Signal-to-noise counts in jamming and if you are close enough to carrier generate a jamming signal, you won't be doing it very long.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
UAVs, not just an Air Force gig anymore
- Thread starter kanakAttack
- Start date
Signal-to-noise counts in jamming and if you are close enough to carrier generate a jamming signal, you won't be doing it very long.
I read somewhere that military GPS uses P-code (Psuedo random code) and Y-Code (with an additional encryption key) as opposed to civilian gps using CA code (Course Acquisition) which makes it more accurate and tougher to jam.
Will try to find the link, but this firefox 3 beta sucks at saving bookmarks...
I wasn't thinking things close to a carrier, more like a couple low orbit jamming satellites. I was just googling and read that the Iraqis bought some GPS jammers from Russia prior to the invasion that worked to little effect.
MasterBates
Well-Known Member
Just as a reminder, this is probably NOT a good place to discuss how we prevent people from jammin our GPS systems.
Without getting into the details, for all practical purposes, GPS is NOT a particularly easy thing to jam.
Brett
Hokay, here it is: GPS Anti-Jam Protection Techniques
P-code = precision code. All mil recievers use P and C/A codes, but GPS retains SA (selective availability) capability for non-mil uses of the C/A fix. SA basically degrades the fix for a certain geographic area. Hell, before 2000 SA was the policy for all civilian GPS receivers, so it definitely works.
You're half right about pseudorandom code... it is an integral part of the GPS system & theory... The wikipedia article on GPS is good, if a bit long-winded/dorky.
Independent of the skids, which seems like would be the limiting factor for roll, the weather really should matter much. Our (yours and mine) issue was not getting the thing on deck, but getting it into a small box on deck, and that's only needed to move it. Since the thing is smaller and lighter, seems like getting aboard would be easier.
That said, I'm curious, as well, what kind of sea state/roll they've tested w/. Seems like they'd need some sort of simple trapping system on the skids should it be really rolling.
I have always said that UAV+Jamming=non-flexable air support. I got a mini-brief on such things (all unclass, actually) years ago. Yes, they are working on solutions, but "they" are naturally working on solutions for our solutions.
We shall see....
We shall see....
Tactical387
New Member
I think that UAV's in general equal a non-flexible aviation fleet. I imagine a situation going down something like this- the radar shows something behind me, let me pivot this minicam housed in a drinking straw around...stand by. whiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiir KER splash ..... uh oh...but hey what do i know.
I dont wanna fly UAVs...I cant even play the new ace combat without crashing into the ground out of curiosity
skidz
adrenaline junky
I wonder how long it'll be till some geeks get paid enough to electronically hijack
confused one of our UAVs and fire on our own guys.Keep the men in the cockpit.
I wonder how long it'll be till some geeks get paid enough to electronically hijack
Keep the men in the cockpit.
And women, so to speak.
Or both. Two craniaums are better than one, so to speak.
Even more when you are in the kill container, so to speak.
[points elbow at UAV]
skidz
adrenaline junky
It works. I meant both. Since when was "men" and "man" no longer able to be used to include both?