be in the right. Eventually, the US would back itself into a corner, as playing unfair and pragmatic led to Nazis invading Europe.
Here's a tip: Go see The Battle of Algiers. It's a good example of how Iraq can and may be botched. (The Pentagon and West Point has been screening it)
Apparently only the U.S. is allowed to decide who can use and deploy basic technology.
You seam to think people in the USA want to dictate to the rest of the world how to do things. No, actually what happens is the people who want to dictate to the rest of the world, find it easiest to do so through USA.
Such as the skull and bones, they are a power out of Europe. And other cartel organizations like the riaa/mpaa have existed long before USA, and each country has their own version of the same thing today. So quit blaming USA for everything. We just have a flaw that is being exploited, that is fixable only by the fact we have the right own guns.
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
I don't know about $143.50, but for $50,000 and some Home Depot measuring tape as an antena, you can have yoru own. http://www.hypocrites.com/article2897.html
NO! NO! Please don't mod me, I'm too young to die a troll. *click* Oh the pain, the pain...
OK since some people seem to think this post has merit, I don't know why:
Skull and bones is a 100% American. Where exactly did you get "they are a power out of Europe". They are in fact full of wealthy and powerful Americans dedicated to expanding America's wealth and power and dictating to the rest of the world. They are close cousins to the Neocons. If you want to read their outline for global domination read The New American Century. Many of the people behind this statement are in the current administration and key backers of the war in Iraq, including Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush and Paul Wolfowitz. It is kind of a noble sounding statement, freedom and all, until you appreciate its dark side is it advocates American domination of the world.
The only thing out of Europe about Skull and Bones is yes they are very much an American version of forming a ruling elite like those you find in Great Britain. You know... the sons of the wealthy elite are sent to prep schools and the Ivy League and get the best of everything (like Bush and Kerry), they are qualified to lead and ordinary Americans(like Clinton) aren't. Clinton was basically trailer trash, Rhodes scholar aside, and its one reason the powers that be hounded him every minute he was in office.
Yes there have been cartels since before the USA, though the RIAA/MPAA obviously aren't examples of the same, recording and motion pictures, not being invented until long after the US came in to being. They aren't doing much but trying to protect and maximize the profits they make on mostly bad music and bad movies. I'm not sure they actually count for much on the global stage because their products are so bad and devoid of substance, though people the world over still seem to buy them for some reason. Maybe they are good sedatives. To break the RIAA's back form a band that makes music that doesn't suck and sell it over ITunes without selling your soul to them. To break the MPAA's back stop watching bad movies which is most of them.
One might guess you are alluding to a global Jewish conspiracy, if thats what you are getting at why don't you just spit it out and get flamed for it instead of using all the veiled references like "a power out of Europe" and "cartels". What the hell is that.
Bottomline you are doing what all American's do these days, especially our political leaders. Blame everything bad America does on someone else, instead of taking responsibility when we let our government do bad things. Ranting about "the right to own guns" as being the solution is bullshit until and unless you and probably a whole bunch of others are ready to use them. It would probably be a blood bath and you would probably lose. It may well be that it will come to that if American government stays its current course but I'd say at the moment you are blowing smoke.
@de_machina