Space - the final frontier?!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Space - the final frontier?!
Good people of PPRUNE, I wonder if you can assist? I am, for personal research, doing a study on the vulnerability of space-enabled assets.
Without going above the restricted level, could various trades illuminate me as to whether they could cope without the good things that space gives us. I am of course interested in airframe drivers, whether they could cope without GPS for example? Is your nav kit, with ring laser gyros etc, able to cope without GPS updates? Does your secure comms depend on GPS timing synchronisation? If GPS was unavailable, could you revert to steam planning these days? Any other gotchas?
Don't need to talk about munitions...happy with those, or indeed lack of accurate met. Also aware of CSAR requirements and int branch dependencies.
Other trades, does space do anything for you? Logistic tracking, ATC, Regiment for example.
AP3000 (sorry!) says 90% of what we do is space dependent, but does not illuminate any further.
Much obliged!
Roger D
Without going above the restricted level, could various trades illuminate me as to whether they could cope without the good things that space gives us. I am of course interested in airframe drivers, whether they could cope without GPS for example? Is your nav kit, with ring laser gyros etc, able to cope without GPS updates? Does your secure comms depend on GPS timing synchronisation? If GPS was unavailable, could you revert to steam planning these days? Any other gotchas?
Don't need to talk about munitions...happy with those, or indeed lack of accurate met. Also aware of CSAR requirements and int branch dependencies.
Other trades, does space do anything for you? Logistic tracking, ATC, Regiment for example.
AP3000 (sorry!) says 90% of what we do is space dependent, but does not illuminate any further.
Much obliged!
Roger D
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: S of 55N
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Space - it's big
Ring laser gyros can be run seperately from their embedded GPS - have a Google for Honeywell H-764 EGI and you'll find loads. Drift rate from the manufacturer is <0.8nm/hr (in practise its a shed load less).
Now I agree that SATCOM sats are vulnerable, but are they likely to be denied by kinetic effect or jamming?
Heres why I think:
1. Geo-Stationary Orbit is 22,500 miles away and that would probably need a transfer orbit to reach it - or mahoosive rocket that most don't have. Even then, the GEO sat would have so much notice of the rocket coming that it could expend some of its fuel and sidestep the rocket.
2. Hitting a GEO satellite would probably deny all GEO satellites for a very long time - both the enemy's and our own through large debris fields (very indescriminate). That would probably be the biggest own goal of the millenium!
3. Jamming aircraft receive SATCOM is tricky from the ground as the directional antennae are pointing upwards (with massive amounts of gain up and lots of attenuation down), so an airborne jammer would be needed in the proximity of the aircraft you were trying to jam - may as well shoot it down whilst you're there! Also, you would need to jam X, Ku and Ka Band accross all frequencies to be effective and probably "frag" your own assets. Jamming satellite receive SATCOM is easier with a mahoosive dish and lots of power - that would deny any platform picture on reach-back.
4. Any SATCOM jammers are likely to go straight to the top of any priority lists for engagement by others means (TLAM, HARM, STORM SHADOW, SF teams, etc...).
I'm sure there's more...
So I'm not so convinced for SATCOM as I am for GPS - until M-Code is rolled out.
iRaven
Heres why I think:
1. Geo-Stationary Orbit is 22,500 miles away and that would probably need a transfer orbit to reach it - or mahoosive rocket that most don't have. Even then, the GEO sat would have so much notice of the rocket coming that it could expend some of its fuel and sidestep the rocket.
2. Hitting a GEO satellite would probably deny all GEO satellites for a very long time - both the enemy's and our own through large debris fields (very indescriminate). That would probably be the biggest own goal of the millenium!
3. Jamming aircraft receive SATCOM is tricky from the ground as the directional antennae are pointing upwards (with massive amounts of gain up and lots of attenuation down), so an airborne jammer would be needed in the proximity of the aircraft you were trying to jam - may as well shoot it down whilst you're there! Also, you would need to jam X, Ku and Ka Band accross all frequencies to be effective and probably "frag" your own assets. Jamming satellite receive SATCOM is easier with a mahoosive dish and lots of power - that would deny any platform picture on reach-back.
4. Any SATCOM jammers are likely to go straight to the top of any priority lists for engagement by others means (TLAM, HARM, STORM SHADOW, SF teams, etc...).
I'm sure there's more...
So I'm not so convinced for SATCOM as I am for GPS - until M-Code is rolled out.
iRaven
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: planet earth
Posts: 451
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you have the time, I commend this book:
It is written from a US perspective, but then they have most to lose.
This is also worth a read as it give you some idea of a pratical application ( note the book was written before this hit the web)
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/wo...xnet.html?_r=1
I appreciate it does not strictly answer your question, but if you want to screw up someone's day then there are many possible ( and shorter ) routes to achieveing this.
It is written from a US perspective, but then they have most to lose.
This is also worth a read as it give you some idea of a pratical application ( note the book was written before this hit the web)
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/wo...xnet.html?_r=1
I appreciate it does not strictly answer your question, but if you want to screw up someone's day then there are many possible ( and shorter ) routes to achieveing this.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it more likely we will see satellite disruption via natural means rather than by overt act, despite the capabilities shown by the Chinese*, which may be what the o.p. needs/wants to look at.
*Even this I see not necessarily as a means to destroy a nations coms/spy capabilities - there are too many redundant systems for that (ok, not ours perhaps). However, the amount of debris created by multiple sat strikes could, perhaps, temporarily swamp some early warning systems(?), even if only as a distraction tactic. Tricky to quantify without delving into classified data.
*Even this I see not necessarily as a means to destroy a nations coms/spy capabilities - there are too many redundant systems for that (ok, not ours perhaps). However, the amount of debris created by multiple sat strikes could, perhaps, temporarily swamp some early warning systems(?), even if only as a distraction tactic. Tricky to quantify without delving into classified data.
