6 ms·

> the protagonists only initially survive because their ship eschews network connections. I always wonder if the next big military development is actually goin

> the protagonists only initially survive because their ship eschews network connections. I always wonder if the next big military development is actually going to involve more technology, rather than less. America’s main military weakness is that it is very reliant on things like GPS or connections to other devices. What’s to stop a foe from developing jamming tech and counteracting the US’ lead? From what family tells me, the army still teaches people to dig trenches and use old-fashioned maps (among other things) just in case.

kstrauser 5y ago
A couple of things make that not so easy: 1. Ship- and ground-based transmitters are ridiculously powerful, and use lots of jamming-resistant tech like spread spectrum. 2. Viewed at the right wavelengths, jammers are like looking at Las Vegas at night. They’re very visible, and attractive targets for RF-seeking munitions.
- jcims 5y ago
  > 2. Viewed at the right wavelengths, jammers are like looking at Las Vegas at night. They’re very visible, and attractive targets for RF-seeking munitions. This may not be super intuitive until you start playing around with the technology and understand what’s possible with phased array antennas. I’m fairly confident that somewhere in the planet is an integrated, real-time, broadband view of RF illumination over the surface of the earth.
- seoaeu 5y ago
  Yeah, your missiles don't need fancy GPS guidance when their programming can basically just be "travel towards the radio jamming signal and explode on impact"
bladegash 5y ago
As a former Marine (07-12), yes, they do still teach basic land navigation using a map and compass. However, the skills are not reinforced or even practiced really. It is not as easy to conduct EW against GPS as you would think, at least not military specific capabilities. There are contingencies and capabilities in place for that. Bigger concern would be the GPS satellites being destroyed altogether. Which is also why when you hear news reports about China or the US destroying their own satellites using ship launched missiles, the message intended to be conveyed is more than meets the eye. Those demonstrations are really about telegraphing to adversaries what you can/would do in the event of a conflict.
- LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
  Would that really matter, given the existence of [1] https://www.microsemi.com/product-directory/clocks-frequency-references/3824-chip-scale-atomic-clock-csac https://www.microsemi.com/product-directory/clocks-frequency... , [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_laser_gyroscope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_laser_gyroscope , [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibre-optic_gyroscope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibre-optic_gyroscope , and other [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microelectromechanical_systems https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microelectromechanical_systems gizmos like [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibrating_structure_gyroscope#MEMS_gyroscopes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibrating_structure_gyroscope#... ? Especially when global [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_elevation_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_elevation_model fit multiple times on the equivalent of some micro-sd card nowadays? Seems like something like this [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_vision_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_vision_system wouldn't need to depend on GPS at all, maybe some sensor fusion for things like radar/infrared/whatever.
  - bladegash 5y ago
    I’m not very familiar with the technologies you linked. However, bear in mind the military operates at a scale that’s hard to fathom. Fielding new capabilities requires substantial level of effort when it’s military wide. Aside from that, many times they already have some tricks up their sleeves if push ever came to shove.
    - LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
      Me neither, except on a pop-science level. Anyways, what I linked to are the key components for inertial navigation systems. Not all of them together, but several options. The first is that chip-scale 'atomic clock' thing from microsemi, a very precise time source. Something like that would be needed in every case. The others are different possible paths to precisely measure (speed of) movement and (change of) orientation. Based on those you could construct inertial navigation 'on the go' in small form factors. Not smartphone-like small at the moment, but close to. Regarding the scale of fielding/roll-out, ask Apple, Honeywell, or someone like that... Thinking about it, maybe that is why 'the others' play at shooting things in orbit because they allready have 'Mao's mighty map' available? Who knows? Whatever. The end of GPS/GNSS wouldn't necessarily have to be 'the end of navigation'.

kstrauser 5y ago

A couple of things make that not so easy: 1. Ship- and ground-based transmitters are ridiculously powerful, and use lots of jamming-resistant tech like spread spectrum. 2. Viewed at the right wavelengths, jammers are like looking at Las Vegas at night. They’re very visible, and attractive targets for RF-seeking munitions.

jcims 5y ago
> 2. Viewed at the right wavelengths, jammers are like looking at Las Vegas at night. They’re very visible, and attractive targets for RF-seeking munitions. This may not be super intuitive until you start playing around with the technology and understand what’s possible with phased array antennas. I’m fairly confident that somewhere in the planet is an integrated, real-time, broadband view of RF illumination over the surface of the earth.
seoaeu 5y ago
Yeah, your missiles don't need fancy GPS guidance when their programming can basically just be "travel towards the radio jamming signal and explode on impact"

bladegash 5y ago

As a former Marine (07-12), yes, they do still teach basic land navigation using a map and compass. However, the skills are not reinforced or even practiced really. It is not as easy to conduct EW against GPS as you would think, at least not military specific capabilities. There are contingencies and capabilities in place for that. Bigger concern would be the GPS satellites being destroyed altogether. Which is also why when you hear news reports about China or the US destroying their own satellites using ship launched missiles, the message intended to be conveyed is more than meets the eye. Those demonstrations are really about telegraphing to adversaries what you can/would do in the event of a conflict.

LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
Would that really matter, given the existence of [1] https://www.microsemi.com/product-directory/clocks-frequency-references/3824-chip-scale-atomic-clock-csac https://www.microsemi.com/product-directory/clocks-frequency... , [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_laser_gyroscope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_laser_gyroscope , [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibre-optic_gyroscope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fibre-optic_gyroscope , and other [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microelectromechanical_systems https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microelectromechanical_systems gizmos like [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibrating_structure_gyroscope#MEMS_gyroscopes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibrating_structure_gyroscope#... ? Especially when global [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_elevation_model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_elevation_model fit multiple times on the equivalent of some micro-sd card nowadays? Seems like something like this [6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_vision_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_vision_system wouldn't need to depend on GPS at all, maybe some sensor fusion for things like radar/infrared/whatever.
- bladegash 5y ago
  I’m not very familiar with the technologies you linked. However, bear in mind the military operates at a scale that’s hard to fathom. Fielding new capabilities requires substantial level of effort when it’s military wide. Aside from that, many times they already have some tricks up their sleeves if push ever came to shove.
  - LargoLasskhyfv 5y ago
    Me neither, except on a pop-science level. Anyways, what I linked to are the key components for inertial navigation systems. Not all of them together, but several options. The first is that chip-scale 'atomic clock' thing from microsemi, a very precise time source. Something like that would be needed in every case. The others are different possible paths to precisely measure (speed of) movement and (change of) orientation. Based on those you could construct inertial navigation 'on the go' in small form factors. Not smartphone-like small at the moment, but close to. Regarding the scale of fielding/roll-out, ask Apple, Honeywell, or someone like that... Thinking about it, maybe that is why 'the others' play at shooting things in orbit because they allready have 'Mao's mighty map' available? Who knows? Whatever. The end of GPS/GNSS wouldn't necessarily have to be 'the end of navigation'.