SixPapaCharlie
May the force be with you
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2013
- Messages
- 16,391
- Display Name
Display name:
Sixer
You guys are killing me!
Today it's us. Tomorrow it will be your flying.
You guys are killing me!
Never mind.
The reality is that ultimately ground based transmitters are more vulnerable than space based transmitters if someone well and truly wants to disrupt a radio based navigation system, and the target is able to do whatever they can to avoid it.
But we are getting off topic.
I need to take a break, and wait until I have an update on my conversation with the DPE.
You guys are killing me!
Never mind.
The reality is that ultimately ground based transmitters are more vulnerable than space based transmitters if someone well and truly wants to disrupt a radio based navigation system, and the target is able to do whatever they can to avoid it.
But we are getting off topic.
I need to take a break, and wait until I have an update on my conversation with the DPE.
You guys are killing me!
Not really, this is very relevant to the topic, your lack of consideration of the importance of detail. In fact, space based systems are far more vulnerable to not on terrestrial based threats, but also space based natural phenomenon.
Um...no.
Ground based transmitters are infinitely more difficult to disrupt because of (a) Proximity and (b) Power. They are both far higher power than anything that is economical to launch into space, and thanks to the fact that they're much, much closer and the magic of the inverse square law, it takes orders of magnitude more power to jam them.
And this just demonstrates that you are entirely unwilling to listen to other people and their correct advice.
Today it's us. Tomorrow it will be your flying.
Don't confuse the poor guy with reality, Henning.
Um...no.
Ground based transmitters are infinitely more difficult to disrupt because of (a) Proximity and (b) Power. They are both far higher power than anything that is economical to launch into space, and thanks to the fact that they're much, much closer and the magic of the inverse square law, it takes orders of magnitude more power to jam them.
And this just demonstrates that you are entirely unwilling to listen to other people and their correct advice.
Do you not take advice from someone without a degree? Even if they're right? Is it possible for someone to know more about aviation than you even if they don't have a college education? Is your education even related to aviation?Typical Henning. So you're an expert on space phenomena now?
By the way... What is your educational level seriously? You talk the talk, that is for sure.
I have no idea about jamming or disrupting through electronic counter measures, so I have no basis to agree or disagree on that front. But what about something a little more low tech, such as use of demolitions? It would seem easier to get access to a VOR on the ground than a satelite.
Well, if I'm going to get a lecture in electrodynamics from someone I'd like to know their qualifications. For a lesson in flying, yes sure, Henning is way ahead of me. I know that. Of course I know that.
Perhaps you might accept some advice on airmanship from someone designated by the FAA as having some knowledge on the subject, but you don't seem capable of that.
okay you got me there...
Working on it.
Typical Henning. So you're an expert on space phenomena now?
By the way... What is your educational level seriously? You talk the talk, that is for sure.
I have no idea about jamming or disrupting through electronic counter measures, so I have no basis to agree or disagree on that front. But what about something a little more low tech, such as use of demolitions? It would seem easier to get access to a VOR on the ground than a satelite.
Thank you, finally someone who is sane.
Typical Henning. So you're an expert on space phenomena now?
By the way... What is your educational level seriously? You talk the talk, that is for sure.
"electrodynamics"?
"electrodynamics"?
OK. We have now confirmed that if your jammer of choice is a baseball bat, or a truck full of manure, it's easier to jam a VOR signal than a GPS satellite signal. Got it.
See: Feynman, Richard. Lorenz, and Maxwell: Classic electrodynamics is the study of electrical charges, how they propagate, influence, and are influenced by magnetism, and other natural phenomenon(lightning, solar rad, northern lights, etc).
The OP was just going to lecture on this I believe. Should be good theater.
See: Feynman, Richard, Lorenz, and Maxwell: Quantum electrodynamics is the study of electrical charges, how they propagate, influence, and are influenced by magnetism, and other natural phenomenon(lightning, solar rad, northern lights, etc).
The OP was just going to lecture on this I believe. Should be good theater.
He will learn quickly that this is not the place to baffle people with bull****.Electrodynamics (not QED) is just how electric and magnetic fields are affected by each other and moving charges. I.e., Maxwell, not Feynman.
Only slightly relevant.
What it really is is a form of name-dropping. He's trying to BS his way through it.
If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance,
Baffle 'em with bulls***.
He will learn quickly that this is not the place to baffle people with bull****.
I've only read Feynman Lectures and both of his "autobiographies" and I know enough to say "electrodynamics" is nothing our dear Peter tried to explain
edit: you edited while I posted
Electrodynamics (not QED) is just how electric and magnetic fields are affected by each other and moving charges. I.e., Maxwell, not Feynman.
Only slightly relevant.
What it really is is a form of name-dropping. He's trying to BS his way through it.
If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance,
Baffle 'em with bulls***.
OK. We have now confirmed that if your jammer of choice is a baseball bat, or a truck full of manure, it's easier to jam a VOR signal than a GPS satellite signal. Got it.
No, that's correct, it isn't. I was just lucky enough to be at one of Feynman's CalTech lectures in the mid 80s. Every seat was taken, people standing in the wings, and on the sides, and it was recorded as well. We all just gaped, with our mouths open as this guy walked us through Quantum fields and Feynman diagrams as if it were paint by numbers. A thrilling moment for me and one I'll never forget.
Except from Rodney Dangerfield. Which seems strangely appropriate....
"electrodynamics"?
Sure we will.From this point onwards, you shall all refer to me as Doctor.
From this point onwards, you shall all refer to me as Doctor.
It is nice that you are telling us a little about yourself. Now, why are you learning to fly? What sort of flying have you done already?Well yes, ultimately Maxwell's equations dictate everything, and the study of that is electrodynamics. I see some other nonsense being sprouted above about QED and Feynman? Not applicable to attenuation of RF not at this level anyway (non quantum effects)! Feynman was brilliant, I have read many of his lectures. Stop trying to impress me, you won't.
I know none of you believe me so why do I bother. I have a bachelor's degree, a Masters in Applied Mathematics and a PhD in CS/EE. Not bad for a 15 year old, huh?
Don't expect you to believe me. Don't. I don't care.
The reality is that ultimately ground based transmitters are more vulnerable than space based transmitters if someone well and truly wants to disrupt a radio based navigation system, and the target is able to do whatever
have a bachelor's degree, a Masters in Applied Mathematics and a PhD in CS/EE. Not bad for a 15 year old, huh?
I think perhaps the folks on the board should just start referring to you as "Lady Malibu".