Why doesn't Russia put some EW jammer near Bakhmut/Soledar to counter drones? Can't hide it from HIMARS?

Why doesn't Russia put some EW jammer near Bakhmut/Soledar to counter drones?
Can't hide it from HIMARS?

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    American satellites could probably pick up the signals from space, yeah.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Doesn't Ukraine have HARMs at this point? Don't even need a satellite.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Well to locate the target you kinda need a satellite then you have to pre program HARMS to its destination due ukies are launching them from mig-29 and su-27 which are old soviet junk but yhe it whould be promptly get blown up

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Doesn't Ukraine have HARMs at this point? Don't even need a satellite.
        the russians just turn the radars off when the HARM is coming in. what they actually need are loitering ARM's that will wait for the radar to come back online before attacking. even if it never hits anything, cruising around in the sky and waiting for a radar forces the operators to keep the radar turned off during that time, giving the other side a period of time where they can attack without any radars lighting them up

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >the russians just turn the radars off when the HARM is coming in
          How will they know?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Real talk?

            If its a radar designed to track aircraft it'll probably be able to track missiles as well. The HARM will appear as a target that splits from a preexisting contact (or appears out of nowhere in the case of a low altitude launch), climbs maybe 20-30k ft, and reaches Mach 3 if it's going high altitude and max range. It will be vectored directly towards your radar. Not too difficult to spot.

            If it's an early warning radar or something the radar crew will need to be told to turn it off. Generally any conflict in which HARMs are used ends up in the complete destruction of any IADS or communication nets are brought up specifically to relay this info.

            Otherwise there are other signs you could look for. One would be an aircraft, for no apparent reason, NOT using jamming and flying at a slight angle. This aircraft could be attempting to collect your emissions to triangulate you. (Although I think Growlers and the like can jam while collecting). Another would be a flight out of a package randomly vectoring off towards your radar, or a flight that very obviously isn't doing a sweep/escorting mission coming ahead of a package (so for instance one that ignores enemy aircraft while another is actively hunting them down, but is far ahead of the package anyway).

            Then there's ELINT techniques you can use. Obviously picking up the type of jamming you'd expect from a EW aircraft followed by a few radar contacts doing the above behavior would be 100% reason to turn off your radar. Or picking up a single Super Hornet's radar in an area that only operates those aircraft in packages, or alone (Growlers).

            You can also listen to enemy radio traffic, even if it's encrypted. A sudden, massive increase in traffic along with jamming? A few early warning contacts? Yep, turn off your radar once they're within ~60 miles.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              A suHispaniciously good post

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >A suHispaniciously good post
                >Dunning-Kruger tier shit like 'just turn off your radar, bro'
                lol

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Turning off your radar hasn't worked since 'nam. Grandpa. None of what you said does with a competent, disciplined enemy such as the US.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >A suHispaniciously good post
                >Dunning-Kruger tier shit like 'just turn off your radar, bro'
                lol

                Feel free to explain why turning your radar off doesn't work

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Because anything newer than the AGM-78 from the late 60s has a memory circuit that remembers the last known location of the emission source you're targeting, and either loiters in the area until you turn your radar back on, or it uses it's terminal radar seeker to find the radar once in the area of last known emission. Like I said: it's not 1960, and this isn't something that's a secret.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Any decent modern missile can remember the last position of the target

                if it can remember the location then why does it need to loiter? why doesn't the missile just hit the target?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I don't know why the other anon even call that loitering, those missiles does in fact, just go for the target last known position.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >if it can remember the location then why does it need to loiter?
                Because they lack a terminal guidance radar to find the emitting radar, and needs the radar to emit again to pinpoint it.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                so in other words...turning the radar off actually works. isn't that the opposite of what you were trying to prove? walk me through this, logically

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >so in other words...turning the radar off actually works.
                No, it doesn't. Hence, the Suppression part of SEAD. If your radar is off, the job is done. You can't do anything with it.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Hence, the Suppression part of SEAD. If your radar is off, the job is done.
                but we started this conversation with you saying that turning the radar off doesn't do anything and the missile will still hit it. now you're saying the opposite. help me understand

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >but we started this conversation with you saying that turning the radar off doesn't do anything and the missile will still hit it.
                It will, since the 1960, like I have said. Even older ones work if they get you to turn your radar off, though. The point is to disrupt, deny, degrade. If they do any of those three, they have done their job. But, anything newer than 1960s anti-radiation missiles will still find you.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Turning the radar off works, kinda, if you're up against AGM-88As, Bs or Cs. They didn't have a second sensor to pick up your radar if you stopped emitting, so they'd just memorize the targeting vector they were going for previously and continue to that point.

                There are modes you can set the HARM into that let it elect to choose other targets, basically telling it to go after other types of radar if it's target isn't emitting. So it might go after the early warning radar in a SA-5 SAM site instead of the fire control radar, if the fire control radar has been turned off. You can also tell it to go into a deliberately high trajectory and then fly on a path that gives it maximum time in the air, which is what the other anon is describing as loitering.

                As for why I'm calling him a gay for using the term "loitering", there are other munitions that actually do fucking loiter. Israel has made a couple that will fly around and vector back in IIRC (although I'm unsure from memory if they're dedicated ARMs or just missiles that can be shot at radars, still though that's the conventional use of the word "loiter"), and the UK made a type that would deploy a parachute and wait for the emitter to turn back on.

                >Yes, that's how handoff to a HARM works. Do I need to go into full detail with someone asking for basic information? You're showing your autism.
                Rather than give wrong info? Yes, yes you do.
                >False, HARMs do not loiter. Don't muddy the waters.
                HARM does loiter.
                >A feature not in the AGM-88C, which is the one being given to Ukraine. You stupid fuck.
                Proof they're only getting Cs?

                >HARM does loiter.
                To literally anyone who isn't familiar with what "loitering" means in the context of a HARM, no it does not.

                >Rather than give wrong info?
                Listen here you stupid moron, do you want me to write a fucking 7 page dissertation on the specifics of modern SEAD?

                >Proof they're only getting Cs?
                Memory from when it was announced and the various photo we've seen of non-AGM-88Es in Ukraine, both intact missiles and decoys. If you can post proof of AGM-88Es being used in Ukraine, please do I'd like to see it.

                >Hence, the Suppression part of SEAD. If your radar is off, the job is done.
                but we started this conversation with you saying that turning the radar off doesn't do anything and the missile will still hit it. now you're saying the opposite. help me understand

                He's describing what SEAD means in practice. You're not necessarily trying to destroy the enemy SAM site/radar, you're trying to deny its use. Shooting a missile at it will do that.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >He's describing what SEAD means in practice.
                yeah I know I'm just giving him shit for being unable to compose his thoughts before he writes them down

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >To literally anyone who isn't familiar with what "loitering" means in the context of a HARM, no it does not.
                It loiters. Period.
                >Listen here you stupid moron, do you want me to write a fucking 7 page dissertation on the specifics of modern SEAD?
                No, just don't give 60-year-old outdated info like you're some modern day expert.
                >Memory from when it was announced and the various photo we've seen of non-AGM-88Es in Ukraine, both intact missiles and decoys. If you can post proof of AGM-88Es being used in Ukraine, please do I'd like to see it.
                Why does it need to be Es? Why can't it be the upgraded C models to the block 6 D internals?

                You're genuinely autistic anon, surely. I'm not going to delve into the deep of the internet in the efforts to try to find someone who has calculated the /EXACT/ accuracy of the HARM's seeker.

                For anyone who isn't this gay, a seeker doing passive guidance on a target is going to be accurate /over time/, but isn't necessarily going to be accurate /at any given instance/. The HARM might have an initial error in position of several hundred feet, which it will narrow down in the process of, you know, flying towards the goddamn target. The INS "lost lock" feature is only supposed to be used to keep the HARM flying in the direction of the emitter so that when it lights back up it will be in a good position to guide on it, not to fly into the fucking thing. Jesus christ.

                He'll now complain that I'm not giving any sources or whatever but it's the truth, the sort of sensor the HARM has is physically not capable of tracking a target down to the accuracy required to kill it with the HARM's warhead.

                [...]
                I am too lmao, I think he started this wanting an argument then it all kinda fell apart once he figured out I had a clue.

                >figured out I had a clue.
                You do? Could have fooled me.

                Let me clarify: what you're doing isn't helping the cause.
                Shitting up signal-to-noise of Russia-aligned corners of Twitter with forced frog->doge fren->fella memes is funny. Looking for vatniks on PrepHole is retarded, outs you as an outsider, and pisses off people who were here before the shill brigades and who's political opinions are probably formed by which shills are more annoying.

                Case in point this thread could've been about ISM band jammers off AliExpress. They're cheap, they're portable, they fuck up drone video feeds real good. Plus the built in lipo doubles as an incendiary IED. I've seen one (1) photo of these in use.
                Wassup? Are DJI drones just too high up?

                >Looking for vatniks on PrepHole is retarded
                You're the retard if you honestly believe there are no vatnig shills on PrepHole.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >It loiters. Period.
                No it does not, gay.

                >Why does it need to be Es? Why can't it be the upgraded C models to the block 6 D internals?
                You're being pedantic, friend.

                >You're the retard if you honestly believe there are no vatnig shills on PrepHole.
                Please don't tell me you're the same guy from before.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >No it does not, gay.
                It does, gay.
                >You're being pedantic, friend.
                You're being retarded.
                >Please don't tell me you're the same guy from before.
                So, you ARE actually retarded, or a shill. Which is it? Post gun with timestamp.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >It loiters. Period.
                No it does not, gay.

                >Why does it need to be Es? Why can't it be the upgraded C models to the block 6 D internals?
                You're being pedantic, friend.

                >You're the retard if you honestly believe there are no vatnig shills on PrepHole.
                Please don't tell me you're the same guy from before.

                Wrong missiles dudes
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALARM
                >ALARM is a fire-and-forget system, with an added loiter capability. In loiter mode, ALARM will, when launched, climb to an altitude of 13,000 metres (43,000ft). If the target radar shuts down, the missile will deploy a parachute and descend slowly until the radar lights up. The missile will then fire a secondary motor to attack the target.[12]

                yes I'll keep quoting wikipedia until you crossref those

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                [...]
                Feel free to explain why turning your radar off doesn't work

                so in other words...turning the radar off actually works. isn't that the opposite of what you were trying to prove? walk me through this, logically

                >if it can remember the location then why does it need to loiter?
                Because they lack a terminal guidance radar to find the emitting radar, and needs the radar to emit again to pinpoint it.

                Turning the radar off works, kinda, if you're up against AGM-88As, Bs or Cs. They didn't have a second sensor to pick up your radar if you stopped emitting, so they'd just memorize the targeting vector they were going for previously and continue to that point.

                There are modes you can set the HARM into that let it elect to choose other targets, basically telling it to go after other types of radar if it's target isn't emitting. So it might go after the early warning radar in a SA-5 SAM site instead of the fire control radar, if the fire control radar has been turned off. You can also tell it to go into a deliberately high trajectory and then fly on a path that gives it maximum time in the air, which is what the other anon is describing as loitering.

                As for why I'm calling him a gay for using the term "loitering", there are other munitions that actually do fucking loiter. Israel has made a couple that will fly around and vector back in IIRC (although I'm unsure from memory if they're dedicated ARMs or just missiles that can be shot at radars, still though that's the conventional use of the word "loiter"), and the UK made a type that would deploy a parachute and wait for the emitter to turn back on.

                [...]
                >HARM does loiter.
                To literally anyone who isn't familiar with what "loitering" means in the context of a HARM, no it does not.

                >Rather than give wrong info?
                Listen here you stupid moron, do you want me to write a fucking 7 page dissertation on the specifics of modern SEAD?

                >Proof they're only getting Cs?
                Memory from when it was announced and the various photo we've seen of non-AGM-88Es in Ukraine, both intact missiles and decoys. If you can post proof of AGM-88Es being used in Ukraine, please do I'd like to see it.

                [...]
                He's describing what SEAD means in practice. You're not necessarily trying to destroy the enemy SAM site/radar, you're trying to deny its use. Shooting a missile at it will do that.

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-radiation_missile#Air-to-surface
                >This led to the development of more advanced ARMs such as the AGM-78 Standard ARM, AGM-122 Sidearm, and AGM-88 HARM missiles, which have inertial guidance systems (INS) built-in. This allows them to remember the radar's direction if it is turned off and continue to fly towards it. ARMs are less likely to hit the radar if the radar is turned off shortly after the missile is launched, as the longer the radar is off (and assuming it never turns back on), the more error is introduced into the missile's course. The ALARM even has an added loiter mode, with a built-in parachute, enabling it to descend slowly until the radar activates, whereupon the rocket motor will re-ignite. Even a temporary shut down of the enemy's missile guidance radar can be of a great advantage to friendly aircraft during battle.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You're genuinely autistic anon, surely. I'm not going to delve into the deep of the internet in the efforts to try to find someone who has calculated the /EXACT/ accuracy of the HARM's seeker.

                For anyone who isn't this gay, a seeker doing passive guidance on a target is going to be accurate /over time/, but isn't necessarily going to be accurate /at any given instance/. The HARM might have an initial error in position of several hundred feet, which it will narrow down in the process of, you know, flying towards the goddamn target. The INS "lost lock" feature is only supposed to be used to keep the HARM flying in the direction of the emitter so that when it lights back up it will be in a good position to guide on it, not to fly into the fucking thing. Jesus christ.

                He'll now complain that I'm not giving any sources or whatever but it's the truth, the sort of sensor the HARM has is physically not capable of tracking a target down to the accuracy required to kill it with the HARM's warhead.

                >He's describing what SEAD means in practice.
                yeah I know I'm just giving him shit for being unable to compose his thoughts before he writes them down

                I am too lmao, I think he started this wanting an argument then it all kinda fell apart once he figured out I had a clue.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudram_(missile)
                >On 25 January 2019, NGARM was fired from a Sukhoi Su-30MKI over Bay of Bengal off the coast of Odisha that hit the designated target with a high degree of accuracy.[53][54] The missile achieved an accuracy within 10 m CEP covering a range of 100km

                check the homing of that Indian missiles, kinda nifty

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Because anything newer than the AGM-78 from the late 60s has a memory circuit that remembers the last known location of the emission source you're targeting
                Yes, that's how handoff to a HARM works. Do I need to go into full detail with someone asking for basic information? You're showing your autism.

                >and either loiters in the area
                False, HARMs do not loiter. Don't muddy the waters.

                >or it uses it's terminal radar seeker to find the radar once in the area of last known emission
                A feature not in the AGM-88C, which is the one being given to Ukraine. You stupid fuck.

                >I know how sensor fusion works. Since I understand where you're coming from
                [...]
                It has nothing to do with sensor fusion.

                Surprisingly yes it does. Wanna know how I know you've never seen a HTS before?

                > They legitimately do have direction finding wired straight into their artillery kill chain, it's fucking terrifying.
                What do you mean by "direction finding"?

                >The HARM has a seeker on it, remember?
                I always wondered how that works. It´s not like you can just use a camera sensor or something similar for radio waves. You would need to have some kind of antenna, two actually, with a certain distance to each other, or even simple "more to the left / more to the right" infos may not be gained. Radio waves are way more wave-like then something like thermal signals.

                Radio direction finding, anon. With one ELINT station you can pick up the rough bearing of a transmission, with several you can triangulate it. There are (or were, I don't know if they're still alive now) Russian units dedicated to listening for cell phone traffic, radio traffic, etc and giving estimated locations to artillery units.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Yes, that's how handoff to a HARM works. Do I need to go into full detail with someone asking for basic information? You're showing your autism.
                Rather than give wrong info? Yes, yes you do.
                >False, HARMs do not loiter. Don't muddy the waters.
                HARM does loiter.
                >A feature not in the AGM-88C, which is the one being given to Ukraine. You stupid fuck.
                Proof they're only getting Cs?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Radio direction finding, anon. With one ELINT station you can pick up the rough bearing of a transmission, with several you can triangulate it. There are (or were, I don't know if they're still alive now) Russian units dedicated to listening for cell phone traffic, radio traffic, etc and giving estimated locations to artillery units.

                Thanks, I see now what you mean. Your claim that russians have this isn´t even outrages. That sounds like tech from the late 80s. Don´t know why other anons are even trying to dispute that.

                That triangulation through distance measurement is what I meant with my other question. Let´s say you know your enemy is in front of you. Know you need only a two antennas to get his location. The Problem is: the closer those antennas are to each other, the smaller the difference in distance to the target. If the distance is just the diameter of a rocket, it may be difficult to even say in which direction is hot or cold. Adding more antennas won´t solve that problem, since they are all so close. How do these seekers of a harm rocket work then? Do they only find with extremely high frequency emitters, whose signals behave almost like light (e.g. phased array radars)? Can they even search for emitters in the "lower" frequency ranges?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                EW suites on a single fighter can triangulate an emission source. No need for ten thousand antennae.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >EW suites on a single fighter can triangulate an emission source. No need for ten thousand antennae.

                Yeah, like i said, you only need two. They actually use a few more on a fighter jet. The widest distance between two antennas will be the wing spread. Since the diameter of a missile is small fraction of that, the error of the distance and angle measurement will be a multiple of that (by physical law). Missiles often use cheaper sensors too.
                That is the reason for my question. How do those seeker systems actually work? How do they achieve any satisfying precision? You can´t have them miss by a few hundred yards.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Any decent modern missile can remember the last position of the target

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I know how sensor fusion works. Since I understand where you're coming from I'm not going to hit you with the Serb HARM argument.

                To elaborate on this anon's point: you need to also account for the enemy having persistent ELINT platforms in the air, and the ability to share information quickly. Within perhaps a few tens of seconds to minutes of you emitting, the enemy can get a location of your radar that's accurate to within a few thousand ft. At worst. This may not be enough to kill your radar with a bomb or something but it will be enough to queue endless numbers of HARMs onto your position (a common technique is launching them at suspected enemy positions every few minutes, so that there's always a HARM in the air ready for when you turn your radar back on). If they really refine your position, or worse get another type of sensor onto it (VHF/UHF antenna are really large on radar, who the fuck knew???) you'll have SDBs for fucking days.

                The worst part is that the US doesn't even need planes to do it. The Americans have satellites in orbit that do ELINT via triangulation. They've had this for decades.

                There's a couple of ways to combat this. The best way is obviously to disable these platforms from the beginning. Doable with planes, very difficult with satellites. The second is to jam them, endlessly. This has the issue of degrading your own systems. The third is to continuously move your radars around. This works (the Serbians did it with SA-6s and associated equipment), but the enemy still wins in a way because you now have to spend a lot of effort (and downtime!) to move your planes around. The fourth is to get a competent air force and never have to worry about an enemy having endless time to SEAD/DEAD you, which basically only China is seriously trying to achieve.

                >A suHispaniciously good post
                >Dunning-Kruger tier shit like 'just turn off your radar, bro'
                lol

                Explaining shit at a basic level doesn't mean that I'm retarded, friend.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I know how sensor fusion works. Since I understand where you're coming from

                Because anything newer than the AGM-78 from the late 60s has a memory circuit that remembers the last known location of the emission source you're targeting, and either loiters in the area until you turn your radar back on, or it uses it's terminal radar seeker to find the radar once in the area of last known emission. Like I said: it's not 1960, and this isn't something that's a secret.

                It has nothing to do with sensor fusion.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That's too close to the hunting grounds of its natural predator

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous
  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Russia can jam but can't into selective jamming so it's all or nothing. So they choose nothing.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because they have already lost some of their most advanced EW platforms that are in multiple laboratories being investigated since march. They cannot lose many more because there were not that many to begin with and also there are likely countermeasures in the pipeline ready to being fielded.
    One interesting question would be how hard it is to modify HAARMs to go right after those things.
    Also, these systems are not meant to jam small drones. Risking them for that would be stupid. Jamming drones is not very hard, especially those cheap commercial grade ones. We do not know whether/how Russia is doing it to what level of success and Ukraine will never tell us for obvious reasons.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because to jam multiband MIMO beamformed signal you practically need to be directly between receiver and transmitter.

    Modern military drones use 3-bands and have phased array antennas

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They don't have sophisticated jamming tech. They'd end up fucking themselves in the ass as well.

    If they have jammers, they have them near critical installations with communication methods they don't compromise. Not protecting Ivan Trenchfootovsky at the cost of making him unable to hear orders over his radio.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They're using Chinese made walkie talkies lmao, they don't have real comms. None of their shit is encrypted.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >They don't have sophisticated jamming tech
      They definitely do, Wagner don't.
      The regular army has EWAR brigades which are very good, just not so many of them and they're incredibly vulnerable on the battlefield.

      Passive EWAR, snooping, is safe and effective, locating enemies by cell phones etc is doable and both sides are doing it but Russia is better at it. It's a problem.

      Active EWAR, jamming and spoofing are very dangerous, Russia is good at this too but only in the army, not Wagner (and maybe not FSB?). This is super dangerous though because you can't hide while jamming, everyone with an antenna can easily find your position and with just two antennas, probably doesn't even need a spotter to drop artillery on you.

      Their juiciest ew equipment were either blown up or towed away at the early phase of the war.
      Maybe they have a few still intact, but i guess they are reserved for the paranoid putin's defense
      What is left is second grade jamming.
      There are drone vuds where jamming is noticeable, so I would think they use some here and there but nothing powerful or at least many enough to be worthy. Also these older shits just cant jam fire and forget things which are used even more as time passes

      >Maybe they have a few still intact, but i guess they are reserved for the paranoid putin's defense
      I think they used to have quite a lot so I'm sure there's still plenty around. At least around the professional army or what's left of it.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >probably doesn't even need a spotter to drop artillery on you.
        You can, with a bit of effort, string out a cable and jam from a bit of a distance. It depends on the type of jamming you're doing, the power required and any antennas you're using.

        Like jamming an omnidirectional VHF receiver that is at 10 watts of power could be done with like 100 watts of power and a directional dish. That's doable with a fairly long transmission line, long enough for your jamming vehicle to sit in cover.

        As for the really high power ones, yeah fuck no those are bomb magnets.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Their juiciest ew equipment were either blown up or towed away at the early phase of the war.
    Maybe they have a few still intact, but i guess they are reserved for the paranoid putin's defense
    What is left is second grade jamming.
    There are drone vuds where jamming is noticeable, so I would think they use some here and there but nothing powerful or at least many enough to be worthy. Also these older shits just cant jam fire and forget things which are used even more as time passes

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That would make too much sense retard. The MIC is there to make money you fucking retard dumbmoron natosucking cockfag.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Who are you replying to?

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because they either get BTFO by artillery and HIMARS, or they just don't work. Evidenced by shitty Ukrainian commercial DJI drones dropping nades right on the EW systems from 20ft above them. Russia can't into EA.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Evidenced by shitty Ukrainian commercial DJI drones dropping nades right on the EW systems from 20ft above them. Russia can't into EA
      I'm not sure what was up with that, I think they just didn't see them.
      The EWAR units are definitely fucking with drones though, both sides are losing drones constantly, the figure I saw quoted recently was an average of three sorties per drone before they're downed, either destroyed, hijacked or just lost.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >I'm not sure what was up with that, I think they just didn't see them.
        It was right on top of it. No need to see it, just fucking jam it. It got BTFO because it doesn't work and Russia can't into EA.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Hijacking drones
        Even cinkshit DJIs must have encryption on their datalinks and return to base on jam implementation is trivial so most commercial drones have that option on loss of signal.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Even cinkshit DJIs must have encryption on their datalinks
          I think if you spoof the handset, you can take over most drones. I know people who've found active drones and salvaged them, then bought handsets to use with them.

          https://i.imgur.com/bLykh92.jpg

          Russians are striping every dead ukr of their shoes. What EW are You talking about when they cant even equip their soldiers with fucking winter shoes. Look at any photo of deady ukr, the are allway barefoot...

          The hardware budget is years old, the shoe budget is today. Also, you can't tell hardware to buy its own wheels, you can totally tell conscripts to BYO boots.
          Do you remember that video with the quartermaster shouting at the conscript and throwing too-small boots at him?
          >size 46? fuck you, size 40, get the fuck out, cyka, blyat

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >who've found active drones
            I mean active but uncontrolled.

            It happens in sailing, people are using drones to try and find nude sunbathers or just generally snoop around and it gets out of range and they lose it. Maybe it's blown off course by wind or something and they lose signal.
            Then you come up deck to see what the noise is and there's a drone hovering off your stern so you get the net and snag it.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You cannot block Ukie drones, you'll block anything that uses these bands and more so no one can fly drones and probably won't be able to use radios too.

    That's why the west don't go with these big ass powerfull jammers, they do more harm than good.

    EW capabilites was another Russian dog and pony show.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Actual military drones can do frequency hopping on non-unlicensed bands so using jammers around them isn't too much of a problem. Doing barrage jamming against a bunch of frequencies at once is a very good way to get a battery of guns doing FFE on you.

      As for Russian EW capabilities, nah it was pretty good at the start of the war and close to the Russian border it's still pretty dangerous. The real hype about them was that they had a worked out EW architecture, with integration into combat units, well before NATO did. The memes about "turning on your phone results in 5 text messages from Putin asking you to pls stop killing donbas children then artillery strikes" were, and to a degree are still true. They legitimately do have direction finding wired straight into their artillery kill chain, it's fucking terrifying.

      That being said I believe the US has done a lot of work on this. If anything the experience in Ukraine will give them a cookbook of ways to work around Russian EW.

      Well to locate the target you kinda need a satellite then you have to pre program HARMS to its destination due ukies are launching them from mig-29 and su-27 which are old soviet junk but yhe it whould be promptly get blown up

      Nah with a few signals intercept stations you can triangulate the location close enough to lob a HARM at it. The HARM has a seeker on it, remember? You just need to be within a few km of the emitter and it'll guide in.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Have NATO peer EW equipment
        >Still do comms over unsecured boefangs
        Fucking how ?
        Is it because EW brigades are difficult to loot due to huge expensive equipment while infantry equipment is easy to smuggle out and sell ?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >As for Russian EW capabilities, nah it was pretty good at the start of the war and close to the Russian border it's still pretty dangerous.
        It's been shit since even before the war started.
        >The real hype about them was that they had a worked out EW architecture, with integration into combat units, well before NATO did.
        Proof?
        >The memes about "turning on your phone results in 5 text messages from Putin asking you to pls stop killing donbas children then artillery strikes" were, and to a degree are still true.
        Proof?
        >They legitimately do have direction finding wired straight into their artillery kill chain, it's fucking terrifying.
        Proof?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You're retarded, friend. This was well known to anyone who joined this board prior to 2022. One of the biggest questions that popped up right after the invasion was why EW wasn't being used more effectively.

          I'm not going to bother giving sources to you since you've clearly already decided that anything Russia is claimed to be good at is fake. But please, if you actually want to know, research it.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >You're retarded, friend.
            Doubt it. My IQ is 130+
            >This was well known to anyone who joined this board prior to 2022.
            Vatnig shills have been fluffing their capabilities on PrepHole for a decade. Doesn't make any of it true.
            >One of the biggest questions that popped up right after the invasion was why EW wasn't being used more effectively.
            Because vatnigs can't into EA, and their hardware is shit. Pretty simple, actually.
            >I'm not going to bother giving sources to you
            Because you can't or you would.
            >since you've clearly already decided that anything Russia is claimed to be good at is fake.
            Claimed is the key word here. They can claim anything, like they have for half a century. Again, doesn't make it true.
            >But please, if you actually want to know, research it.
            Why can't you just provide the proof? Not claims; actual proof it works, and they're good at EA. You can't, and you know you can't. Just admit it, low IQ vatnig, serboid, or shitskin. Shouldn't be hard to do, should it?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Masturbating over cutting edge hardware is usually a MIC cash grab. Scale forces legacy systems, legacy systems have known weaknesses, known legacy weaknesses can be hit with gear ghetto rigged from AliExpress components.

              Actual military drones can do frequency hopping on non-unlicensed bands so using jammers around them isn't too much of a problem. Doing barrage jamming against a bunch of frequencies at once is a very good way to get a battery of guns doing FFE on you.

              As for Russian EW capabilities, nah it was pretty good at the start of the war and close to the Russian border it's still pretty dangerous. The real hype about them was that they had a worked out EW architecture, with integration into combat units, well before NATO did. The memes about "turning on your phone results in 5 text messages from Putin asking you to pls stop killing donbas children then artillery strikes" were, and to a degree are still true. They legitimately do have direction finding wired straight into their artillery kill chain, it's fucking terrifying.

              That being said I believe the US has done a lot of work on this. If anything the experience in Ukraine will give them a cookbook of ways to work around Russian EW.

              [...]
              Nah with a few signals intercept stations you can triangulate the location close enough to lob a HARM at it. The HARM has a seeker on it, remember? You just need to be within a few km of the emitter and it'll guide in.

              is correct that integrating ghetto tools into an organization composed mostly of sub-sapient retards is scary because that's how you get scale. Not wunderwaffen but scattered specialists feeding coordinates to arty that'll take coordinates from whoever and doesn't give a shit if half are wrong/danger close/have lat-long swapped.

              https://i.imgur.com/TMrkD4P.gif

              >Have NATO peer EW equipment
              >Still do comms over unsecured boefangs
              Fucking how ?
              Is it because EW brigades are difficult to loot due to huge expensive equipment while infantry equipment is easy to smuggle out and sell ?

              It's kinda like US troops buying their own GPS units at one point. Except with bottom of the barrel Baofengs. Industrial collapse is terrifying.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Omfg this fucking post.

              >My IQ is 130+
              Bro. Are you 15? Nobody cares.

              >Vatnig shills have been fluffing their capabilities on PrepHole for a decade.
              Yes, but I'm not talking about PrepHole you moron.

              >Because you can't or you would.
              No, I just don't care to go digging for youtube videos or think tank reports just so you can "debunk" my sources. You're making yourself look like a fool, like are you legit trying to claim that the Russians didn't/don't have EW baked into their force structure? Are you stupid?

              >They can claim anything, like they have for half a century.
              If you'd paid attention, fuck, were here during 2014 you'd know otherwise.

              >Shouldn't be hard to do, should it?
              Google a bit you fucking moron. You're no better than the actual vatniks. There was a recent report by a think tank that said that a lot of people overcorrected hard from their previously optimistic opinions of the Russian military and you are that plus a bunch of dunning kruger piled on top.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Bro. Are you 15? Nobody cares.
                You seem quite upset that I'm much smarter than you, so, I assume, you care. A lot, actually.
                >Yes, but I'm not talking about PrepHole you moron.
                Then, why the fuck did you say, "this board"? Where do you think you are, retart?
                >No, I just don't care to go digging for youtube videos or think tank reports just so you can "debunk" my sources.
                Must be shit sources if even you think they will be deboonked ASAP. KEK.
                >You're making yourself look like a fool
                Says the gay who will provide no proof.
                >like are you legit
                >like
                >legit
                Are you a 12-year-old girl?
                >Russians didn't/don't have EW baked into their force structure?
                The only thing baked is your brain, vatnig.
                >If you'd paid attention, fuck, were here during 2014 you'd know otherwise.
                Nothing in 2014 showed any EA capabilities by your vatnigs you fawn over.
                >Google a bit you fucking moron. You're no better than the actual vatniks.
                Why can't you just provide proof of Russia's superior EA abilities, and their incorporation before HATO?
                >There was a recent report by a think tank that said that a lot of people overcorrected hard from their previously optimistic opinions of the Russian military and you are that plus a bunch of dunning kruger piled on top.
                Only retards, or MIC shekel shuffling, fluffed Russia up to be a peer to the US. Nobody who actual follows military tech believed Russia was anything but a third world shithole with nukes, and nothing more.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You really should go back to wherever you came from friend, you're very new here and it shows.

                >Nothing in 2014 showed any EA capabilities by your vatnigs you fawn over.
                Fucking lmao. Sure anon, sure.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >You really should go back to wherever you came from friend, you're very new here and it shows.
                You first, leftypol tankie chud.
                >Fucking lmao. Sure anon, sure.
                Care to prove me wrong? I know you can't, though. So, start screaming MUH NUFAG, MUH CIA, MUH HATO SHILL like the good little low IQ shitskin parrot you are.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >this gay again
                You really should have posted the image cap beforehand so I knew to ignore you.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                So, you can't, and are going to run now? Back to your shitskin containment site, chud.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Omfg literally just google Russian EW, filetype:pdf and filter by time to before 2022. You've got brainrot to the point you're denying that they have it attached to their artillery or that they have an EW corps at all. These are basic facts you can google man, it's not some vatnik conspiracy. There are public, open source statements from the Ukrainian military, from 2014 all the way up to now, that state turning on your phone in the vicinity of a Russian EW unit results in artillery strikes. It would take you about 30 seconds to google and find one. There are public statements from high ranking NATO generals about the risk of Russian EW. There are public statements from the US DoD that they're focusing on EW specifically because of Russia's and China's advances in the field.

                Why are you even here if you're unwilling to use wikipedia?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                They can have an alien corps, too. Doesn't mean it's real, or actual works. Why can't your feeble mind grasp this? Is it because you're a shitskin with a double-digit IQ? I think so. Now, post the fucking proof. The time it took you to make these cope posts, you could have just posted the fucking proof. I don't care if they have Jesus attached to their troops, let me see it work.

                Does shitting up threads to make it all about yourself please you?

                Seethe, moron.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >the anti-Russian shill literally being a proofster
                Oh how the turn tables. I don't even have a proofster meme on my machine atm, so you'll have to have a KYM one. Sorry.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Still no proof
                Got it.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                There's a variety of first and second-hand reports on
                > thorough phone inspections at checkpoints
                > cell service mysteriously staying up when all other infrastructure's shot to shit
                > people who use phones getting shelled
                If "recent" 8 year old sources don't count read up on Chechnya - they've been doing it since they whacked Dudayev.
                Is it as expensive and cutting edge as what's made in Maryland? lmao no
                Can it absolutely fuck up territorial defense units with poor training and discipline? no shit
                Dunning Kruger piece of Reddit shit

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >There's a variety of first and second-hand reports on
                Then. post. them.

                https://i.imgur.com/HzgF5Ou.jpg

                >Doubt it. My IQ is 130+

                Keep seething, my low IQ inferior fren.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Google 'em, gay. We're not going to spoonfeed you.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You weren't here back then. You shouldn't be here now.

                Real talk?

                If its a radar designed to track aircraft it'll probably be able to track missiles as well. The HARM will appear as a target that splits from a preexisting contact (or appears out of nowhere in the case of a low altitude launch), climbs maybe 20-30k ft, and reaches Mach 3 if it's going high altitude and max range. It will be vectored directly towards your radar. Not too difficult to spot.

                If it's an early warning radar or something the radar crew will need to be told to turn it off. Generally any conflict in which HARMs are used ends up in the complete destruction of any IADS or communication nets are brought up specifically to relay this info.

                Otherwise there are other signs you could look for. One would be an aircraft, for no apparent reason, NOT using jamming and flying at a slight angle. This aircraft could be attempting to collect your emissions to triangulate you. (Although I think Growlers and the like can jam while collecting). Another would be a flight out of a package randomly vectoring off towards your radar, or a flight that very obviously isn't doing a sweep/escorting mission coming ahead of a package (so for instance one that ignores enemy aircraft while another is actively hunting them down, but is far ahead of the package anyway).

                Then there's ELINT techniques you can use. Obviously picking up the type of jamming you'd expect from a EW aircraft followed by a few radar contacts doing the above behavior would be 100% reason to turn off your radar. Or picking up a single Super Hornet's radar in an area that only operates those aircraft in packages, or alone (Growlers).

                You can also listen to enemy radio traffic, even if it's encrypted. A sudden, massive increase in traffic along with jamming? A few early warning contacts? Yep, turn off your radar once they're within ~60 miles.

                Partial BUK manuals going around after the Incident only distinguished 3 categories:
                > it's slow, probably civilian
                > it's fast, probably military (or a Boeing 777 but what would one be doing near RU air defense??)
                > it's very fast, a missile is seconds away from fucking you up
                Shit's basic analog technology with a university student doing his mandatory military training serving as the computer. No IFF no Hollywood special effects just the bare minimum to complete its mission.
                BUK's kind of an extreme case since it's supposed to cover the front line. Maybe newer stuff further in the back is more advanced but the way Ukraine accidentally an Israeli Tupolev or Iran's self-own back when US was saber rattling or whatever that recent Engels shootdown was... nah.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >You weren't here back then. You shouldn't be here now.
                Sure, sure, Vanya. Now, back to leftypol you mentally ill tankie chud.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Let me clarify: what you're doing isn't helping the cause.
                Shitting up signal-to-noise of Russia-aligned corners of Twitter with forced frog->doge fren->fella memes is funny. Looking for vatniks on PrepHole is retarded, outs you as an outsider, and pisses off people who were here before the shill brigades and who's political opinions are probably formed by which shills are more annoying.

                Case in point this thread could've been about ISM band jammers off AliExpress. They're cheap, they're portable, they fuck up drone video feeds real good. Plus the built in lipo doubles as an incendiary IED. I've seen one (1) photo of these in use.
                Wassup? Are DJI drones just too high up?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Hey! The angry wanker! Been a while! Howyadoin?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I think I smell something funny, might be the blob.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Does shitting up threads to make it all about yourself please you?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Doubt it. My IQ is 130+

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            i got banned for sharing this on this board:

            https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2022/12/24/russia-electronic-warfare-troops-knocked-out-90-percent-of-ukraines-drones/?sh=7b671464575c

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Where can I learn more about Russia's EW capabilities?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        > They legitimately do have direction finding wired straight into their artillery kill chain, it's fucking terrifying.
        What do you mean by "direction finding"?

        >The HARM has a seeker on it, remember?
        I always wondered how that works. It´s not like you can just use a camera sensor or something similar for radio waves. You would need to have some kind of antenna, two actually, with a certain distance to each other, or even simple "more to the left / more to the right" infos may not be gained. Radio waves are way more wave-like then something like thermal signals.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Russians are striping every dead ukr of their shoes. What EW are You talking about when they cant even equip their soldiers with fucking winter shoes. Look at any photo of deady ukr, the are allway barefoot...

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They know how quick shoes can smell like death if you dont undress them from the deads!

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They either
    >don't work
    >don't have any to spare
    >it will screw them over also
    So its either a procurement issue or an issue of accidentally screwing over your own stuff in exchange for the other side to not have any drones. Their EW equipment is not selective.

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Jam GPS
    >All the Russian officers and aircraft in the area using commercial Garmins get lost

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Drones ARE getting jammed (by both sides). The problem is you basically have to be the radio equivalent of loudmoron.wav, which is also interferes with your shit if you're a vatnik, so you use such tools judiciously.

    Russia has also lost a number of jamming platforms to superior allied intelligence and just general fuck-ups like poor perimeter control and cowardly soldiers. This includes their ostensibly most-advanced platforms, too.

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Soledar is about 120 km from the borders of mordor. Do we need to count the days?

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Russia can not control their front yard. They can not contrll their porch. They are fightng at the very doormat after almost one year. With everything except their questionable 'nuclear power'.
    Remember orcs...there are no wunderwaffen. And this time, there is no ally attacking from eslewhere. I smell blood.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *