GPS being jammed and spoofed at Shanghai Port

a reply to: EternalSolace

It makes perfect sense if a new EW system is being tested. The world has watched us demonstrate our warfighting doctrine for decades, and knows how much we rely on GPS. If they can develop a system that can spoof GPS effectively, they're going to handicap us if it comes to a fight. We only within the last couple of years started training to fight in a GPS denied environment, and we don't train for it much because the only way to do it is to actually deny GPS for everyone. It's the same reason we don't train against EW systems in general. They're more concerned about inconveniencing people using GPS than training to actually fight a war.

a reply to: FredT

Real world testing. You can test against your own ships, but there's always a question of "was it rigged" in that situation. If it's supposedly in the hands of criminals they're not going to keep the system in a harbor where it won't affect anyone else. They're going to want to use it to cause the most chaos, such as causing sand ships to run aground. And you won't be able to spoof just a small area with a system like this.

a reply to: EternalSolace

I never said they were blocking the signal rather spoofing it or transmitting false data to receivers to put then in other positions

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: EternalSolace

It makes perfect sense if a new EW system is being tested. The world has watched us demonstrate our warfighting doctrine for decades, and knows how much we rely on GPS. If they can develop a system that can spoof GPS effectively, they're going to handicap us if it comes to a fight. We only within the last couple of years started training to fight in a GPS denied environment, and we don't train for it much because the only way to do it is to actually deny GPS for everyone. It's the same reason we don't train against EW systems in general. They're more concerned about inconveniencing people using GPS than training to actually fight a war.

Highly interesting. But basic orienteering without GPS was a part of my basic flight training. Almost buzzed Patrick AFB airspace once during a VFR training flight. Airforce/Naval Pilots are 100x more skilled than me. Would GPS seriously limit combat activity? In all practicality?

originally posted by: FredT
a reply to: EternalSolace

I never said they were blocking the signal rather spoofing it or transmitting false data to receivers to put then in other positions

You said that, "If the US degrades the signal people would not recieve it."

That insinuates blocking. Sorry.

a reply to: FredT

It might also be strictly be working through the automatic identification system (AIS) transponders. They might be testing using jamming mixed with AIS data traffic.

a reply to: EternalSolace

Yes. The KC-135 had a sextant window at one point. They barely even teach what a sextant is anymore. And INS is at times unreliable. Without input from another navigation system to correct the errors that happen over time, you would have to land and realign the system, especially if it's not aligned right to start. Almost all of our current PGMs use GPS guidance. The F-35 wasn't even initially built with a laser designation system to guide non-GPS weapons.

originally posted by: machineintelligence
a reply to: FredT

It might also be strictly be working through the automatic identification system (AIS) transponders. They might be testing using jamming mixed with AIS data traffic.

AIS systems get location data from GPS then send out VHF signal that other receivers can see. So if the AIS gets a spoofed signal saying its two miles away from where it really is, it will dutifully transit the bad location

a reply to: Zaphod58

I'm good. One of our dads was an old SAC pilot and taught us how to use them in the scouts. I'm pretty sure I could dust off those memories.

I notice some GPS jamming around KSC on occasion.

a reply to: FredT

I suspect this is a combination of taking location data from receivers linked to the AIS system and then jamming those signal sources so they can be spoofed onto the AIS system. I am still thinking this is a EM warfare system test or is being used at this busy port to slip smuggler ships in and out in the confusion. These are to me both likely scenarios.

a reply to: machineintelligence

Article said they had been using listening gear and recorded the incoming signals.
They could have traced terrestrial based signals.
I wouldn't trust any gear for military use that didn't have an auxiliary ring laser gyro running in parallel with a voting algorithm. China must have chip RLG's these days that can be manufactured for less than $10.

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: EternalSolace

It makes perfect sense if a new EW system is being tested. The world has watched us demonstrate our warfighting doctrine for decades, and knows how much we rely on GPS. If they can develop a system that can spoof GPS effectively, they're going to handicap us if it comes to a fight. We only within the last couple of years started training to fight in a GPS denied environment, and we don't train for it much because the only way to do it is to actually deny GPS for everyone. It's the same reason we don't train against EW systems in general. They're more concerned about inconveniencing people using GPS than training to actually fight a war.

Highly interesting. But basic orienteering without GPS was a part of my basic flight training. Almost buzzed Patrick AFB airspace once during a VFR training flight. Airforce/Naval Pilots are 100x more skilled than me. Would GPS seriously limit combat activity? In all practicality?

the short and frightening answer is a clear YES.

look the military lately has as a goal a "centrist unified " fighting style.. they want to unite and coordinate forces to a high degree.

some of the reasons have noble reasons such as limiting collateral damage, limiting harm to civilians and reduced use of force needed to accomplish a mission.

but the reality is war is a dirty messy business where your enemies dont fight fair (in worst case) and even in the best case will want to negate any advantage you have.

along with the basic fact that anything (be high or low tech) breaks, fails, fails to work as advertised , is disabled/destroyed in warfare and just good old Murphy law

our dependence on electronics is that gross weakness. alot of basic skills (ex land navigation without gps) are either not taught or once out of basic training are not continually trained on.

we have countless non electronic examples in modern armies where they just stopped teaching basic skills that have come back and we have to learn the lessons AGAIN with cost in lives and equipment.

just look at the submarines (u boats) of germany just beween wwI and WW II and that was barely 20 or so years apart.

we had the B 1 bomber that had all sorts of problems because one system was not working with another ( multiple) and if one or two went no backups .
we have navy vessels that if the computer went down it was dead in the water...

hell the latest fighters if the computer has a glitch the pilot could lose oxygen alone (and did happen) with no warning or backups. that was just one problem

our potential opponents know this and either use old fashion skills (like in middle east) or are developing (or most likely have) to disable and destroy our electronics (china for one)... or both.

sadly we are not immune to being forced to learn from military history .

the danger here us unlike (ex) early WWII we may not have the time to relearn the skills before we are defeated.

scrounger

a reply to: Macenroe82

You should go FPV and never look back.

😉

a reply to: The GUT


Every day is a faded sign..

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: EternalSolace

Yes. The KC-135 had a sextant window at one point. They barely even teach what a sextant is anymore. And INS is at times unreliable. Without input from another navigation system to correct the errors that happen over time, you would have to land and realign the system, especially if it's not aligned right to start. Almost all of our current PGMs use GPS guidance. The F-35 wasn't even initially built with a laser designation system to guide non-GPS weapons.

I get that everything relies on GPS, but I would imagine that we have pretty detailed maps of the entire Earth's surface that would be able to roughly guide where you are in good weather, and navigation by stars, etc. if it wasn't.

I'd also imagine that planes can calculate where they should be by their original take-off location and path they've taken.
Sure, there will likely be an increasing difference the longer the flight and it won't be good enough for any type of military operation. In theory, once a jamming source was identified, I'd think it would be targeted pretty quick.

I would also hope that the military has back-up plans in the event of a conflict where GPS was taken out? Maybe other hardened satellites, etc. It's been what, 25 years since all the GPS satellites have been in place?

originally posted by: peter_kandra
I get that everything relies on GPS, but I would imagine that we have pretty detailed maps of the entire Earth's surface that would be able to roughly guide where you are in good weather, and navigation by stars, etc. if it wasn't.

Navigation with maps would require visual cues. Flying at 40,000 feet and 500 knots it's pretty hard to get visual cues. Navigating by stars requires a sextant. It's no longer taught because it's no longer required.

I'd also imagine that planes can calculate where they should be by their original take-off location and path they've taken. Sure, there will likely be an increasing difference the longer the flight and it won't be good enough for any type of military operation. In theory, once a jamming source was identified, I'd think it would be targeted pretty quick.

INS. I've seen an INS unit off by 50 miles within an 8 hour flight. It also required a 45-60 minute alignment on the ground before takeoff. As for targeting, depending on altitude, a GPS jammer can hit a huge area. The last GPS denial exercise they ran, the NOTAM showed GPS unavailable out to 117nm at 50 feet, and 300nm at 40,000 feet. You also have to get through any defenses around it.

I would also hope that the military has back-up plans in the event of a conflict where GPS was taken out? Maybe other hardened satellites, etc. It's been what, 25 years since all the GPS satellites have been in place?

Your hope would be wrong. They have run two GPS denial exercises in the last 3-4 years. And those were like one or two day long exercises.

a reply to: Zaphod58
While jamming is an issue the part of this story out of the port of Shanghai that I find most concerning is the spoofing of the GPS locations of the ships that are on the system as you previously mentioned. That technology can have some serious safety issues with it in a busy port such as the one in Shanghai. The why is the question most on my mind.

a reply to: machineintelligence

As I said earlier, what better way to do a real world test than to let "criminals" get their hands on the system and use it to steal something valuable, such as the sand they mentioned in the article. Total deniability on the part of the government, and they get to see if their system works. If a few people get hurt in the process, well that's too bad isn't it.

a reply to: Sparkitekt

Oh I do with my personal quads.

But I'm also a drone pilot at my work.
Yesterday's GPS issue comments were work-related.