DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Sabra Tech » Israel Wants to Jam Sats

Israel Wants to Jam Sats

Back in 2004, the U.S. Air Force sug­gested that they might be will­ing to mess with com­mer­cial satel­lites, if they were aid­ing an American foe. The idea drew howls from out­side observers. And, for a while, it seemed des­tined for an extremely quiet cor­ner of fly­boy doc­trine.
sat_dish.jpgBut now, the Israelis are pick­ing up where their American coun­ter­parts left off, Defense News’ Barbara Opall-​​Rome reports. Fed up with Hezbollah’s Al-​​Manar TV broad­casts — which stayed on the air, despite repeated aer­ial and elec­tronic attacks — the Sabras are now talk­ing pub­licly about “disrupt[ing] trans­mis­sions of enemy pro­gram­ming car­ried by com­mer­cial satellites.”

No doubt, we under­stand the power of the media, pub­lic opin­ion and mass psy­chol­ogy, said [Maj. Gen. Ido] Nehushtan, who is respon­si­ble for IDF mod­ern­iza­tion plan­ning. Al-​​Manar is a lia­bil­ity, and were going to have to improve our abil­ity to counter this threat…
…the only way to ensure per­sis­tent, reli­able, wide-​​area broad­cast denial is through an anti-​​communication satel­lite sys­tem. Israel must develop the means to sur­gi­cally tar­get sig­nals serv­ing Hizbollah with­out dam­ag­ing the space­craft or dis­rupt­ing oper­a­tions of other cus­tomers ser­viced by the broad­cast fre­quen­cies, he said…
[But] accord­ing to [an Israeli] exec­u­tive, jam­ming a com­mu­ni­ca­tions satel­lite is like inter­fer­ing with civil avi­a­tion. You can do it, but its against inter­na­tional law and youll be sub­ject to all kinds of law­suits.
It is tech­no­log­i­cally impos­si­ble, he said, to selec­tively jam only those satel­lite sig­nals that carry enemy broad­casts.
Everything goes out as a sin­gle beam, and it is impos­si­ble to jam only those chan­nels viewed as a threat, the exec­u­tive said. If you make the deci­sion to inter­fere with one [satel­lite sig­nal], then you must be pre­pared to face the con­se­quences of the col­lat­eral dam­age incurred to the many other legit­i­mate users of the sig­nal.
Robert Ames, chief exec­u­tive of the Satellite Users Interference Reduction Group… said it is rel­a­tively easy to jam a spe­cific satel­lite transpon­der.
Transponders are sep­a­rated by fre­quency, he said. All you have to do is know the fre­quency which it oper­ates on and then put up a sig­nal that is stronger than the pro­gram­ming car­rier of the satel­lite…
Satellite inter­fer­ence capa­bil­i­ties have been around since the mid-​​1970s, he added. But if the Israelis are talk­ing about tech­no­log­i­cal chal­lenges, I assume they are aim­ing for a capa­bil­ity that goes way beyond what our com­pa­nies have expe­ri­enced to date.

Share |

August 30th, 2006 | Sabra Tech, Space | 325814 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2006/08/30/israel-wants-to-jam-sats/Israel+Wants+to+Jam+Sats2006-08-30+14%3A26%3A55noahmax You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Rapid Fire 08/​30/​06 | Iraq’s Biowar Labs: Mystery Solved? » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Robot.Economist says:
    August 30, 2006 at 10:22 am

    Since when have the Israelis demon­strated a con­cern for sig­nif­i­cant col­lat­eral dam­age in the name of their national secu­rity? If they can’t fig­ure out how to jam just one chan­nel, are they pre­pared to blot out satel­lite com­mu­ni­ca­tions across the Near East? Al Manar is cur­rent car­ried on three com­sats, but it wouldn’t sur­prise me if Hezbollah has backup car­ri­ers arranged.
    I don’t see what block­ing Al-​​Manar would accom­plish any­way. Israel doesn’t have the kind of pop­u­lar cred­i­bil­ity in the Middle East to counter Hezbollah’s mes­sage even if it could dom­i­nate the airwaves..

    Reply
  2. michael says:
    August 30, 2006 at 10:47 am

    I’m sur­prised the Israelis didn’t do this dur­ing the last engage­ment. It’s not like they would lose pop­u­lar sup­port or any­thing. They would, how­ever, shut down a ral­ly­ing point for their enemy.
    Even if Hezbollah had backup sats, once one sat went black, I doubt the other car­ri­ers would have been will­ing to risk their equip­ment to carry the sig­nal. And if Al Cheer-​​leadia went black as col­lat­eral dam­age, would that have been so terrible?

    Reply
  3. Brian says:
    August 30, 2006 at 3:03 pm

    I don’t know. If this works, it has the poten­tial to be a great mil­i­tary asset. You’d need to cut off inter­net traf­fic as well, but silenc­ing com­mu­ni­ca­tions could be a great help in a war. The last thing you want is a reporter for a hos­tile power point­ing a TV cam­era at your tanks and say­ing “the Israelis are advanc­ing from the north­east”. Even as a pro­poganda piece, Al-​​Quaeda TV is effec­tive. I’d say that poten­tial com­bat­ants would be much more inspired by such a sta­tion stay­ing on the air and con­tin­u­ing to broad­cast than they would if it went sta­tic in the first wave of a war.

    Reply
  4. Gen Jack D. Ripper says:
    August 30, 2006 at 6:32 pm

    Back dur­ing my days as an employee of a now defunct defense con­trac­tor one of the projects I worked on involved the AAMS. If you have a broad­band input on a satel­lite you can lower the effec­tive power out of that satel­lite by pump­ing in a sig­nal that sat­u­rates the front end of the receiver.
    The satel­lite is lim­ited to how much power it can trans­mit at any one time and a boom­ing input sig­nal reduces all other out­put sig­nals. Put too much power in and the receiver does a grace­ful shut down.

    Reply
  5. Robot Economist says:
    August 30, 2006 at 6:42 pm

    Pete Brown is on to the sec­ond point I was going to make: What if Al-​​Manar moves onto YouTube? Is Israel going to black out web­sites as well? Jamming com­sats sends Israel down a road sim­i­lar to the one it took into south­ern Lebanon in July.
    If they esca­late on the strate­gic com­mu­ni­ca­tions front and Hezbollah out-​​maneuvers them, they look bad twice over — once for blot­ting out Arab TV and once for fail­ing to gain the upper hand.
    Brown also brings up a good point about pirate sig­nals. Ultimately the only way to stop Al-​​Manar may involve blot­ting out all TV sats in range of the Arab Peninsula. There are at least three major sats I can think of off-​​hand, but there are bound to be more.

    Reply
  6. Noah (the other one) says:
    August 30, 2006 at 8:54 pm

    ‘Enemy pro­gram­ming’ is quite a loose term, and could just as eas­ily include CNN as MEMRI TV. In essence, any com­mu­ni­ca­tion is a tar­get in ‘total war’. Just look at US strikes on Al Jazerra in Kabul and Baghdad (which only served to increase its pop­u­lar­ity).
    If any­thing should have been learned by now, it’s that infra­struc­ture is not nec­es­sary to wage guer­rilla war­fare, and that attacks on infra­struc­ture serve to drive the indige­nous pop­u­la­tion towards the insur­gency.
    Finally, we are not deal­ing with soci­eties where every house has TV, inter­net, or even tele­phone con­nec­tions. Knocking out satel­lite com­mu­ni­ca­tions is more likely to be an attempt to keep ones own pop­u­la­tion in the dark.

    Reply
  7. Byron Skinner says:
    August 30, 2006 at 8:58 pm

    Good Evening Folks,
    All you make good points but I don’t see what Israel has to gain by jam­ming TV sig­nals. This is all date tech­nol­ogy, with the inter­net and 24 hour new chan­nels vac­u­um­ing up any­thing that out tere it looks like just a bad case of old think­ing.
    The one part on the “Information Battlespace” that the ter­ror­ists have excelled at is get­ting the infor­ma­tion. They know about Video, Mobile satel­lite phones, DVD’s, 802.11 etc. Unlike the US,s DoD who has to go through a bureau­cratic bid­ding and pur­chas­ing process they just go on line and buy what ever they want with US dol­lars, and get it in there next DHL ship­ment.
    In the US, TV often has video of attacks on FOX or CNN before the OSD even can even put out a press mes­sage, in short the US’s mes­sage is the sec­ond ver­sion of events to hit the air­ways.
    The only way to defeat the ter­ror­ist is to get your mes­sage out FIRST. Both the United States and Israel are a dis­tant sec­ond to the ter­ror­ists on this part of the “Information Battlespace”.
    ALLONS,
    Byron Skinner

    Reply
  8. Gary says:
    August 31, 2006 at 11:57 am

    Hmmm, why not employ those “EMP Bombs” we have heard so much about?
    If you can’t turn off the sat trans­mis­sion, turn off the TV (…and every­thing else) receivers in the region. That would also address the issue of the Internet. Haji’s sat and cell phone comms would be fried as well.
    “I don’t see what block­ing Al-​​Manar would accom­plish any­way. Israel doesn’t have the kind of pop­u­lar cred­i­bil­ity in the Middle East to counter Hezbollah’s mes­sage even if it could dom­i­nate the air­waves.“
    Non func­tional TV would just another sub­tle reminder to Haji that he was not gain­ing the upper hand. When you have peo­ple with cities reduced to rub­ble and still claim­ing “vic­tory”, it is impor­tant to play every card in the deck.

    Reply
  9. Robot.Economist says:
    August 31, 2006 at 12:26 pm

    QUOTE: “Non func­tional TV would just another sub­tle reminder to Haji that he was not gain­ing the upper hand. When you have peo­ple with cities reduced to rub­ble and still claim­ing “vic­tory”, it is impor­tant to play every card in the deck.“
    I don’t even know where to being with this. The pejo­ra­tive use of the term “Haji” is emblem­atic of how some peo­ple clearly don’t under­stand what is going on the Middle East. Allow me to illus­trate a sim­ple sce­nario:
    “Haji” doesn’t care about tele­vi­sion, he cares about sell­ing his socio-​​political angle. One way or another he will fig­ure a new way of ped­al­ing his views.
    Mr. and Mrs. Ahmed Q. Public, on the other hand, were just sit­ting at home, mind­ing their own busi­ness some­where between Tehran and Cairo when their very expen­sive satel­lite TV ser­vice went out. Even if this only proves to be a minor annoy­ance, it still gen­er­ates neg­a­tive atti­tudes towards Israel and U.S. — and worst of all, when “Haji” gets his media machine up and run­ning again, he only has more pub­lic griev­ances to prey on.
    The War on Terror isn’t about inter­na­tional bor­ders or mate­r­ial goods or fan­tas­ti­cal ide­o­log­i­cal notions. Its about win­ning hearts and minds and resolv­ing a series of loosely related socio-​​political strug­gles across the globe.

    Reply
  10. lester says:
    September 4, 2006 at 9:39 am

    stop invad­ing lebanon and al manar won’t have any­thing to report on in regards to israel.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Today's Hottest Topics
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • Pinnacle's New Armor
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • UPDATED: Details on Army's New Afghanistan Duds
    Recent Comments
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      I'm disappointed. When are they going to make clothes...
      Nadnerbus
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
      Part II : * USMC attempts to make a single seat (no...
      freefallingbomb
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
      Part I : I think we're not the only ones on the...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part III : Guided missiles will also be programmed to...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part II : If a tank shoots at another tank at only 5...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part I : To the poster "Will" : You wrote:...
      freefallingbomb
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
      Yeah, I don't get it. The "Dragon...
      Ptsfp
    • Pinnacle’s New Armor
      Should wikipedia Ned Kelly.He used armour that worked in...
      Nick
    • UPDATED: Details on Army’s New Afghanistan Duds
      Marines win agin hoo rur
      greg
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
      To the poster "batvette" : You wrote:...
      freefallingbomb
    Recent Articles
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • BAE to Market Mantis UAV to North America
    • Pinnacle’s New Armor
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
    • Northrop Invests Own Money In Fire Scout
    • IMINT: French Fashion Mavens Model MultiCam
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • Super Cavitation and the Truth
    • Mantis Begins Search For Prey
    Recent Hot Topics
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • The Osprey has Landed
    • UPDATED: Details on Army's New Afghanistan Duds
    • Iraq Cyber Attack and the DigiSEALs
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • Pinnacle's New Armor
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
    • Grim Wanat Footage
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    • IMINT: French Fashion Mavens Model MultiCam
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage