Sneeky

Surely this is only observed when looking via marine traffic etc, on board you would see other boats as normal?
 
Surely this is only observed when looking via marine traffic etc, on board you would see other boats as normal?

Exactly.

Don‘t expect journalists to understand that distinction - which ironically is exactly why there is a story of sorts here. If you can spoof a Russian warship being somewhere interesting on Marine Traffic, then you can stimulate a lot of news stories for political effect even though nobody on scene with an actual AIS receiver is fooled at all.

Pete
 
Although, in this case, they'd be shooting at a ship which is not actually there.

Richard
That doesn't need to matter, if what you are after is a pretext to go on and commit some other act of aggression.

The second gulf of Tonkin incident, which was entirely imaginary (and admitted to be such by none other than Robert McNamara in 2003) , was used by LBJ as the legal pretext for deploying American forces in open warfare against North Vietnam. I highly recommend Gen H.R. McMaster's excellent book Dereliction of Duty, subtitled "The lies that led to Vietnam."
 
If you read the article it's very clearly a sales pitch to get quite a bit of money from the UK government. Those that understand are clearly already explaining the reality, as quoted in the article:

"Warships in times of tension and war would never use AIS," added Lord West.

The problem is that that will be ignored when debated because of various fearmongering to justify a few billion investment. What they want investment in is hard to say as there was a lot of jabber about eLoran and GPS. My guess is a new and shiny UK GPS system that will fail once those involved become wealthy enough.

Cynical? Me?
 
Surely this is only observed when looking via marine traffic etc, on board you would see other boats as normal?
Not necessarily. If the warships chose to switch on AIS but broadcast false information, that false information would also appear on the local AIS picked up by VHF.

Who would have thought it, warships hiding or giving false impressions. Next they will be painting the ships in camouflage colours to aid the deception - or do they already do that?
 
If you read the article it's very clearly a sales pitch to get quite a bit of money from the UK government. Those that understand are clearly already explaining the reality, as quoted in the article:



The problem is that that will be ignored when debated because of various fearmongering to justify a few billion investment. What they want investment in is hard to say as there was a lot of jabber about eLoran and GPS. My guess is a new and shiny UK GPS system that will fail once those involved become wealthy enough.

Cynical? Me?
Way out of date. The U.K. National Cyber Security Centre isn't new. Neither are many kinds of electronic warfare.
 
Not necessarily. If the warships chose to switch on AIS but broadcast false information, that false information would also appear on the local AIS picked up by VHF.

Who would have thought it, warships hiding or giving false impressions. Next they will be painting the ships in camouflage colours to aid the deception - or do they already do that?
They do it with aircraft so why not warships?
pic0771.jpg
 
I thought we were talking about outside influences giving false positions, surely the warship themselves would just turn it off as I would expect them to use their radar anyway
 
Expect them to have slightly more refined tech than we have, especially overhead radar scans from various sources
 
Top