Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bolton: Iranian Jamming Technology Could Be Worse News Than Downed Drone
FOX ^ | 12/11/2011

Posted on 12/12/2011 6:26:23 AM PST by Just4Him

American officials insist that neither weaponry nor technology brought down a U.S. drone that was flying over Iranian territory earlier this month, but a former U.S. ambassador says if reports are true that Russia provided jamming equipment, the situation becomes all that much worse. "Some reports have said Russia sold (Iran) a very sophisticated jamming system a short time ago," U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton told Fox News on Sunday. "Now, our military says that is not true, it came down because of a malfunction. I certainly hope that's right because if the Russians have provided Iran with sophisticated jamming equipment it means a lot else is at risk too."

Bolton said Congress ought to be concerned if the Iranians are in possession of jamming technology that can bring down missiles, planes and communications and guidance systems "for a whole range of our weapon systems."

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last
To: Travis McGee
I thought our frequency-hopping algorithms made jamming our drones impossible?

They make it hard to take control of the drone, but not jamming. You just jam the entire section of the spectrum where the transmitter operates. Simple in theory, hard in practice. You need to know how wide a band to jam. And you need some serious gear to do that but then that is what the Russians were selling them. Finally you tend to blind any of you own equipment operating in that range.

I have always been a big fan of the cheap drone. Think V-1 buzz bomb with a camera instead of a warhead. Have an assembly line crank them out by the thousands. Sure they will probably shoot down five out of six. But they are shooting million dollar a pop SAMs at you $200,000 a copy drones. You force them to wage economic warfare against themselves. And when you lose a drone no big deal.
21 posted on 12/12/2011 7:25:19 AM PST by GonzoGOP (There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RFEngineer
The antennas are shielded by the body of the aircraft.

Depends on what it's made of. Fiberglass composite is invisible to RF. Carbon and aluminum aren't.

22 posted on 12/12/2011 7:25:28 AM PST by Thermalseeker (If ignorance is bliss how come there aren't more happy people?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps
Just suppose that the GPS signal is also jammed and the critter doesn’t know where it is much less where “home” is.

Backup nav systems should let it know pretty much where it is in 3D space.

23 posted on 12/12/2011 7:26:09 AM PST by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lonesome in Massachussets

I too thought the Iranian response was strange. Why publicize the fact they have the drone, especially if it was brought down with jamming technology? They would get a brief public relations bump but reveal a lot about their capabilities.


24 posted on 12/12/2011 7:40:12 AM PST by BigBobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

US ambassadors don’t have clearance for such knowledge, so I highly doubt his guessing is accurate.


25 posted on 12/12/2011 7:42:13 AM PST by CodeToad (Islam needs to be banned in the US and treated as a criminal enterprise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Thermalseeker

Depends on what it’s made of. Fiberglass composite is invisible to RF. Carbon and aluminum aren’t.

We can be confident that a stealth platform does not conduct RF through the wing/body of the aircraft.


26 posted on 12/12/2011 7:43:47 AM PST by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: BigBobber

A muslim would not miss the brownie points among their own. They brought down a dreaded weapon of the great satan after all.


27 posted on 12/12/2011 7:44:00 AM PST by DonaldC (A nation cannot stand in the absence of religious principle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Army Air Corps
Just suppose that the GPS signal is also jammed and the critter doesn’t know where it is much less where “home” is.

You still have inertial navigation...assuming that it was part of the system. Counting on GPS to always be there is a single point of failure kind of mistake. Ditto for assuming the satellite links will be there.

28 posted on 12/12/2011 7:53:53 AM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Just4Him

This whole episode is curious. Could Iranian radar even detect this thing up in the air? If not, how did they find it - did they somehow recieve and interpret the radio signal controlling the aircraft?

And, judging by its non-wrecked condition, it looks like it did not ‘crash’...so was it ‘jamming’, or was it ‘taking over the controls’?

If the Iranians/Russians are able to do this, it seems there is little they can’t do (I’m thinking satellite communications, etc.).

Wow....still hoping for a Trojan Horse scenario.


29 posted on 12/12/2011 8:04:36 AM PST by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
The frequency hopping or CDMA approach is resistant to jamming on a single frequency. You jam that kind of signal with a frequency hopper or CDMA. The technology to receive the signal is common as dirt. CDMA cellphones are a common example. In theory, the PN sequence we use should be hard to follow. The GPS version repeats on a 2 week cycle, but you can "join" that cycle by using the encrypted channel to get info on where the PN cycle is currently functioning. The jamming exercise is simply a denial of service attack using a technique that whacks enough receiver samples to prevent complete reception of a digital data packet. You don't even have to hit 100%. Just keep the reception disrupted.
30 posted on 12/12/2011 8:07:20 AM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625
This would actually be a good thing. We’ve been getting too used to fighting against technologically-inferior opponents, and getting dependent upon weapons systems that rely upon nobody being in a position to jam signal reception:

How is this possibly a good thing, sure you wrote that right or maybe I am missing your point?

31 posted on 12/12/2011 8:08:01 AM PST by Las Vegas Ron (Rush Limbaugh = the Beethoven of talk radio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: PapaBear3625

Undoubtedly Pooty sent Iran a jammer.
The good thing would be our early ability to find a good work-around or even a good hard hitting counter-measure.

Who knows what the actual config of the drone nobama gave them was. Probably not setup or equipped like what nobama “thought” he was giving his bretheren, more or less just a way to feel them out. I will give our Mil and CIA more credit than to be as dumb as nobama.

I don’t care what Russia gives them, two things are in play. One, most everything Ruski Mil sucks in real life (excepting AK-47) and if Russia gave them a ballbearing, we can count on the stupid camel jocks to either file on it or pack sand in it.


32 posted on 12/12/2011 8:28:14 AM PST by X-spurt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: lacrew
This whole episode is curious. Could Iranian radar even detect this thing up in the air? If not, how did they find it - did they somehow recieve and interpret the radio signal controlling the aircraft?

The classic approach to "stealth" aims to disperse the signal striking the target in multiple directions or absorb the signal to attenuate the reflected signal. That works when the radar transmitter/receiver is in a single location. The new approach is a form of "crowd sourcing" using ganged radar receivers at multiple locations. The "ping" from a transmitter is received by multiple receivers at widely separated locations. That data is correlated to resolve a target. The short answer is that "stealth" is a technology that is nearing its useful life as detection techniques have improved. The advent of an RF rich environment creates an "ocean" through which aircraft must travel. The RF acts as a passive transmitter. If you fly an absorbing object through that "ocean", it creates a detectable disruption. The "ganged" receiver approach can resolve a target that way, albeit with "fuzzier" resolution than a standard radar T/R approach.

BTW, you "beat" the ganged radar by breaking the data links used to "gang" the receivers. That puts your "stealth" back in business. The bad guys have been using buried fiber optic cable for the data links.

33 posted on 12/12/2011 8:28:23 AM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RFEngineer
We can be confident that a stealth platform does not conduct RF through the wing/body of the aircraft.

Not necessarily. Fiberglass aircraft, for incidence, are almost invisible to radar and it's not because they are absorbing or reflecting RF energy. BTW, I'm also an RF Engineer, I've worked on a couple of stealth projects, specifically range testing various materials for echo signature.

34 posted on 12/12/2011 8:29:34 AM PST by Thermalseeker (If ignorance is bliss how come there aren't more happy people?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Ron
It's a good thing to know in advance so you don't send your best assets in to be slaughtered because you underestimated your opponent. They tipped their hand too early. We've been exceptionally bold on the assumption that we were dealing with technically inferior opponents. This incident exposes that we have a more substantial opponent. Forewarned is forearmed.
35 posted on 12/12/2011 8:34:01 AM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP

Good thinking!

As my old Granddad always told me “Son, use your head for more than just a hat-rack”


36 posted on 12/12/2011 8:34:42 AM PST by X-spurt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Myrddin

TMI.


37 posted on 12/12/2011 8:42:47 AM PST by patton ("Je pense donc je suis," - My Horse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Myrddin; PapaBear3625
It's a good thing to know in advance so you don't send your best assets in to be slaughtered because you underestimated your opponent.

Ah, now I get it...duh, must need more coffee!

Thanks for the reply ;)

38 posted on 12/12/2011 8:58:05 AM PST by Las Vegas Ron (Rush Limbaugh = the Beethoven of talk radio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

If they are Jamming GPS signal from Sats,then you not using Freq-Hoping. Also, Frequency Hopping makes it harder to Jam,not impossible you just have to Jam much wider channel. Also,where is guarantee that the Drone was using it, instead something much simpler,because its cheap.


39 posted on 12/12/2011 9:12:28 AM PST by alex2011
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Myrddin

Interesting...sounds like it takes alot of equipment and processign power to ‘defeat’ stealth. No way the Iranians did this by themselves.

Perhaps our pals the Russians have been gently stabbing us in the back.


40 posted on 12/12/2011 9:54:13 AM PST by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-65 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson