[aprssig] GPS possible disruption SE US Jan 20 - Feb 22

Fri Jan 21 09:20:18 EST 2011

Pretty much spot-on, Glenn.

I was involved in testing MIRVs during the 80s and 90s.  We'd deploy to 
a remote location and fly an orbit near where the MIRVs reentered.  The 
MIRVs were equipped with telemetry transmitters instead of warheads, and 
we'd collect data on each of them.  Sitting on an island in the South 
Atlantic, watching our aircraft orbit and the MIRVs reenter was pretty 
surreal... especially if you considered what they were SUPPOSED to be 
carrying as payload.

Most of the time, there was a Russian trawler in the vicinity... 
sometimes in the target area.  We would always warn them (transmitting 
in the clear) that they were in a bad spot.  Normally they'd move a 
couple of miles, but on at least one occasion, we had to buzz the deck 
(in a EC-135) to get them to move.

I miss those days!

73,

Mike
WM4B

On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Glenn Little WB4UIV wrote:

> Long range nukes have no need for GPS.
> We could fire a MIRV (Multiple Independent Reentry Vehicle) ballistic 
> missile from a submarine and hit hardened targets with all warheads.
> The missiles almost 20 years ago used celestial navigation for 
> inflight corrections.
> I do not know what is used today, but, if they relied on an active 
> emitter (GPS) for inflight corrections, somebody goofed.
>
> GPS would be used for launching a short range device from a moving 
> launcher where position was either not accurately known or moving very 
> fast.
>
> This is just my guess as to how to direct a weapon.
>
> 73
> Glenn
> WB4UIV
>
>
>
>
>
> At 12:58 PM 1/20/2011, you wrote:
>> What is the modulation of the GPS signal?  Is it something that a 
>> larger power transmitter could blanket an area and override the sats 
>> as in the FM capture effect?  I'd guess that "moving things around" 
>> could be a good reason for this test.  It implies that once a target 
>> is "guessed", that a high speed interceptor could arrive overhead and 
>> direct GPS guided weapons away to somewhere else.
>>
>> I'd guess that smart weapons would be designed to "integrate over 
>> time" correction of their trajectory and might not be vastly 
>> redirect-able at the last minute.  But dealing with wind changes and 
>> other things might make them much more nimble and this could allow 
>> them to be "flown over" for a long amount of time and directed to 
>> someplace else, completely.
>>
>> The recent noise about North Korea being ready to deliver long range 
>> nukes might be a stimulus for this kind of activity.
>>
>> Gregg Wonderly
>> W5GGW
>>
>> On 1/20/2011 11:20 AM, mwbesemer at cox.net wrote:
>>> That is possible, and could probably be implemented via the WAAS 
>>> system, in
>>> areas that are augmented by WAAS.
>>>
>>> However, keep in mind that either jamming or offsetting GPS for 
>>> aviation or
>>> maritime customers would be relatively ineffective due to the fact 
>>> that those
>>> platforms are required to have redundancy in their navigation 
>>> systems via
>>> another source. (GPS backed by INS, DNS, Omega, LORAN, etc.) Also, 
>>> when near or
>>> over land, VORTACs are available for aircraft use (although they 
>>> could be shut
>>> off in case of emergency).
>>>
>>> Consider, however, the case of smart-munitions. Those that are 
>>> GPS-guided (are
>>> likely to) go into a fail-safe mode if GPS guidance was completly 
>>> disrupted
>>> (jammed). This mode might result in the self-destruction of the 
>>> weapon or in the
>>> safeing of the weapon (rendering it non-explosive, although you 
>>> still would not
>>> want it landing on your house).
>>>
>>> I'm only speculating on all of this (of course) but I did spend the 
>>> majority of
>>> the past 30 years doing RT&E/DT&E with the military. Most likely, we 
>>> will NOT
>>> hear anything specific regarding the results/purpose of this test 
>>> (unless
>>> Wikileaks gets a hold of it!) for the next 25 years or so. There are 
>>> some things
>>> that the public really doesn't need (or want) to know about.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Mike
>>> WM4B
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr) wrote:
>>>
>>>> But with a jammer, the receiver knows they don't have a fix and 
>>>> something's
>>>> up. I'm more thinking an experimental scrambler/offsetter that 
>>>> allows GPS
>>>> receivers within the cone of influence to arrive at a solution 
>>>> based on the
>>>> received signals and generate fix, but they really aren't at the 
>>>> location the
>>>> fix describes. And the GPS consumer won't know that they're being 
>>>> mis-lead
>>>> (literally!).
>>>>
>>>> Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and Win32
>>>>
>>>> mwbesemer at cox.net wrote:
>>>>> Nope... you're thinking about it from the wrong angle.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ever heard of a GPS Jammer?
>>>>>
>>>>> Mike
>>>>> WM4B
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 11:36 AM, Gregg Wonderly wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> It sounds like a transmitter at 40,000ft that might be a "relay" 
>>>>>> of existing
>>>>>> GPS data. Perhaps they are trying to figure out how to make GPS 
>>>>>> work on the
>>>>>> ground in cities with tall buildings?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gregg
>>>>>> w5GGW
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 1/20/2011 9:15 AM, Earl Needham wrote:
>>>>>>> I'm just wondering what they're doing that might disrupt GPS...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Vy 7 3
>>>>>>> Earl
>>>>>>> KD5XB
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> KD5XB -- Earl Needham http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cw_bugs 
>>>>>>> Quoting from
>>>>>>> the Coast Guard: ZUT Posted via Blackberry
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Steve Noskowicz<noskosteve at yahoo.com>
>>>>>>> Sender: aprssig-bounces at tapr.org
>>>>>>> Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 07:12:37
>>>>>>> To: TAPR APRS Mailing List<aprssig at tapr.org>
>>>>>>> Reply-To: TAPR APRS Mailing List<aprssig at tapr.org>
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [aprssig] GPS possible disruption SE US Jan 20 - 
>>>>>>> Feb 22
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --- On Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr) wrote:
>>>>>>>> ... I was looking for the coordinates that I could understand 
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - - - - - -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I often say that... "Can you explain that in terms I know?" (;-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 304906N = 30.4906 Deg North
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 0802811W = 80.2811 Deg West
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Google maps finds it A-OK.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you'd like it, I have an Excel spreadsheet that does 
>>>>>>> conversions between
>>>>>>> all forms of these. That is:
>>>>>>> 1 - Degrees.decimal (As shown above)
>>>>>>> 2 - Degrees, Minutes.decimal
>>>>>>> 3 - Degrees, Minutes, Seconds.decimal
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Contact via my web site or MYCALL at arrl.net
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> aprssig mailing list
>>>>>> aprssig at tapr.org
>>>>>> https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> aprssig mailing list
>>>>> aprssig at tapr.org
>>>>> https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> aprssig mailing list
>>>> aprssig at tapr.org
>>>> https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> aprssig mailing list
>>> aprssig at tapr.org
>>> https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> aprssig mailing list
>> aprssig at tapr.org
>> https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> aprssig mailing list
> aprssig at tapr.org
> https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig