Navigation

[rogerthebodger]

If plan B uses radio it will have all of the deficiencies of GPS with the exception of transmit power.

GPS is space based where eLoran is land based and there is not to radio then transmitting power the are frequency polarization and the way of encoding the navigation information.

Know what you are talking about before you discredit yourself

 

[lustyd]

This is not correct. Sorry!

Care to elaborate on that?

 

[lustyd]

GPS is space based where eLoran is land based and there is not to radio then transmitting power the are frequency polarization and the way of encoding the navigation information.

Know what you are talking about before you discredit yourself

I did mention transmit power being the one advantage, although not a huge advantage in a military scenario.

I do know what I'm talking about, thanks. That's why I understand the difference between jamming and spoofing, and why spoofing is not an issue on modern gear. You might lose position, but you won't have a false position with good kit.

 

[capnsensible]

The spoofing cat is out of the bag. One of many articles here:

New Warning As ‘Spike’ In GPS Spoofing Attacks Hit Passenger Planes—Fasten Your Seatbelts

Not hard to consider that military electronic warfare by potentially hostile states is a significant threat should one of the usual suspects get the hump.

Get yer sextant out!

 

[Wansworth]

The spoofing cat is out of the bag. One of many articles here:

New Warning As ‘Spike’ In GPS Spoofing Attacks Hit Passenger Planes—Fasten Your Seatbelts

Not hard to consider that military electronic warfare by potentially hostile states is a significant threat should one of the usual suspects get the hump.

Get yer sextant out!

Or Astralabe

 

[billskip]

I do know what I'm talking about spoofing is not an issue.....


New Warning As ‘Spike’ In GPS Spoofing Attacks Hit Passenger Planes—Fasten Your Seatbelts

mmmmm

 

[lustyd]

The spoofing cat is out of the bag. One of many articles here:

New Warning As ‘Spike’ In GPS Spoofing Attacks Hit Passenger Planes—Fasten Your Seatbelts

Not hard to consider that military electronic warfare by potentially hostile states is a significant threat should one of the usual suspects get the hump.

Get yer sextant out!

It is fixable with a simple update though. Those are civilian planes and probably not using encryption to trust the signals they’re blindly trusting everything.
GNSS Authentication and encryption - Navipedia

 

[Pye_End]

It is fixable with a simple update though. Those are civilian planes and probably not using encryption to trust the signals they’re blindly trusting everything.
GNSS Authentication and encryption - Navipedia

And we sail civilian yachts.

If there wasn't a benefit for the military to spoof, then why would they bother doing it?

 

[Buck Turgidson]

And we sail civilian yachts.

If there wasn't a benefit for the military to spoof, then why would they bother doing it?

Of which 0% use encryption, which is quite close to the % of military equipment with encryption capabilities. Updating military hardware doesn’t happen overnight or for free.

 

[lustyd]

If there wasn't a benefit for the military to spoof, then why would they bother doing it?

The real question here is how would eLoran prevent spoofing without using the exact same technology. The military do things because they have funding and want more.

 

[lustyd]

Of which 0% use encryption, which is quite close to the % of military equipment with encryption capabilities. Updating military hardware doesn’t happen overnight or for free.

My point was that eLoran works in the same way with very similar tech, just not in space. Doing software updates (which is all that's needed) of GNSS units is considerably cheaper than implementing an entirely new platform.

 

[capnsensible]

My point was that eLoran works in the same way with very similar tech, just not in space. Doing software updates (which is all that's needed) of GNSS units is considerably cheaper than implementing an entirely new platform.

Militaries around the world recognise how vulnerable GPS is. Hence all the effort, time, money and real world expertise that's being chucked at the problem.

I don't believe a simple software updates solves anything. Certainly if you, at the critical moment, haven't got it. And let's not forget that for every measure in the history of warfare, there is a countermeasure.

I reckon we can also say that anyone involved in Electronic Warfare and knows what's really going on certainly isn't gonna post about it on here!

 

[lustyd]

Militaries around the world recognise how vulnerable GPS is. Hence all the effort, time, money and real world expertise that's being chucked at the problem.

I don't believe a simple software updates solves anything. Certainly if you, at the critical moment, haven't got it. And let's not forget that for every measure in the history of warfare, there is a countermeasure.

I reckon we can also say that anyone involved in Electronic Warfare and knows what's really going on certainly isn't gonna post about it on here!

Did you read what I said and the link I shared? GNSS and eLoran are both openly transmitted radio signals. Encryption and authentication are the solution to the spoofing problem, it's a simple fix and discards any additional spoof signals since they are of unknown origin. The Internet has used this tech for decades and it's very effective. As I said, you could implement a full new eLoran system, but it will have every downside of GNSS apart from signal strength, and the competition could just as easily up their output. eLoran would also allow for higher bandwidth, but then that can be done with dgps too so why bother with a new solution to a solved problem?

The software update would be to enable certificate checking, it's a trivial update and the satellite side not only already supports it, but it's actively in use. The client side is essentially the same as TLS which is implemented in every web browser and has been for decades.

Just because you don't understand it, doesn't mean it's hard. No, nothing I've said is classified. Quite the contrary it's all over the Internet in the GNSS specs so even less reason to question the validity.

 

[capnsensible]

Did you read what I said and the link I shared? GNSS and eLoran are both openly transmitted radio signals. Encryption and authentication are the solution to the spoofing problem, it's a simple fix and discards any additional spoof signals since they are of unknown origin. The Internet has used this tech for decades and it's very effective. As I said, you could implement a full new eLoran system, but it will have every downside of GNSS apart from signal strength, and the competition could just as easily up their output. eLoran would also allow for higher bandwidth, but then that can be done with dgps too so why bother with a new solution to a solved problem?

The software update would be to enable certificate checking, it's a trivial update and the satellite side not only already supports it, but it's actively in use. The client side is essentially the same as TLS which is implemented in every web browser and has been for decades.

Just because you don't understand it, doesn't mean it's hard. No, nothing I've said is classified. Quite the contrary it's all over the Internet in the GNSS specs so even less reason to question the validity.

Well it's clearly not solved because of the investment in eloran.... and I'm not suggesting anything you've posted is classified. As I said, those that know what's going on aren't gonna post about it!

Anyway, fancy a career change? There's a job for you in powder blue.

UK Space Command

 

[lustyd]

Well it's clearly not solved because of the investment in eloran.... and I'm not suggesting anything you've posted is classified. As I said, those that know what's going on aren't gonna post about it!

Anyway, fancy a career change? There's a job for you in powder blue.

UK Space Command

You've not linked the eLoran work to a failing of GNSS though. That investment is happening because people like money and can justify it with vague assertions about GNSS which are not being checked.

If you can explain how eLoran would contribute to solving a specific problem, go ahead. I explained why it's not necessary to prevent spoofing, since spoofing is a solved problem that just needs to be rolled out more broadly. I explained why it doesn't prevent jamming either. No other issues have been presented that it might solve.

No thanks, I've just retired so I can use my boat a bit more

 

[capnsensible]

You've not linked the eLoran work to a failing of GNSS though. That investment is happening because people like money and can justify it with vague assertions about GNSS which are not being checked.

If you can explain how eLoran would contribute to solving a specific problem, go ahead. I explained why it's not necessary to prevent spoofing, since spoofing is a solved problem that just needs to be rolled out more broadly. I explained why it doesn't prevent jamming either. No other issues have been presented that it might solve.

No thanks, I've just retired so I can use my boat a bit more

I just can't see how you could possibly know that.....

 

[lustyd]

I just can't see how you could possibly know that.....

Yes, this does seem to be the issue. You don't need to know how I know things, I've provided answers to the questions laid out alongside external information explaining it. Usually that's sufficient for reasonable conversations.

 

[rogerthebodger]

Yes, this does seem to be the issue. You don't need to know how I know things, I've provided answers to the questions laid out alongside external information explaining it. Usually that's sufficient for reasonable conversations.

Well, I certainly wish to know how you know things so we can research and evaluate the reasons you know these things.

Without all we can take is your word which could be based on false assumptions.

Any scientific paper is always to peer review for if there is any assumptions is not fact it can be pointed out and we all can learn something.

 

[lustyd]

evaluate the reasons you know these things

What a bizarre thing to say.

I've provided the information and some reading material. Why I know things and who pays me to know them is of no concern to you. The subject matter here is extremely basic and if you choose not to educate yourself that's up to you, but I don't need to provide credentials for knowing simple and widely understood security mechanisms from the previous century.

 

[billskip]

Usually that's sufficient for reasonable conversations.

Not on here ....link ....is what is normally requested.