🚀 go-pugleaf

On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:06:26 -0700 (PDT), u2r2h@gmx.net wrote:

>Re: http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2008/08/czech-poland-radar-missile-bull-space.html
>
>Could someone please tell me what the author meant?
>
>=========== quote ==============
>Those who comment without knowing the true nature of the US's over the
>horizon radar system, are commenting blissfully ignorant of the
>situation.
>
>I'm not going to describe how it works or the frequencies the 2nd
>antenna can produce because most of you would discard me out of hand.

Antennas don't produce any sort of frequency. At all. An antenna is a
device for transmitting electromagnetic waves, not producing them.

>But the Russian know and they are very upset, more with the radar
>system than the interceptors.
>
>I will tell you a couple of things though.
>1.- It has terrestrial offensive capabilities.
>2.- The directing antenna apart from using the ionosphere as the
>mirror with additional power can be used as an anti satellite device
>by pushing large parts of the ionosphere higher to cause friction with
>low orbiting spy satellites.
>3.- The additional power required can be sourced remotely.
>
>Weapons development didn't stop in the 50's -- wake up.
>
>Ray Bay, Glennallen Alaska, USA
>============================
>
>What could be "terrestrial offensive"?

A fictitious mode the correspondent has heard someone else use, or made up
himself.

>Is it true that radar can be used as an anti satellite device??

No.

--
Shill #2

Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance
to those of us who do.
  Isaac Asimov

Government Shill #2 wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:06:26 -0700 (PDT), u2r2h@gmx.net wrote:
> 
>> Re: http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2008/08/czech-poland-radar-missile-bull-space.html
>>

Have a look at the site....it's the incredibly stupid SCIENTOLOGISTS..

Try the link to the 'Tower Pulverisation' and read the bizarre theories 
these weirdos have. People like these should have a licence to breed.

> >Re: http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2008/08/czech-poland-radar-missile-bull-space.html


> >What could be "terrestrial offensive"?

> A fictitious mode the correspondent has heard someone else use, or made up
> himself.


Thanks.  We better stop imagining that the USA would do anything
malicious.

> >Is it true that radar can be used as an anti satellite device??

> No.

Aha.  Pushing up the ionosphere to slow LEOs is nonsense then.

BTW  I added some interesting info on French and Russian radars...
http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2008/08/czech-poland-radar-missile-bull-space.html
Contrary to the benevolent intentions of the USA we probably _can_
assume that they would use their radars for evil purposes, right?

Government Shill #2 wrote:
>> Is it true that radar can be used as an anti satellite device??
>>     
>
> No.
>   

You might be able to blow out the electronics on a satellite by hitting 
it with a very intense and well focused radar pulse to generate 
electrical surges in its chips, burning them out.
There are already promulgated systems for aircraft that use powerful 
radar pulses to damaged the electronics on their opponents, and such 
technology is rumored to be incorporated in both the F-22 and F-35.
To shoot at a satellite and get the beam focused enough though is going 
to take a mighty big antenna.
Also, if you knew that a satellite was going to be attacked by such 
means, it probably wouldn't be all that difficult to design a means of 
shielding it from the effects, sort of a Faraday cage around its structure.

Pat

<u2r2h@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:844f305a-e15f-410d-8d13-d93f874f8be7@v57g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> Re:
> http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2008/08/czech-poland-radar-missile-bull-space.html
>
> Could someone please tell me what the author meant?


If you're curious about the US military and it's abilities in such areas
....just ask 'em!  The name of the relevant agency is...and I'm not
making this up...

         ...The Directed Energy Directorate   aka   D.E.D.

'Their product lines are well-suited for today's space warfighter!'


DIRECTED ENERGY DIRECTORATE PRODUCT LINES
http://www.kirtland.af.mil/afrl_de/


"The Directed Energy Directorate concentrates on six major "product" lines
or  emphasis areas - Offensively, they can strike at the speed of light
with little or no collateral damage.

Counter Electronics - Disrupt adversaries' critical military and infrastructure
electronics and communications equipment with little to no collateral damage
utilizing radio frequency and high power microwaves

Force Protection - Protect U.S. Forces with directed energy shields and
non-lethal weaponry to minimize casualties and reduce collateral damage

Long Range Strike - Identify, communicate and attack time critical targets
anytime; anywhere

Precision Engagement - Provide scaleable effects from disrupt to destroy
on a wide range of tactical targets with limited collateral damage

Space Control - Provide rapid knowledge of space situations for the
combatant commander to ensure freedom of action in space"


And if you swing on over to the Missile Defense Agency
you'll find a nice list of our current capabilities.
http://www.mda.mil/mdalink/html/mdalink.html


Current system architecture consists of the following:

24 GBI emplaced in silos in Alaska and California
21 SM-3 sea-based interceptors
Three Navy Aegis BMD Cruisers and seven Destroyers
capable of engaging short- to intermediate-range missiles
and able to perform the Long-Range Surveillance & Track
(LRS&T) mission.
505 PAC-3 missiles.
A Sea-Based X-Band (SBX) radar capable of providing
robust discrimination to the system.
Active Upgraded Early Warning Radar (UEWRs) in California
and the United Kingdom and an upgraded Cobra Dane radar
in Alaska
Two Forward-Based X-Band Radars (AN/TPY-2) delivered
(one deployed to Shariki, Japan)
Initial Global Integrated Fire Control (GIFC) capability
A C2BMC system on line at three COCOMs with situational
nodes within the National Capital Region and the
UK.

And, while shopping, remember to visit the main page of the
AIR FORCE SPACE COMMAND
http://www.afspc.af.mil/







>
> =========== quote ==============
> Those who comment without knowing the true nature of the US's over the
> horizon radar system, are commenting blissfully ignorant of the
> situation.
>
> I'm not going to describe how it works or the frequencies the 2nd
> antenna can produce because most of you would discard me out of hand.
> But the Russian know and they are very upset, more with the radar
> system than the interceptors.
>
> I will tell you a couple of things though.
> 1.- It has terrestrial offensive capabilities.
> 2.- The directing antenna apart from using the ionosphere as the
> mirror with additional power can be used as an anti satellite device
> by pushing large parts of the ionosphere higher to cause friction with
> low orbiting spy satellites.
> 3.- The additional power required can be sourced remotely.
>
> Weapons development didn't stop in the 50's -- wake up.
>
> Ray Bay, Glennallen Alaska, USA
> ============================
>
> What could be "terrestrial offensive"?
>
> Is it true that radar can be used as an anti satellite device??
>
> http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2008/08/czech-poland-radar-missile-bull-space.html
>

Check out this video from the Directed Energy Directorate.
I'm just glad their on our side....

Before long our troops will be fielding more lasers and
energy 'beams' than in a whole season of Star Trek~
f-16's, hummers, high altitude laser balloons....you name it
it'll have some kind of energy weapon.

http://www.kirtland.af.mil/afrl_de/videos/index.asp 

Pat Flannery wrote:
> 
> 
> Government Shill #2 wrote:
>>> Is it true that radar can be used as an anti satellite device??
>>>     
>>
>> No.
>>   
> 
> You might be able to blow out the electronics on a satellite by hitting 
> it with a very intense and well focused radar pulse to generate 
> electrical surges in its chips, burning them out.
> There are already promulgated systems for aircraft that use powerful 
> radar pulses to damaged the electronics on their opponents, and such 
> technology is rumored to be incorporated in both the F-22 and F-35.
> To shoot at a satellite and get the beam focused enough though is going 
> to take a mighty big antenna.
> Also, if you knew that a satellite was going to be attacked by such 
> means, it probably wouldn't be all that difficult to design a means of 
> shielding it from the effects, sort of a Faraday cage around its structure.
> 
> Pat
Except for the antennas!!

Sounds like bullshit to me.

If it were true, the giga-watts of RF energy pumped into/bounced against the 
ionosphere every day would cause every satellite in orbit to drop on to our 
heads.

-- 
"Those who beat their swords into ploughshares will plough for those who 
didn't".

<u2r2h@gmx.net> wrote in message 
news:844f305a-e15f-410d-8d13-d93f874f8be7@v57g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> Re: 
> http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2008/08/czech-poland-radar-missile-bull-space.html
>
> Could someone please tell me what the author meant?
>
> =========== quote ==============
> Those who comment without knowing the true nature of the US's over the
> horizon radar system, are commenting blissfully ignorant of the
> situation.
>
> I'm not going to describe how it works or the frequencies the 2nd
> antenna can produce because most of you would discard me out of hand.
> But the Russian know and they are very upset, more with the radar
> system than the interceptors.
>
> I will tell you a couple of things though.
> 1.- It has terrestrial offensive capabilities.
> 2.- The directing antenna apart from using the ionosphere as the
> mirror with additional power can be used as an anti satellite device
> by pushing large parts of the ionosphere higher to cause friction with
> low orbiting spy satellites.
> 3.- The additional power required can be sourced remotely.
>
> Weapons development didn't stop in the 50's -- wake up.
>
> Ray Bay, Glennallen Alaska, USA
> ============================
>
> What could be "terrestrial offensive"?
>
> Is it true that radar can be used as an anti satellite device??
>
> http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2008/08/czech-poland-radar-missile-bull-space.html
> 

On 22 Aug, 21:06, u2...@gmx.net wrote:
> Re:http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2008/08/czech-poland-radar-missile-bull-spa...
>
> Could someone please tell me what the author meant?
>
> =========== quote ==============
> Those who comment without knowing the true nature of the US's over the
> horizon radar system, are commenting blissfully ignorant of the
> situation.
>
> I'm not going to describe how it works or the frequencies the 2nd
> antenna can produce because most of you would discard me out of hand.
> But the Russian know and they are very upset, more with the radar
> system than the interceptors.
>
> I will tell you a couple of things though.
> 1.- It has terrestrial offensive capabilities.
> 2.- The directing antenna apart from using the ionosphere as the
> mirror with additional power can be used as an anti satellite device
> by pushing large parts of the ionosphere higher to cause friction with
> low orbiting spy satellites.
> 3.- The additional power required can be sourced remotely.
>
> Weapons development didn't stop in the 50's -- wake up.
>
> Ray Bay, Glennallen Alaska, USA
> ============================
>
> What could be "terrestrial offensive"?
>
> Is it true that radar can be used as an anti satellite device??
>
> http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2008/08/czech-poland-radar-missile-bull-spa...

I think the other contributers are quite right there is NO ASAT
capability as such. However "over the horizon" nullifies stealth as
steath does not operate at 50cm+. If the Russians were attemting to
develop "Stealth" aircraft, such a development is nullified by the
Polish radar.

It should be pointed out too that the Russians are working on "over
the horizon" too OTH mobile radars are in Syria as we speak.


  - Ian Parker

Graeme wrote:
>>
>> Also, if you knew that a satellite was going to be attacked by such 
>> means, it probably wouldn't be all that difficult to design a means 
>> of shielding it from the effects, sort of a Faraday cage around its 
>> structure.
>>
>> Pat
> Except for the antennas!!

 You might be able to get around that also by having a system that notes 
a sudden power surge coming off of the antennas and shuts them off for 
the duration of the surge.
 A friend of mine has a surplus phone switch system from a Minuteman 
silo that uses some sort of neon-filled circuit breakers to shut down 
the system temporarily in the event of EMP.
 If it's fast enough to handle that (lightning arrestors are too slow to 
stop EMP), it might be fast enough to deal with the antenna problem.

Pat

"Ian Parker" <ianparker2@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6462309d-acb8-44a9-bee9-d2662b81bb4c@m73g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

> I think the other contributers are quite right there is NO ASAT
> capability as such. However "over the horizon" nullifies stealth as
> steath does not operate at 50cm+. If the Russians were attemting to
> develop "Stealth" aircraft, such a development is nullified by the
> Polish radar.
>
> It should be pointed out too that the Russians are working on "over
> the horizon" too OTH mobile radars are in Syria as we speak.


But they're working on high energy microwave beams that could
be used for asats someday. They seem to be planning on putting
them just about everywhere.

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
High Power Microwaves

Division scientists are exploring equipment and methodologies for
generating high power microwave energy and accurately propagating
that energy to a target. Included are efforts to assess the effects
of those highpower microwaves on various targets. Work is also
ongoing on the feasibility and utility of placing compact highpower
microwave systems aboard various Air Force platforms.

Beam Development: Solidstate switch technology offers an
ultrawideband beam, but with the ability to make an antenna
conform to the skin of a system. With the promise of high
efficiency, the technology also provides the ability to steer
the beam and phase the radiation into an extremely narrow beam.
http://www.kirtland.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-070404-036.pdf


>
>
>  - Ian Parker

On Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:06:26 -0700 (PDT), u2r2h@gmx.net wrote:

>Re: http://u2r2h.blogspot.com/2008/08/czech-poland-radar-missile-bull-space.html

>Could someone please tell me what the author meant?

What the author meant was, "These radars are DEATH RAYS!, just like
Nikolai Tesla invented before THEY silenced him!"

The author, of course, is wrong.  


>=========== quote ==============
>Those who comment without knowing the true nature of the US's over the
>horizon radar system, are commenting blissfully ignorant of the
>situation.
>
>I'm not going to describe how it works or the frequencies the 2nd
>antenna can produce because most of you would discard me out of hand.

And here he's got cause and effect backwards.  We dismiss him out of
hand, *because* he won't describe how it works and put numbers on it.

[...]

>============================

>What could be "terrestrial offensive"?

It could be "DEATH RAY!!!", but in fact is "pure gibberish".


>Is it true that radar can be used as an anti satellite device??

High power microwave transmitters similar to those used by radar
can be used to jam satellite communications and perhaps damage
sensitive electronics, at least in low orbit.  We'd have to do
the math to see whether a particular radar system could be used
for this, which is is where bits of data like "frequencies of 
the 2nd antenna" might come in handy.


-- 
*John Schilling                    * "Anything worth doing,         *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP       *  is worth doing for money"     *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner *    -13th Rule of Acquisition   *
*White Elephant Research, LLC      * "There is no substitute        *
*John.Schillin@alumni.usc.edu      *  for success"                  *
*661-718-0955 or 661-275-6795      *    -58th Rule of Acquisition   *

John Schilling wrote:
> What the author meant was, "These radars are DEATH RAYS!, just like
> Nikolai Tesla invented before THEY silenced him!"
>   

Well, I was just talking to a pigeon, and that pigeon said that Tesla 
knew too much...particularly about pigeons. :-)
I always suspected that Tesla hanging out around those giant high 
voltage coils was giving him a slight dose of electroshock therapy on a 
daily basis, and eventually his brain was rewired in a odd form, rather 
like one-too-many doses of LSD.

Pat