Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
In theory Russia and every other country already probably had the ability, Starlink uses comms in a standard frequency range, it's not really any different to jamming any other system (and jamming satellite broadcasts is old news, even modern satellites if you don't need those frequencies yourself).
The question is, can Russia do it without also jamming their own equipment, their own satellites and do it from a distance in such a way that it can't be compensated for.
IIRC a large part of Starinks usefulness comes from that highly directional comms, as it is by design and intention far less prone to interference from other users on the same frequency range and to have a higher number of concurrent users within the same frequencies than other systems (the only real way to do that is to make the areas which their communications are receivable in smaller*), which means that to realistically block it you probably need a much stronger signal that is somewhere in footprint of the satellites, and for starlink due to its intended use those footprints are quite small (very small compared to most satellites at only a few miles diameter).
In short basically in theory the ability has been there pretty much from day Starlink launched, but because of the highly directional nature of the system it's likely to require Russia actually have the hardware needed fairly near the terminals, which means that they might be able to jam right at the front lines, but 10 miles back it's going to be much harder (so a ground unit in contact with the Russians might be affected, the artillery 25 miles away could be fine, as could another unit only a few miles away).
I would also suspect that there may be a way for Starlink to compensate for it by changing which of any overlapping transceivers are in use to reduce the affected zone even more.
*The same idea behind having more lower power mobile phone transmitters in city centres and fewer, more powerful ones in the countryside, and why 5g is meant to be so much better (IIRC solid state phased arrays, so you can have thousands of people in a stadium with the beam being split into hundreds of very small locations so effectively there are only a small number of people using the frequencies per target area).
Looks more like an episode of Eastenders.
This genuinely made me laugh out loud. /thumbs up.
Yea but what happens now, do they blame Putin and mass protest over a pointless war or do they rally behind him and demand action (not that he can do anything else really)
They will be worried now about the fact the wars on their doorstep.
My guess is the second option.
Wow that was brutal, but tbh what did he expect when they are thrown in trucks given a gun with no training and sent to the front lines.
Where are they getting the booze? They should be stopping that and then they cant get blind drunk
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 7,146
Checking tiktok or facebook on your trackable smartphone while in a combat area seems really smart.
Probably going to need a new screen on that.
Possibly related to not wanting to be there, either.
Apparently 1/5 of soldiers in Vietnam were addicted to heroin at some point. Weed use was commonplace. Some reports say as many as 50% of might have used heroin (without becoming addicted).
I guess the common denominator is forced participation in a brutal conflict. Even for trained professional soldiers it's virtually guaranteed to be an incredibly traumatic experience.
(For clarity, I'm not suggesting any equivalence between the wars, aside from conscription/drafting, and war in general being pretty **** for the participants).
Deleted User 298457
Deleted User 298457
A crazy high percentage of Vietnam soldiers were known to fire high (i.e. aim to miss).
That was at the far near the end of the war re narcs
Last edited:
- Status