On 11/28/14, Cathal Garvey <[email protected]> wrote: > To clarify on your "complexity" argument, are you saying that the > POTUS-parade may be employing technology that detects other devices by > their output signatures, then fires a noise-beam specifically at them to > maximise power delivery and minimise energy costs/unnecessary interference?
to clarify, the POTUS jammin' described by OP is a simple, and brute case. however, there is precedent for "intelligent jamming", where attempts to avoid the specific DoS using wide band, complex encoding would be met with a specific wide-band, complex response telling you to get stuffed. these systems cooperate together, and surely countermeasures are in place if you evade the trivial measures. note that avoiding POTUS jammin' is a violation of FCC regs, #include <std_disclaimer> etc,... > If that were the case, then a shielded, passive receiver ought to be OK, a shielded, passive receiver would be overwhelmed by the brute flood. > For my part, I just doubt they're using intelligent jamming because cost > isn't really a factor in their requirements, is it? They can just blare > out on all the frequencies they care about, yup. > How much power is needed to jam > at the frequency band you described? We're talking about a cavalcade > that could, if they considered it necessary, employ a portable nuke! > Power ain't a limiting factor! :) they probably use a few tens of watts EIRP at most, unless they need to react to a perceived threat to penetrate that barrier. military systems go to many thousands of watts. best regards,
