Hi Tom,
Funny talking about the frequency range and power consumption for jamming. You
may or may not be aware that some of the secure comms systems employed now are
using a variable frequency as part of the security measures. So? Well,
traditional wide band scanning won't work. Combine this with a medium level
encryption and it makes the effort required to intercept or interfere with
tactiacal level comms very costly. You might find EW software developing at
the same rate down the track but I agree that we in SGII we already ahve the
EW component present.
[quoted original message omitted]
> You wrote:
> Funny talking about the frequency range and power consumption for
I had a discussion along these lines with a friend of mine who's retired from
the SIGINT field. He sat a minute and contemplated exactlly what would be
classified and what wouldn't be. He then made two simple statements. 1)The
USofA does not sell communications equipment that we cannot jam
and/or intercept.
2)The United States has sold comms systems using variable frequencies to
various nations.
I leave you, as I was left, to connect the dots.
Besides, anyone think the military will ever come up with a 100% reliable
piece of equipment? Hell, I can't name a single piece of
low-tech, 1,000 year old (in concept at least), TA-50 that I can't
imagine an improvement on. Except the poncho liner.
To the World,
You may be interested to know that the SADSF was fielding frequency agile
communications systems in the mid 1980's, so it is nothing new or
spectuacular. The SPY-1 radar of the Aegis combat system does as well,
and that is late '60's technology.
DM
----------
> From: Glover, Owen <oglover@mov.vic.gov.au>
> >think if they are not being used, it is not present, and therefore
> >tech exists, so assuming they harness the same for comms...) and
> >the mainline powers (NAC, NSL, FSE) have advantages because of their
> >superceded commo tech (hence rendering comms risky or problematic),
> >be aware of them, and be aware of their impact on how one would
> John Atkinson wrote:
...
> 1)The USofA does not sell communications equipment that we cannot jam
Which leads to another interesting "war story." A friend of mine was an
electronics officer on an Intruder. He related a story of how in an exercise
with the French he was jamming on a full spectrum to cover all of the
"variable frequencies" even though he knew exactly what frequency the French
were using. On an unjammed administrative channel he was radioing the French
and asking about the effectiveness of the jamming. Well, the French ignored
him until he took all of the Intruder's jamming power, across all of the
frequencies, and put it on the one frequency they were using. He said he got
immediate feedback from the French operators since he had set their equipment
on fire.
Hmmm.
> On an unjammed administrative channel he was radioing the French and
> Kristian Miller
This whole incident might have been avoided by asking the question in french.
Also, it doesn't speak well for the 'frequency agility' of the comms.
> At 09:59 4/27/98, Miguel Echavarria wrote:
I am reminded of an episode of Babylon 5 where a White Star encountered an
alien vessel:
Marcus: Any response? Ivanova: We keep hailing them... It's like they can
understand what we're saying, but refuse to speak our language. Marcus: Who
knew they were French?