Skip to comments.
Black Surprises (USAF can take control of enemy missile launchers, radars, etc.)
aviationnow.com ^
| January, 2007
| David A. Fulghum, Michael A. Dornheim & William B. Scott
Posted on 01/24/2007 6:54:09 PM PST by steve86
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-71 next last
To: Dark Wing; Dog Gone; Shermy; blam
41
posted on
01/24/2007 8:21:23 PM PST
by
Thud
To: Prophet in the wilderness
Either this has been vetted and got the Pentagons ok,
Eh, an intelligent person can often piece together assorted open-source information on classified stuff and come up with a reasonably good picture of it without having had a leak or Pentagon approval.
To: Thud
Thanks for the ping. Very interesting article.
43
posted on
01/24/2007 8:34:27 PM PST
by
blam
To: BearWash
The Suter aircraft evidently project multiple digital signal beams into the antennas and other electronic components of the enemy platform to probe and then set up an ad-hoc network, similar to what a "hacker" would do to a target computer on the Internet using ordinary TCP and IP data packets. The nature of the signal beams, however, is a highly guarded secret,
Smoke ... but no mirrors yet ...
44
posted on
01/24/2007 8:36:53 PM PST
by
_Jim
(Highly recommended book on the Kennedy assassination - Posner: "Case Closed")
To: ASA Vet
I agree with your comment.
45
posted on
01/24/2007 8:38:55 PM PST
by
TommyDale
(If we don't put a stop to this global warming, we will all be dead in 10,000 years!)
To: BearWash
they were also talking about projecting contrived images, IIRC, presumably onto radar screens or the modern equivalent.
The creation of 'false (RADAR) returns' is an already well-known 'trick' ...
46
posted on
01/24/2007 8:39:18 PM PST
by
_Jim
(Highly recommended book on the Kennedy assassination - Posner: "Case Closed")
To: BearWash
Yes, I am aware of it. It's the Ultimate in EW.
It would be terrible, for example, if the N. Koreans tested a ballistic missile and it somehow went off course and hit Peking. Or of the Iranians did likewise and it somehow hit Damascus.
47
posted on
01/24/2007 8:40:27 PM PST
by
Jeff Head
(Freedom is not free...never has been, never will be (www.dragonsfuryseries.com))
To: _Jim
I think it builds upon that earlier "positional disparity" to create an entirely new virtual view, with fake aircraft, others missing, etc. I am making an educated guess here.
48
posted on
01/24/2007 8:42:53 PM PST
by
steve86
(Acerbic by nature, not nurture)
To: nnn0jeh
49
posted on
01/24/2007 8:43:19 PM PST
by
kalee
(No burka for me....EVER!)
To: BearWash
>>>
....projecting contrived images, IIRC, presumably onto radar screens or the modern equivalent.<<< I have VietNam era F-4 (Navy Phantom) pilot friend that tells of flying in the same space with an EA-6B (or maybe it was an E-2 Hawkeye?) and they were joking about cababilities.
The 6B jock asked my friend his call sign....and immediately his radar screen went blank as his callsign was spelled out on its face.
50
posted on
01/24/2007 8:45:31 PM PST
by
HardStarboard
(The Democrats are more afraid of American Victory than Defeat!)
To: BearWash
For instance, first, raise the noise 'floor' to hide your own hopefully LO (Low Observable 'platform'), second, delay, advance and reposition in time and even space 'stronger' timed and synchronized with the original RADAR pulse returns back to the emitter ... this works well with pulse trains that aren't randomized, in which case it becomes a LOT more difficult ... although broadband WN can still be used to 'blind' an OPFOR RADAR receiver ...
51
posted on
01/24/2007 8:49:58 PM PST
by
_Jim
(Highly recommended book on the Kennedy assassination - Posner: "Case Closed")
To: HiJinx
I'm continually pissed that our military and intelligence secrets get outed to the media just to make some bureaucratic pukes can feel important.
52
posted on
01/24/2007 9:20:26 PM PST
by
bpjam
(Never Give Up, Never Surrender (Unless James Baker gives you permission))
To: BearWash
Could they not just fly over and maim communication in Iran for a decade or two.
53
posted on
01/24/2007 9:26:56 PM PST
by
alrea
To: 2111USMC
Who's doing the "guarding"? If elected Hillary Roddon Clinton will insure the safety of our technology.sarc/
54
posted on
01/24/2007 9:30:12 PM PST
by
alrea
To: Interesting Times; GreyFriar; SeraphimApprentice
55
posted on
01/24/2007 9:34:02 PM PST
by
zot
(GWB -- the most slandered man of this decade)
To: HiJinx; ASA Vet
Capabilities published are capabilities lost. There are two bugs that need fixing now.
56
posted on
01/24/2007 9:35:12 PM PST
by
BIGLOOK
(Keelhauling is a sensible solution to mutiny.)
To: BIGLOOK
57
posted on
01/24/2007 9:36:52 PM PST
by
HiJinx
(Ask me about support for the Troops)
To: Rembrandt
"Who's doing the "guarding"? That would be A1C Sandy Burglar."
Since we're in a "discovery" mode here, where is he filing the data - right sock or left sock?
Under these circumstances Berger needs to moved to a more secure location. I recommend Fort Leavenworth, KS for about 15 to 20 years.
58
posted on
01/24/2007 9:42:48 PM PST
by
incredulous joe
("Quo me amat, amat et canem meam" - Saint Bernard of Clairvaux)
To: ASA Vet
It's deafening!
59
posted on
01/24/2007 9:55:34 PM PST
by
null and void
(<----- Shocked and odd...)
To: Jeff Head
It would be terrible, for example, if the N. Koreans tested a ballistic missile and it somehow went off course and hit Peking. Or of the Iranians did likewise and it somehow hit Damascus.Damascus? That would be Syria's...
60
posted on
01/24/2007 9:57:07 PM PST
by
null and void
(<----- Shocked and odd...)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-71 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson