UAV Counter-Measures?

[sazk07]

Hey everyone.
Just wanted to find out if anyone else thought of this:
UAVs are operated by radio signals right?
so a simple radio jammer, even a portable one, should be an effective counter-measure against all UAVs. they will fall right out of the sky

 

[Anonymous user]

Hey everyone.
Just wanted to find out if anyone else thought of this:
UAVs are operated by radio signals right?
so a simple radio jammer, even a portable one, should be an effective counter-measure against all UAVs. they will fall right out of the sky

No way you're gonna down a million dollar UAV by using a jammer, excerpt from Wiki

Command and sensor systems
During the campaign in the former Yugoslavia, a Predator's pilot would sit with several payload specialists in a van near the runway of the drone's operating base. Direct radio signals controlled the drone's takeoff and initial ascent. Then communications shifted to military satellite networks linked to the pilot's van. Pilots experienced a delay of several seconds between tugging their joysticks and the drone's response. But by 2000 improvements in communications systems (perhaps by use of the USAF's JSTARS system) made it possible, at least in theory, to fly the drone remotely from great distances. It was no longer necessary to use close-up radio signals during the Predator's takeoff and ascent. The entire flight could be controlled by satellite from any command center with the right equipment. The CIA proposed to attempt over Afghanistan the first fully remote Predator flight operations, piloted from the agency's headquarters at Langley.[13]

The Predator air vehicle and sensors are controlled from the ground station via a C-band line-of-sight data link or a Ku-band satellite data link for beyond-line-of-sight operations. During flight operations the crew in the ground control station is a pilot and two sensor operators. The aircraft is equipped with the AN/AAS-52 Multi-spectral Targeting System,[14] a color nose camera (generally used by the pilot for flight control), a variable aperture day-TV camera, and a variable aperture infrared camera (for low light/night). Previously, Predators were equipped with a synthetic aperture radar for looking through smoke, clouds or haze, but lack of use validated its removal to reduce weight and conserve fuel. The cameras produce full motion video and the synthetic aperture radar produced still frame radar images. There is sufficient bandwidth on the datalink for two video sources to be used at one time, but only one video source from the sensor ball can be used at any time due to design limitations. Either the daylight variable aperture or the infrared electro-optical sensor may be operated simultaneously with the synthetic aperture radar, if equipped.[citation needed]

 

[sazk07]

having a satellite link doesn't mean its signals can't be blocked. a radio jamming device with a large enough bubble in which signals can be disrupted... means once the UAV is in its range, it is no longer under the operator's control. won't even feedback video.

 

[Anonymous user]

having a satellite link doesn't mean its signals can't be blocked. a radio jamming device with a large enough bubble in which signals can be disrupted... means once the UAV is in its range, it is no longer under the operator's control. won't even feedback video.

I'm no communications expert but I am sure the military satellites are not as easy to jam as commercial ones, then again even if you did Jam the UAV I assume the UAV will just hover around or be programmed to fly back to point of Origin until the signal is restored.

 

[POPS]

I'm no communications expert but I am sure the military satellites are not as easy to jam as commercial ones, then again even if you did Jam the UAV I assume the UAV will just hover around or be programmed to fly back to point of Origin until the signal is restored.

Thats true

 

[sazk07]

military satellites are not operated by magic. they still need directions via radio wave signals.. difference is that they run on a different frequency than commercial ones. but radio waves.. all radio waves can be jammed.
even if UAVs can return they are still rendered ineffective and therefore it's money down the drain to send them up against radio jammers.

it's an effective counter measure

 

[Anonymous user]

military satellites are not operated by magic. they still need directions via radio wave signals.. difference is that they run on a different frequency than commercial ones. but radio waves.. all radio waves can be jammed.
even if UAVs can return they are still rendered ineffective and therefore it's money down the drain to send them up against radio jammers.

it's an effective counter measure

Military satellites would have designed to counter jamming to a degree, of course you can jam it but it just means you need a very powerful jammer with a large antenna which would I assume would stick out like a sore thumb not to mention jammer locations can be triangulated.

Considering the UAV is mobile in the air trying to predict its movements and dispatch a jammer there is not feasible given the speed and lack of obstacles the UAV encounters (i.e mountains) vs a land based vehicle. Unless you dispatch jammers all over the place which will inadvertently also impact your own operations.

Also the UAV operates around 26,000 feet according to some sources, how effective the jammers are at that altitude I can't say.

Jammers are nothing new and there are discussions similiar to these all over the internet, but if the UAV are still operating with good success it probably means jamming is not an effective countermeasure.

Like said I am not an expert but just a few points indicate that jamming is not an effective deterrent, maybe some experts in the forum can help you on this.

 

[Chogy]

Frequency agility negates jamming, pretty much.

Two radios synchronize highly accurate internal clocks. They then rotate through thousands of frequencies at high speed, in lock-step with each other. So if a jammer operates on 14.2833 gigahertz, the system may stop on that frequency for perhaps a millisecond, but what you get (at worst) is a millisecond's worth of jamming, a tiny, tiny hiccup. And the data-stream is error corrected, so the link continues on despite the jamming.

 

[POPS]

Frequency agility negates jamming, pretty much.

Two radios synchronize highly accurate internal clocks. They then rotate through thousands of frequencies at high speed, in lock-step with each other. So if a jammer operates on 14.2833 gigahertz, the system may stop on that frequency for perhaps a millisecond, but what you get (at worst) is a millisecond's worth of jamming, a tiny, tiny hiccup. And the data-stream is error corrected, so the link continues on despite the jamming.

So in layman term its almost impossible

 

[Chogy]

So in layman term its almost impossible

Correct. We've had frequency agile communications radios for decades. See Have Quick for details. It's jam-proof, and while not technically secure, it may as well be, because only a system in synch can gather all of the data.

The same frequency agility can be used for a data stream.

 

[Jango]

Frequency agility negates jamming, pretty much.

Two radios synchronize highly accurate internal clocks. They then rotate through thousands of frequencies at high speed, in lock-step with each other. So if a jammer operates on 14.2833 gigahertz, the system may stop on that frequency for perhaps a millisecond, but what you get (at worst) is a millisecond's worth of jamming, a tiny, tiny hiccup. And the data-stream is error corrected, so the link continues on despite the jamming.

Frequency Hopping?

Military has a different frequency for itself as well.

 

[Bankai]

so jam the whole range of frequencies by ionizing the atmosphere