Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

U.S. Deploys Satellite Jamming System

CmdrTaco posted more than 9 years ago | from the i-can't-hear-you-nya-nya-nya dept.

Security 342

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.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Thin ice (5, Insightful)

fembots (753724) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690690)

This whole control of space thing is approaching the thin line between annoyed and pissed.

While USAF claims this "ground-based jammer uses electromagnetic radio frequency energy to knock out transmissions on a temporary and reversible basis, without frying components", it will only take one mistake (and it's not that unusual) to fry someone's $500mil baby.

If other countries even dare to think about developing a similar jammer to "neutralize" US's satellite communication and its space-based capabilities, it's likely that US will simply launch another pre-emptive attack to destroy those jammers in these countries.

Re:Thin ice (5, Funny)

nightsweat (604367) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690738)

$500 million baby? I can get you one for $143.50 on the Internet.

Re:Thin ice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690759)

Yea, we have invaded lots of countries to control the proliferation of satellite jamming equipment.

I always forget *we* are the only ones who develop weaponry.

Re:Thin ice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690801)

$500mil baby, like a space shuttle or international space station? Not good.

Surreal Dreams [surreal-dreams.com]

Re:Thin ice (1)

theparanoidcynic (705438) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690835)

Don't worry, the way we're going we'll be too broke to do that kind of shit soon enough.

Re:Thin ice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690852)

It might be amusing to watch the US launch a pre-emptive attack to destroy the jammers in britain or france, at least for the few seconds before the british and ( ;-) ) freedom-ish nukes erase the eastern seaboard of the US...

Re:Thin ice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690965)

Yeah, that scenario is about as amusing as it is probable. Fucking idiot.

Re:Thin ice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10691112)

What are you, an idiot? Only an idiot would think launching nukes at the US would be a good idea. Here's a hint: the US has roughly 48% of the world's nukes. America could literally cover Britain and France with nuclear explosions. 0% chance of survival.

Re:Thin ice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10691547)

800 nukes could cripple america.

Re:Thin ice (3, Insightful)

Keebler71 (520908) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690862)

If other countries even dare to think about developing a similar jammer to "neutralize" US's satellite communication and its space-based capabilities, it's likely that US will simply launch another pre-emptive attack to destroy those jammers in these countries.

Right... just like the US pre-emptively attacked Russia because they build GPS jammers. Now if a country started using (rather than just developing) such a system, I would agree with your position.

Re:Thin ice (4, Insightful)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691052)

> Right... just like the US pre-emptively attacked Russia because they build GPS jammers. Now if a country started *using* (rather than just developing) such a system, I would agree with your position.

And because any ground-based emitter of EM is going to show up as a pretty big honking target when it's turned on...

a) blowing up the jammer is not a pre-emptive attack, and
b) your jammer will get blowed up real good, real quick.

Keep in mind that part b) applies to both sides in the conflict. If you're fighting an adversary capable of launching satellites, you're (by definition) fighting an adversary capable of detecting and lobbing anti-radiation missiles at any EM emitter you own that's more powerful than a microwave oven.

Re:Thin ice (-1, Offtopic)

magefile (776388) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691200)

Anti-radiation missiles? WTF? You'd have two choices: EMP warhead, or conventional/nuclear warheads. There's no such thing as an anti-radiation missile. You're right, though, about the jammer being a target. Remember Command & Conquer, or any game with mobile/stationary jammers? That was the first place you bombed/nuked/sent a spy to.

Re:Thin ice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10691355)

No such thing as anti-radiation missiles?

Someones been smoking too much crack lately *cough* AGM-88 HARM missile *cough* aka the High-speed Anti-Radiation Missile.

And the bigger the radar or jammer, the further away you could launch a missile from and still find it.

So yeah. Shut up, dumbass.

Re:Thin ice (5, Informative)

kin_korn_karn (466864) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691360)

"Anti-radiation missile" is a military term for anti-radar missiles like the Shrike and HARM, or for EU types the ALARM. Doesn't have anything to do with nuclear radiation.

Re:Thin ice (1)

Jason R (38141) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691398)

What confuses you about the term 'anti-radiation missile'? Things like the HARM or Shrike home on transmitting targets. Yes those are A-G, but they must have a similar package that can be put on a space capable missile. I haven't heard of any space based package for it, I'm just confused by your statement that there is no such thing as an anti-radiation missile. There's plenty.

Re:Thin ice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10691452)

Yes, there is such a thing as an anti-radiation missile; ever heard of HARM? They are anti-radar missiles, but I guess one could make it lock on any other EM emitter, with proper modifications. It refers to the locking/tracking method, not the payload (usually it carries a conventional warhead, radar antennae are usually exposed...).

Re:Thin ice (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690945)

I'd make one just to knock the fucking astra satellite out (they transmit the brain-rotting waves of the Murdoch empire across europe).

Re:Thin ice (4, Insightful)

ryturner (87582) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690947)

Your post indicates thats you think wars should be a fair fight. Personally, I want any war the US is in to be very unfair. The point is it win.

Re:Thin ice (0, Redundant)

gfxguy (98788) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691147)

but that wouldn't be FAIR!!!!

Oh noes (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10691032)

Teh us is plannign and invasion like tehy have ben for the past fitfy years!!111 OMFG!

Re:Thin ice (3, Interesting)

TigerNut (718742) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691068)

...it will only take one mistake (and it's not that unusual) to fry someone's $500mil baby.

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.

Re:Thin ice (5, Insightful)

ajs (35943) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691097)

This whole control of space thing is approaching the thin line between annoyed and pissed.

Ah... yes, well I'll assume you meant that YOU are getting annoyed.

While USAF claims this [...] jammer [...is...] temporary and reversible [...] it will only take one mistake (and it's not that unusual) to fry someone's $500mil baby.

How often does this particular jamming technology fry satellites? Really, how often? Heck, you don't even know what this *is*, must less what its failure modes are. ANY complaint about this technology must be on the grounds of lack of information (kind of strange to complain about THIS instead of the dozens of other, far more problematic items that the US military refuses to discuss) or on the grounds that the US feels it has the right to unilaterally develop technology to disable other country's communications (again, I'd start with the MONITORING of communications which is ONGOING rather than the chance that the US MIGHT block communications in the future).

Anything else is arm waving.

If other countries even dare to think about developing a similar jammer to "neutralize" US's satellite communication and its space-based capabilities, it's likely that US will simply launch another pre-emptive attack to destroy those jammers in these countries.

Doubtful. Of the countries that have the capabilities to do so, only one is not an ally, and I don't think we'd invade China over THIS.

Re:Thin ice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10691348)

This is why I'm sticking with cable.

Re:Thin ice (1)

dustinbarbour (721795) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691628)

A country must do what is in its best interests. If that means destroying ground-based jammers pre-emptively, that's what that means. If that disturbs your utopian ideal where every nation and person is treated equally, I'm sorry. Don't hate the US for being the big guy on the block. Any other nation would do the same if they had a legitimate chance at success.

Way to go! (4, Interesting)

rearl (262579) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690695)

"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!

Re:Way to go! (3, Funny)

Galvatron (115029) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691056)

Now, witness the power of this FULLY ARMED AND OPERATIONAL battlestation!

Re:Way to go! (1)

JUSTONEMORELATTE (584508) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691254)

Now, witness the power of this FULLY ARMED AND OPERATIONAL battlestation!

It took some digging, but I knew I'd heard that line somewhere before. [irregularwebcomic.net]

--

Re:Way to go! (1)

jacksonj04 (800021) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691413)

Disrupt early warning systems?

"The entire radar and tracking system is offline Sir!"

You're not gonna sit there and go "Damn Microsoft" are you? You're going to scramble every fighter you've got and bump up ground-based radar through whatever jamming ceilings you can.

Re:Way to go! (1)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691504)

"You're not gonna sit there and go "Damn Microsoft" are you?"

After twenty years of Microsoft teaching the world that bugs are normal and acceptable, I assume that the techs'll at least take time to reboot once before realizing that they're under attack.

hi (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690700)

i want my mtv

Re:hi (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690781)

mod parent informative. it is not offtopic and is a call to arms against the possible implications of this technology on society

Hoo boy (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690709)

When I see verbiage like "electromagnetic radio frequency energy" I immediately get suspicious. Someone's trying to bullshit me here.

Re:Hoo boy (1)

tgd (2822) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691045)

What, and its better when you hear "gravimetric radio frequency energy" on Friday evenings?

Section (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690717)

Why is this in the IT section?

Re:Section (-1, Offtopic)

arose (644256) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690769)

Eye jamming colour scheme, /. does not want you to read this.

Re:Section (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690970)

But I -like- these colors =(

Re:Section (1)

Saeed al-Sahaf (665390) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691175)

Because it has to do with (GET READY FOR THIS!)... Information Technology??? Communications satellites, and all.

\m/ (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690719)

\m/

Yaaaaaaaar. Cyberwar == GOOD! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690727)

Now we don't have to jam them like we used to: breaking into the ground stations, and hijacking the control interfaces. One step closer to the Tesla death ray!!!! Oh, another note: what would happen if we now broke into the ground based station?

Hon The WiFi is down again ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690728)

Just a matter of time. I like hard wire.

Interesting.. (1)

nametaken (610866) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690747)


The article acts as if they should tell us how it works, precisely. While I'm sure many readers already have a good idea, I'm glad they're not just coming out with it.

Re:Interesting.. (1)

59Bassman (749855) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690958)

I'm actually starting to get a bit miffed about the desire to know everything about how defensive systems work. There's a part of me that thinks we really shouldn't be announcing anything of this sort. I've got a great idea - let's let the public know exactly how each and every one of our systems operate! The enemy (pick one) would NEVER think of watching CNN or the Discovery Channel to try to gain a small clue they could turn into a tactical advantage!

Re:Interesting.. (1)

IvanD (719006) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690974)

So the karma thing is because of some US comments?? I live in the US... I like the US.. still I think they were trying to still the idea from the original attempts of satellite knock outs [slashdot.org] .

Bad karma doesn't change minds. It just encourage people to say worse things.

US.. vote.. because I can't... but you.. should!

Re:Interesting.. (2, Funny)

lottameez (816335) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691168)

I'm pretty sure it works by spray painting anti-french slogans on the satellite gyroscope lens....oh crap, I've said too much.... :-)

Re:Interesting.. (1)

duvie (692383) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691566)

by "hating the US" are you referring to wishing to see the junta currently in power removed by our first lawful presidential election in almost a decade? That would stem, you see, from a LOVE of this country.

Sounds familiar... (5, Funny)

Sensible Clod (771142) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690750)

Maybe this [slashdot.org] was a beta version?

Re:Sounds familiar... (2, Funny)

IvanD (719006) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690826)

maybe THIS [slashdot.org] was the beta version.

Re:Sounds familiar... (1)

DoctorDeath (774634) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691172)

My thoughts exactly! Probably not so much beta testing as actual usage of the final version. You know how the military won't reveal what they have until they have something better. I bet the newest version will cause blackouts in whole cities not just open your garage door.

Confused... (1)

D-Cypell (446534) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690755)

So, can I take my tin-foil hat off now?

I would have gotten 1st post (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690777)

But i suspect my wifi was temporarily jammed

Yeah Right! (2, Funny)

darth_MALL (657218) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690780)

This is another vaporware lie perpitrated by "the Man" to keep me from telling the truth about *BZZZT* [NO CARRIER]

"Spies like us" (4, Funny)

Stonent1 (594886) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690782)

I'm having a mental flashback of the scene where the anti-missile system hits an MTV satellite and the girl's TV explodes, where she exclaims "Awesome!"

Like many other technologies (1, Flamebait)

xThinkx (680615) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690788)

The jamming technique fails miserably when the target satellites are equipped with the requisite "tin foil hat" defense system.

Re:Like many other technologies (2, Funny)

mikael (484) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691404)

... I always wondered why satellites are wrapped in gold foil. The offical reason was that it protected against micro-meteorites, sudden temperature changes and heat stress. Now we know the real reason :)

Will be a bad thing... (2, Funny)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690823)

... until SpamSat is launched, and then all will agree that is a good thing.

Cool! (5, Funny)

lottameez (816335) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690843)

I think the USAF could easily recoup their investment if they allowed people to "vote" TV channels off of satellite comms. $1 a minute to jam the signal. No more QVC, goodbye to MTV-trash - yippee!

Oh! (1)

pair-a-noyd (594371) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690849)

So that's why my Dishnetwork system quit working!

Re:Oh! (1)

Mysticalfruit (533341) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691450)

And that's a bad thing???? Though I'm suspecting that Al Jezzera is suddenly going be having a problem getting their Al Queda tapes aired all over the world...

Rasberry! (5, Funny)

Supero100 (664946) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690853)


"Raspberry! I hate Raspberry!"

Re:Rasberry! (4, Funny)

iamstilgar (645508) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691274)

There's only one man who would dare give me the Raspberry {SCH-LUNK}.......LONESTAR!

Re:Rasberry! (1, Redundant)

da3dAlus (20553) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691299)

Only one man would dare give me the raspberry...LONESTAR!!! *thud* *crash*

This is just government FUD (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10690858)

The real jamming will take place when John Kerry jams his cock into America's ass on Nov 2.

HOLY CRAP !! (1)

Artie_Effim (700781) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690861)

I mean to say, I though about this years ago, submitted a letter to the D0D for a RFC and they never got back to me. I'm calling my lawy ..~~!&&&&&.... .#ddh&^^ @&38....

Al-Jazeera (1)

ericdano (113424) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690948)

Can you say "Al-Jazeera"? What? Never heard of it? Oh, thats right, we started using the forementioned device to start blocking them ;-)

They have been telling the EU about this. (1)

Dersucher (602267) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690988)

Not so long ago, there was a news story about the EU comming up with, and launching their own GPS system.
I quote from the article [technovelgy.com]
"The paper also reported that a disagreement between the US and the EU regarding Galileo at a London conference resulted in a threat to blow up the planned satellites. The European delegates reportedly said that they would not turn off or jam signals from their satellites, even if they were used in a war with the US."

Maybe this is just the USAF Jumping the gun, and getting one up on the EU Nations, so that when they do go live with their GPS System, it won't seem that this jamming system is targeted specifically at it.

Re:They have been telling the EU about this. (1)

TykeClone (668449) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691181)

Is the EU GPS like the current one - does it require a lot of little satellites flying around to work?

If so, I would think that it would be much harder to jam a GPS-like system than a spy or communications satellite.

Re:They have been telling the EU about this. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10691386)

IIRC the US has been annoyed about Galileo from the project's conception and I'm not entirely sure why.

The main reason Europe and the rest of the world was a civil controled system as they don't like the thought of the USA switching off or degrading the GPS signal as the civilan airlines require the signal for safe flight.

It may interest the readership to know that Russia also have a similar system as do China. Last I heard, China had been invited to join the program, had accepted, and were going to contribute their sats related equipment to the program. An invitation had been sent to Russia but the last I heard the negotiations were still on going, but a sucessful outcome was likely.

It may interest you to know as well the Russia is the only nation on Earth to have a specific armed forces for space like other nations have an Army, Air Force and Navy. They also did (do?) have the first working anti-sat weapons.

Without frying components (2, Interesting)

Orestesx (629343) | more than 9 years ago | (#10690992)

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?

No. (3, Informative)

Sensible Clod (771142) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691608)

Not unless you can manage to fry ONLY components that the sat doesn't need for communication, and there are, oh, say, zero to few of those in comsats.

Probably old school (5, Interesting)

dougmc (70836) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691011)

Is this just another old school EM jamming technique, or something new?
Old school jamming techniques will be quite effective. You find out what the uplink frequency band is, and hit the satellite with a few thousand watts on that band using a high gain antenna. No commands will be received while your jamming is in effect.

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 ...

Commercial satellites? (4, Insightful)

spooky_nerd (646914) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691021)

What's to keep people from encrypting communications, and using commercial satellite systems? In fact, you could put up a satellite system and market it for commercial use. Then, when you use it to transmit your nefarious plans, the US won't want to take it down because it would be too large of a disruption to US businesses.

tool of terrorism? (4, Interesting)

davidwr (791652) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691026)

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?

Re:tool of terrorism? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10691269)

Imagine if those freedom-hating Iranians took out Fox?!!!!! Oh, the humanity!

Re:tool of terrorism? (5, Funny)

Shihar (153932) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691436)

Look, when 9/11 happened the Americans went nuts. They ended up whacking off two nations. Think about it. The American response to two buildings being destroy was to take out two ENTIRE NATIONS. That is like responding to two guys getting shot by taking out two towns. So, you understand the American prepensely to overreact a little.

Now, considering the American psyche, what kind of fucking idiot would you have to be to take out all American TV. You thought they were on a rampage after two buildings fell? Shit, if someone took out American TV, especially during the Superbowl I would go look for the nearest fallout shelter and come out 100,000 years later to open a very profitable glass business. Why glass you ask? Because that kind of nuclear holocaust, that is all that is left.

Blow up the Statue of Liberty, the White House, and Wall Street, but for the sake of the rest of world, leave the American heart and soul intact and leave TV alone.

Re:tool of terrorism? (1)

Oliver Wendell Jones (158103) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691476)

wow... and if you thought most Americans were ready to nuke the entire middle east on Sept 11, just imagine their reactions on Superbowl Sunday...

I'm not sure this is a great idea (4, Interesting)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691072)

Definitely some cool technology, but lets think about who would be most threatened by it? I don't think Crapassistan has any satellites to threaten, but the Russians and the Chinese would.

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.

Re:I'm not sure this is a great idea (2, Interesting)

redKrane (672370) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691210)

I wouldn't conclude with such confidence that the Russians have a more capable space program right now. Everyone agrees we had the superior program until the disaster over Texas; only now we're hesitant to send our shuttles back up due to safety concerns. However, in a crunch situation, I believe we wouldnt hesitate to use our shuttles once again, considering the overall safety record of the shuttles.

Possible scenario (4, Funny)

PornMaster (749461) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691084)

Michael Powell: You've got to jam the Sirius satellites, Scotty, Howard Stern is corrupting the youth of America!
Scotty: I'm givin' er all she's got, Chairman...

Egahds! (2, Funny)

Kazrath (822492) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691095)

This is just another way for bible thumping goverment agents to control my Pr0n surfing!.

That's great!!!! (1, Funny)

dfn5 (524972) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691116)

U.S. Deploys Satellite Jamming System

Cuz I've got cable.

Re:That's great!!!! (1)

da3dAlus (20553) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691230)

Uh huh, and as far as cable TV goes, how do you think they get THEIR signal? Ever wonder why there's an array of dishes at major cable provider sites?

Re:That's great!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10691240)

And where does your cable come from? The cable company and their gigantic sattelite dish.

Re:That's great!!!! (1)

iamstilgar (645508) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691317)

Where do you think the cable companies get their broadcast feeds?

pakistani paper carried story Oct 30 (1)

museumpeace (735109) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691124)

http://www.dawn.com/2004/10/31/int7.htm What else does everybody but americans know about america?

If I had to design one... (3, Interesting)

Dr. Zowie (109983) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691135)

... I'd use a radiotelescope to identify the wavelengths that the satellite was transmitting, then use the same radiotelescope to send a lot of noise in the same band back at the satellite. Since ground-based radios have essentially infinite power, one could overwhelm any transmission from the satellite with junk signal, reflecting off the satellite itself.

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.

oh boy (4, Funny)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691142)

Oh wow is this going to piss off DirecTV.

Or maybe this is the govt's answer to all those people hacking satellite cards.
No TV For YOU

Metal Gear Solid it up.. (1)

TheAvatar666 (670893) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691191)

Just fry them all..
Compton effect [wikipedia.org] to make a huge EMP [wikipedia.org]

A lot more fun, and it will save us from the Patriots [wikipedia.org]

Part of Galileo threat (2, Informative)

Zaffle (13798) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691340)

This is part of the threat the senior US official made at a London conference on Galileo.

The senior official promised that in the event China used the Galileo system against the US, the US would attempt what they called reversible action, but, if necessary, they would use irreversible action, to knock out the Galileo system.

Article on the threat [spacedaily.com]

Most likely old, conventional tech (2, Informative)

mercuryresearch (680293) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691389)

Anyone remember Captain Midnight and the HBO [signaltonoise.net] incident?

Tracking dish, knowledge of the frequencies in use, signal generator and amplifier and you're pretty much there.

Of course if they're using DS spread spectrum and they don't have the spreading code, it could be considerably harder, though turning up the power sufficiently would probably desensitise the front end of the satellite enough to stop it from working.

Always fighting the last war... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10691400)

meanwhile, our troops are getting mowed down by rural yahoos with practically ancient repeating rifles and homemade bombs...

We've seen this before! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10691405)

It's the government's souped-up version of the keychain that will turn off any TV. It just scans through all of the satellite remote power off codes.

Of course it's reversible! Usually the same code turns it both ON and OFF.

Space Balls (1)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691410)

RADAR TECH. Sir. The radar, sir. It appears to be.... Jam starts dripping down the screen. RADAR TECH. ....jammed. HELMET Jammed? (takes a taste of the jam) Raspberry. There's only one man who would dare give me the raspberry. (pulls down mask) Lone Starr!

Likely just a receiver overloading device (4, Informative)

LM741N (258038) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691424)

Have you ever gotten those places on your FM dial, where it sounds like 10 different stations are coming in at once? That is intermodulation distortion. Very large signals competing with other very large signals. This is most likely what this "weapon" does. Just overloads the telemetry, data channels, etc of a satellite receiver. It takes alot of current to produce overload resistant receivers, and current is always at a premium on satellites, so I would expect weak receiver front ends that are subject to this ground interference.

Sprint Networks? (1)

gandell (827178) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691426)

When Al Qaeda operatives are heard around the world asking the age old question: "Can you hear me now?" I'm not sure which is worse: The political implications, or the fact that I'd be annoyed once again by that idiotic slogan.

Re:Sprint Networks? (1)

trongey (21550) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691500)

Funny thing about those commercials - I never hear anyone answer.

I don't care how, tell me "why" (2, Interesting)

DataDragon (693231) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691496)

*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?

Re:I don't care how, tell me "why" (1)

trongey (21550) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691571)

Hey. I'll sleep a lot better knowing that all of those terrorists and rogue states can't use their highly developed satellite systems to - um - do - uhh - stuff to me.

Can we use it.... (1)

swb (14022) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691510)

...on Al Jazeera and all the other Islamofacist propaganda satellite channels?

Yes, this is a troll, but I don't exactly see where giving publicity to people who behead civilians is doing anything to contribute constructively to reconstructing Iraq or Islamic terrorism generally.

Just in time ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#10691564)

... to obfuscate, cover up, and otherwise prevent the US population from knowing the true election results as they stream in ** BAM ** and get scrambled.

Mucho Silly (1)

Ancient_Hacker (751168) | more than 9 years ago | (#10691596)

Hmm, sounds very silly:
  • "Ground based".... so it can only jam satellites above it's horizon. Not terribly useful.
  • How can this be new or newsworthy? All it takes to jam a satellite is a few watts of power. Any TV station uplink truck could do the same, given the coordinates and frequency. I suspect the military has had this capability for oh, 40 yrs or more.
  • "without burning it up". The range between blotting out a receiver and burning it up is probably at least a factor of 1,000,000, or much more if the satellite designers took any EMP precautions. Shame on them if they didnt.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?