Military Review

Elon Musk is the priority enemy of the Russian army

203
Elon Musk is the priority enemy of the Russian army
Source: uspei.com



Lend-Lease Mask


Communication and information in a war decides a lot, if not everything. This was once again proved by the Russian special operation in Ukraine. At the moment, Banderists have one indisputable advantage - broadband access to Starlink satellite Internet. It seems that this system has become a new word in military affairs, which cannot be ignored in the future. The Russian army must without fail receive a workable system of a similar level in the very near future. In the meantime, let's analyze the subtleties of enemy technology and the scandal that erupted around it.

Starlink has always claimed to be a military system. In the Pentagon and other offices, scenarios for using Elon Musk's technology in the interests of the army were considered first of all. In 2019, SpaceX (the lead developer of Starlink) received funds from the US Air Force to test the compatibility of the system with combat aviation. In May 2020, the US Army signed an agreement with Elon Musk to use broadband satellite Internet access to transmit data over military networks. Just six months later, Musk wins a $150 million contract to develop military satellites that are the equivalent of Starlink. That is, in simple terms, now in Ukraine the testing of a satellite system in the interests of the Pentagon is in full swing. However, there is nothing to test here - the system has proven itself from the best side. Until recently, until Starlink began to fail along the entire line of contact.

What is Starlink? In principle, it does not represent anything new - it is satellite communications, albeit fairly broadband. The average speed reaches 150 megabits per second, the delay is no more than 31 milliseconds. It is important to understand that, unlike Iridium, Elon Musk's technology does not allow phones to be directly connected to the network. For this, a wi-fi router is provided, connected to a satellite dish, made in the form of a phased antenna array. A round plate with a diameter of 48 cm weighs about eight kilograms, a rectangular version of the second generation - no more than four. The average throughput of each ground terminal is up to 1 Gbps. Antennas are resistant to precipitation, and some models are equipped with heating. Included is a thirty-meter cable that connects the antenna to the router. And yes, in good weather, Starlink works better - cloudiness reduces the speed of receiving and transmitting data by 20-25 percent. Satellite communications use Ku-band (10,7 - 18 GHz) and Ka-band (26,5 - 40 GHz) frequencies, which operate within line-of-sight.


Source: glas.ru

Thus, Starlink consists of three main components - a satellite constellation located at an altitude of about 500 km, ground terminals and ground stations that connect satellites to the World Wide Web. In fact, satellites play the role of high-altitude repeaters. The main snag is hidden in ground stations - companies that control traffic at these nodes can carry out both censorship and interception of information flows.

The main feature that annoyed Starlink in peacetime was the disregard for the sovereignty of countries. The brainchild of Elon Musk allows you to bypass national firewalls, for example, the Chinese Great Firewall of China. This is about the same as if in every city in the United States and the European Union, televisions were hung at intersections broadcasting Russian Today, which is banned in them. In fairness, Starlink is now working in only twenty-nine countries - for the rest, a ban has been introduced either at the government level, or an embargo has been introduced by Elon Musk himself. Which, however, in no way interferes with arranging “exclusive” use, for example, for the leaders of anti-government protests in Iran.

Starlink, which allows you to organize an Internet connection from almost anywhere in the world for a few hundred dollars, of course, started very briskly. At the beginning of 2021, more than half a million pre-orders for satellite communication terminals were issued in a couple of months. Now the number of users around the world exceeds 700 thousand. In February, they announced a 500-megabit business version of Starlink.

War Elon Musk


From the very beginning of the Russian special operation, Elon Musk gave the Kyiv regime at least five thousand Starlink ground terminals for free use. According to other sources, in Ukraine there are already more than twenty thousand sets of satellite Internet from Musk. Allegedly, so that civilians can freely use communication services. At the same time, more than a thousand terminals were paid for by grants from the US Agency for International Development (USAID). From the very beginning, it was clear that Starlink was a real weapon and it is worse than the M777 howitzers. According to a number of experts, satellite communications played one of the most important roles in the stability of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in defense. For example, Starlink ensures the rapid transmission of information from reconnaissance drones to artillery positions for strike. Battalions, companies and platoons are controlled in real time. At the same time, no special training and adaptation is required - all interfaces are purely civilian and any average smartphone user can manage them.

How to deal with Starlink on the battlefield? Probably the most logical thing seems to be the destruction of the satellite constellation itself. But it becomes absurd when you find out the number of satellites in the system - at least 3 thousand in low Earth orbit. However, something can be done. For example, with the help of the complex, the Tirada-2S electronic jamming complex, probably the most secret development of the domestic military-industrial complex. Based on scattered data, we can say that the product allows you to suppress or interfere with Starlink satellites located in a 500-kilometer orbit. It is practically useless to jam the signal on the ground - for this you will have to build a developed cellular network in the depths of the enemy's defenses. Hints that Russia is looking for the keys to Starlink began to appear after numerous failures in the Kherson direction and Donbass. For example, on October 15, the Armed Forces of Ukraine failed to organize attacks in the Limansky and Nikolaev-Kryvyi Rih directions. Who knows, maybe the commanders simply refused Starlink terminals? That is why Elon Musk's gifts can become a real Achilles' heel of nationalists. Those who are accustomed to fighting through smartphones will have to retrain for new communication channels, which will be far from being so secure and problem-free.


Source: mobilelegends.net

Unexpectedly, Elon Musk himself recently threw out a couple of tricks. As a businessman, he understands the legacy of Starlink now. It actually turned into a weapon, which is not always perceived positively in the West. Despite all the hysteria that has been unleashed around the conflict. For example, a viewer of the Fox News channel, assigned to the Republicans, will think seven times before buying a Starlink. Local TV commentators regularly criticize US policy towards Ukraine and ridicule Zelensky. And they carefully count the money that the White House spent on sponsoring the nationalists. So Musk succumbed to emotions and refused to finance the work of Starlink in Ukraine. Say, SpaceX's losses are already approaching $100 million. However, what kind of money is this for a mega-corporation that regularly receives subsidies from the budget? Musk built a clearly political action with very specific goals. Elon tried to shift the burden to the Pentagon, as if showing the whole world - look, I just provide equipment and do not sponsor what is happening in Ukraine. Everything is done by the military, deal with them.

A small scandal immediately took shape when the Mask was sent from Ukraine in three letters, his faces were torn off billboards in Odessa, and then he agreed to continue paying for Starlink for the nationalists. Moving away from insults, the billionaire quickly changed his shoes:
“To hell with it… Although Starlink is still losing money and other companies are getting billions of dollars from taxpayers, we will just continue to fund the government of Ukraine for free.”

And this means that there were no problems for the gradual, albeit slow, destruction of the large Starlink grouping in Ukraine, as there were, and there are none. Formally, it has remained a private network, that is, it is not directly related to the US government.
Author:
203 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vladimir80
    Vladimir80 19 October 2022 05: 10
    +35
    Fortune telling on coffee grounds. Can/can't turn it off? I will express my opinion - we cannot, and the point is not in agreements, but in the real absence of such means in our army. The fact that they were able to shoot down a satellite with a rocket (six months ago?) does not count, because. I will assume that that rocket was 100 times more expensive than the satellite, and there are thousands of Starlink satellites.
    1. yuriy55
      yuriy55 19 October 2022 05: 25
      -13
      There are thousands of satellites, but here is a statement about weapons based on the new principles of Peresvet (put into service since 2017):
      According to Yuri Borisov, Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian government in charge of defense issues, the complex can "dazzle all satellite reconnaissance systems of a potential enemy in orbits up to 1,5 thousand kilometers"

      Again, everything depends on the political will of the Russian leadership.
      1. Barmaglot_07
        Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 06: 45
        +27
        blind all satellite intelligence systems
        - there are no reconnaissance cameras on Starlinks, therefore there is nothing to blind, and in order to burn, energy is needed many orders of magnitude higher.
        1. Civil
          Civil 19 October 2022 07: 36
          +22
          Here it is not necessary to wave your fists in the direction of the American billionaire, but to find one of your own so that he finances not the drilling of wells, but the space program for the military Internet.
          1. Barmaglot_07
            Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 07: 59
            +6
            Stop-stop-stop, because it is well known that the "American billionaire" Elon Max is a swindler and a charlatan. Are you calling for the production of swindlers and charlatans in Russia?
            1. Civil
              Civil 19 October 2022 08: 02
              -9
              Quote from: Barmaglot_07
              Stop-stop-stop, because it is well known that the "American billionaire" Elon Max is a swindler and a charlatan. Are you calling for the production of swindlers and charlatans in Russia?

              I understand your sarcasm, but even an atheist (in a good sense of the word) comrade. I.V. Stalin had to turn to the Russian Orthodox Church during the Second World War.
              1. Barmaglot_07
                Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 09: 08
                +15
                Well, let Patriarch Kirill offer a prayer service for strengthening the firmament of heaven, so that all sorts of adversaries do not fly.
                1. Civil
                  Civil 19 October 2022 09: 18
                  -2
                  Quote from: Barmaglot_07
                  Well, let Patriarch Kirill offer a prayer service for strengthening the firmament of heaven, so that all sorts of adversaries do not fly.

                  They say that the authorities are about to call him to him. So to speak, he is already sitting in the waiting room.
            2. TANKISTONE
              TANKISTONE 19 October 2022 21: 59
              -1
              Barmaglot_07 Stop-stop-stop, because it is well known that the "American billionaire" Elon Max is a swindler and a charlatan. Are you calling for the production of swindlers and charlatans in Russia?
              Elon Musk is the "zits-chairman", he and all young modern oligarchs will be devoured by century-old clans of gray cardinals, as sufficient funds are accumulated in the purses of the young ...
            3. cash
              cash 20 October 2022 00: 59
              0
              behind the mask is us and the Pentagon, so that the failures of the "private trader" are not the failure of the United States, but only of one person ... it's like you were born yesterday, also say that democracy and freedom of speech exist ...
          2. Illanatol
            Illanatol 19 October 2022 09: 19
            +6
            And where are you going to look? Are there nominations?
            They are not and cannot be.
            Space, like many other things, can only be dealt with by the state. The "private owners" simply do not have enough opportunities (capitals) and motivation, too.
          3. skeptick2
            skeptick2 19 October 2022 10: 21
            +9
            Quote: Civil
            Here it is not necessary to wave your fists in the direction of the American billionaire, but to find one of your own

            It has already been said more than once: if your own Elon Musk appears in Russia, he will be immediately imprisoned. Something, but laws, under the article of which anyone can be brought, were stamped in abundance.
            But this is by the way. It is necessary to discuss not about the Mask, but about his devices. It is necessary to at least try to understand why the collective West has Starlink, while we have nothing similar even in the first approximation. Why, even for the OneWeb project, the only thing we could provide conditional partners was media.
            Why do things not go beyond words in our country (the same Sphere from the region of the future, and it doesn’t even stand next to Starlink), and the West already today has devices that really affect the outcome of the war?
            Why is no one thinking ahead?
            1. gromit
              gromit 19 October 2022 11: 12
              +13
              Because you can't build a satellite out of bundles of petrorubles.
              We need engineers, scientists, enthusiastic entrepreneurs... And all this public has almost ceased to emerge from the ruins of the Soviet education system, and still does not get along with elderly clowns in uniform.

              The Soviet idea was even popular in Western scientific circles.
              And what is the current RF? Landed temples? Stupid jokes and swear words from the first persons of the state? Former Kpsovites who declared themselves a new aristocracy?
              These will not be able to build anything new. They also aspire not to the future, but to feudal Russia of the times of Nicholas l.
              They are very saddened by the western borders of the Russian Federation. If there was solid Uzbekistan and Tajikistan around, they would be happy. They would live like people, they would limit compulsory education to 3 classes, they would set up golden statues for themselves .. Lepota. Spirituality. Staples.
            2. Garik Gorkin
              Garik Gorkin 19 October 2022 14: 54
              0
              why the collective West has Starlink, but we don't

              Because Russia was the main competitor of the USA (and still has the potential), and as soon as the USA managed to turn us into its colony in 1991-1993, then the appointed colonial administration (the oligarchs and the officials they control) make sure that we did not develop high technologies, and we remained a raw material appendage.
              Article "Why RUSSIA is a COLONY"
              https://solovyeva.livejournal.com/331687.html
            3. stankow
              stankow 19 October 2022 21: 57
              -1
              But are the carriers - that's not enough? So Musk provided Falcon for Starlink.
          4. Ulan.1812
            Ulan.1812 19 October 2022 10: 52
            -3
            Quote: Civil
            Here it is not necessary to wave your fists in the direction of the American billionaire, but to find one of your own so that he finances not the drilling of wells, but the space program for the military Internet.

            Find us? Most live abroad and will hang themselves for a penny, but will not help. Russia.
            We have no other option than to force them to fork out - no.
          5. Scientist
            Scientist 19 October 2022 11: 53
            +1
            So he became a billionaire on budget money, on government orders. And the problem is not in drilling wells, but in where the money received from these wells goes.
            1. kamakama
              kamakama 19 October 2022 13: 39
              +1
              He started his journey in South Africa. With PayPal, in which there is no government money
            2. for
              for 20 October 2022 17: 55
              0
              Quote: U. Cheny
              So he became a billionaire with budget money,

              And what about our wagons unloaded? He did what was ordered and received.
          6. boni592807
            boni592807 19 October 2022 22: 45
            0
            Civilian (Vadim). .today, 07:36. NEWTh - "...Here it is not necessary to wave your fists in the direction of the American billionaire, but to find one of your own so that he finances not the drilling of wells, but the space program for the military Internet ...."


            Yes. difficult question No.
            Well, you need to look at the lists from the Russian Federation in Forbes belay and "suggest" crying tired owners of "earned" overwork to play the game "I'm cooler than Elon Musk." love
            Mask. American. and then "free of charge" helps O. Krajina laughing . And here the locals "want" but WILL NOT DECIDE out of modesty. feel Uncle Vova "help support" Russia. reset to CBO and specifically to the analogue of Starlink bully (consists of three main components - a satellite constellation located at an altitude of about 500 km, ground terminals and ground stations connecting the satellites with the World Wide Web). They are tired of waiting ... recourse

            R.S.. - How not to remember the phrase from the movie "D'Artagnan and the Three Musketeers" from the lips of the innkeeper Buanassier.- "... My one word saved France! A haberdasher and a cardinal are strength!..." hi
        2. Svetlana
          Svetlana 19 October 2022 07: 55
          +2
          Quote from: Barmaglot_07
          blind all satellite intelligence systems
          - there are no reconnaissance cameras on Starlinks, therefore there is nothing to blind, and in order to burn, energy is needed many orders of magnitude higher.

          But there are antenna-feeder devices on Stralinka. When a satellite is irradiated with a powerful laser, a local electromagnetic pulse arises on it due to the appearance of electric currents due to thermoelectric power. Thermoelectric power is the induced voltage between the elements of the external equipment of the satellite, which have different surface temperatures. For thermopower, for example, the automation of a home gas boiler works. Interruption of thermopower electric currents leads to overvoltage surges and breakdowns of the electrical insulation of the channels of field-effect transistors, pn-junctions of bipolar transistors and diodes. The laser energy required to cause local EMP is an order of magnitude less than the energy required for thermal melting and/or evaporation of the satellite structure elements.
          1. Civil
            Civil 19 October 2022 08: 03
            -2
            Quote: Svetlana
            Quote from: Barmaglot_07
            blind all satellite intelligence systems
            - there are no reconnaissance cameras on Starlinks, therefore there is nothing to blind, and in order to burn, energy is needed many orders of magnitude higher.

            But there are antenna-feeder devices on Stralinka. When a satellite is irradiated with a powerful laser, a local electromagnetic pulse arises on it due to the appearance of electric currents due to thermoelectric power. Thermoelectric power is the induced voltage between the elements of the external equipment of the satellite, which have different surface temperatures. For thermopower, for example, the automation of a home gas boiler works. Interruption of thermopower electric currents leads to overvoltage surges and breakdowns of the electrical insulation of the channels of field-effect transistors, pn-junctions of bipolar transistors and diodes. The laser energy required to cause local EMP is an order of magnitude less than the energy required for thermal melting and/or evaporation of the satellite structure elements.

            You will never be able to explain this to the purchasing department.
          2. Barmaglot_07
            Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 08: 31
            +11
            Now two little questions:

            1. How much power is required to disable the Starlink satellite in this way?
            2. What power does the Peresvet laser complex produce?
          3. Scientist
            Scientist 19 October 2022 11: 59
            +4
            Doesn't any satellite experience large temperature differences when leaving or entering the earth's shadow, between the illuminated and shadow parts of the antennas?
            1. Svetlana
              Svetlana 19 October 2022 12: 35
              0
              Quote: U. Cheny
              Doesn't any satellite experience large temperature differences when leaving or entering the earth's shadow, between the illuminated and shadow parts of the antennas?

              The higher the frequency, the higher the energy of the quantum of electromagnetic radiation. Temperature drops when leaving or entering the earth's shadow occur with a frequency of about 2 periods per hour. The electric currents induced by the thermoelectric power caused by the transition from the shadow to the sunlight have time to fade in 1 hour.
              The temperature drops of the satellite surface during laser irradiation occur at a much higher frequency.
          4. aglet
            aglet 19 October 2022 12: 31
            +1
            "Thermoelectric power is the induced voltage between the elements of the outer equipment of the satellite, which have different surface temperatures. For example, the automation of a home gas boiler works on thermoelectric power"
            To use thermoelectric power, you need to attach bimetal thermal converters, or photo converters, to the attacked areas. By itself, irradiating a metal surface with a laser of any EMI power does not create, but only increases the temperature, up to melting. but the performance of overexposure in this function is questionable. maximum - short-term illumination of optics, and a battery the size of Dneproges
            1. Svetlana
              Svetlana 19 October 2022 13: 05
              -2
              Quote: aglet
              By itself, irradiating a metal surface with a laser of any EMI power does not create

              There is a hydrodynamic mechanism for generating a magnetic field in crossed gradients of the temperature and density fields of the ablation plasma. The laser pulse leads to the generation of fast electrons due to the reconnection of the magnetic field lines of the generated magnetic field. Similar processes occur on the Sun during coronal plasma ejections leading to magnetic storms on Earth. The results of an experiment carried out in 2016 at the LFEX facility in Japan showed that a magnetized plasma arose in the cavity of the laser target, which existed for a time significantly exceeding the duration of the laser pulse. See https://laplas.mephi.ru/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Report_2017compressed.pdf?ysclid=l9fgh79hxr208600388
              1. aglet
                aglet 19 October 2022 14: 37
                +1
                "showed that a magnetized"
                how far was this target, and what is the power of the laser pulse? it is known that the power decreases depending on the cube of the distance, how thick should the battery be for this laser?
              2. aglet
                aglet 19 October 2022 14: 49
                +1
                "See https://laplas.mephi.ru/wp-"
                This link opens the mythi report. what about japan?
                "There is a hydrodynamic mechanism of magnetic field generation in crossed gradients of temperature and density fields of ablation plasma"
                and now, in simple Russian, what does this set of words mean, and what does it have to do with overexposure, or rather, with emy, which is allegedly excited by laser irradiation and burns all the electronic stuffing?
          5. Andrey Dibrov
            Andrey Dibrov 19 October 2022 15: 58
            +4
            All this thermoelectric power of yours is snot compared to regular cosmic radiation there from all sides around everything flying there. Not to mention the native solar with its outbreaks.
            In addition to detonating nuclear warheads in orbit
          6. stankow
            stankow 19 October 2022 22: 48
            +3
            svetlana What was described is a complete fantasy. There are no such physical effects in antennas ...
        3. Sinner
          Sinner 19 October 2022 12: 57
          -2
          But it won’t work to scatter a barrel of nails over all the orbits of the satellites?
          1. Svetlana
            Svetlana 19 October 2022 13: 14
            -1
            Quote: Sinner
            will it not work to scatter a barrel of nails over all the orbits of the satellites?

            It will turn out. Moreover, it is easier to deliver a loose package from the Moon than from the Earth, because on the Moon there is a smaller force of attraction than on Earth (the acceleration of free fall on the Moon is 0,165 g = 1,62 m/s2).
          2. Barmaglot_07
            Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 13: 54
            +1
            You'll need a barrel... a big one. That way for several hundred thousand tons of nails.
            1. Svetlana
              Svetlana 19 October 2022 16: 19
              -4
              Quote from: Barmaglot_07
              You'll need a barrel... big

              Can be packaged in three barrels, slightly smaller, 20Mt each in TNT equivalent.
              1. Barmaglot_07
                Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 18: 59
                +2
                Are you hinting at a violation of the Treaty on Principles for the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies? Ay-yai-yai, it's not good.
            2. Sinner
              Sinner 19 October 2022 17: 39
              0
              Would you like to joke? Are you implying that nothing can be done with these satellites?
              1. Barmaglot_07
                Barmaglot_07 20 October 2022 03: 29
                +3
                You can, for example, order a mass prayer for a radical increase in solar activity at ZAO ROC.
              2. Negro
                Negro 20 October 2022 11: 35
                +1
                Quote: Sinner
                Are you implying that nothing can be done with these satellites?

                It is possible, why not. Satellites in low orbit, you can shoot down one in three thousand with some Nudolya.

                Supporters of Ukraine are very hopeful for such a feint. Musk will not get poorer, and the whole world, including India and China, will come to explain the Russian Federation for civilized behavior.
      2. tihonmarine
        tihonmarine 19 October 2022 07: 32
        -9
        Quote: yuriy55
        There are thousands of satellites, but there is a statement about weapons based on the new principles of Peresvet (put into service since 2017)

        The collapse of the Starlink satellite communications, which until recently was considered the most reliable in the world, is a gigantic victory for the Russian cyber forces. Ukraine is already urgently looking for a replacement for Starlink, thanks to which communication of all units, guidance of drones and jet systems, and intelligence exchange were ensured.
        A replacement for the discredited American Starlink could be the British OneWeb satellite system, writes the Washington Post. However, the replacement could drag on for weeks, during which the Russian army will gain absolute superiority over the blinded Ukrainians.

        Russia has twice "blinded" military satellites - in February and September, a special operation in Ukraine turned out to be Russian testing ground for cyber attacks, according to Professor Susan Landau from the Department of Computer Science at University College London.
        1. Barmaglot_07
          Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 09: 38
          +6
          Someone heard the ringing but does not know where he is. In February, there really was an attack, but not on Starlink, but on the KA-SAT network of the Eutelsat operator - "unknown people" On February 24, several tens of thousands of terminals of this network were corrupted through a service channel by erasing the bootloader, after which it was possible to reanimate the device only in the factory conditions. Some of these terminals were used by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, some by various clients in Europe. There were exactly two incidents with Starlinks - one is known only from the words of the Mask, that there was an attempt to drown it out and they neutralized it "by adding a few lines of code", the second recently - that the terminals began to act up in the front line, and after a few days the connection was restored; most likely, geofencing of Starlinks (geographical restriction of terminal operation areas so that they are not used where it is not supposed to) did not keep up with the regroupings of the RF Armed Forces.
          1. Blackmokona
            Blackmokona 19 October 2022 11: 52
            0
            Quote from: Barmaglot_07
            Someone heard the ringing but does not know where he is. In February, there really was an attack, but not on Starlink, but on the KA-SAT network of the Eutelsat operator - "unknown people" On February 24, several tens of thousands of terminals of this network were corrupted through a service channel by erasing the bootloader, after which it was possible to reanimate the device only in the factory conditions. Some of these terminals were used by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, some by various clients in Europe. There were exactly two incidents with Starlinks - one is known only from the words of the Mask, that there was an attempt to drown it out and they neutralized it "by adding a few lines of code", the second recently - that the terminals began to act up in the front line, and after a few days the connection was restored; most likely, geofencing of Starlinks (geographical restriction of terminal operation areas so that they are not used where it is not supposed to) did not keep up with the regroupings of the RF Armed Forces.

            The Pentagon confirmed the first case, but he just cut about a couple of lines, not Musk
          2. stankow
            stankow 19 October 2022 22: 55
            0
            Barmaglot_97 See you're a connoisseur. Tell me, pls, does Starlink calculate the coordinates for geofencing via GPS constellations, or does it already process its signals for the location?
            1. Barmaglot_07
              Barmaglot_07 20 October 2022 02: 50
              0
              As far as I know, the terminals have a GPS receiver, data from which is used during initialization and initial search for satellites.
              1. stankow
                stankow 20 October 2022 10: 35
                0
                Yes, for a civilian product, that's it. Cheap and fast. And for a military terminal, if you remove the GPS receiver - one less concern. We look further at how Starlink will prove itself as GNSS.
                1. Barmaglot_07
                  Barmaglot_07 20 October 2022 14: 28
                  0
                  We look further at how Starlink will prove itself as GNSS.

                  No way. Starlink is not GNSS.
                  1. stankow
                    stankow 20 October 2022 17: 01
                    0
                    But it will. A hundred times more satellites, guaranteed visibility. Drop the ephemeris, get the doppler and count. They work on the topic. The accuracy is not lower, the reliability is higher.
      3. skeptick2
        skeptick2 19 October 2022 09: 40
        +3
        Quote: yuriy55
        According to Yuri Borisov

        You still remember the words of Borisov's predecessor, a lover of trampolines. Let's laugh together.
      4. Russian Patriot
        Russian Patriot 19 October 2022 10: 39
        0
        Borisov is still a dreamer. They are two boots with Konashenkov - a pair.
        And "overexposure" has a huge drawback, like all laser optical systems: it is useless in high cloud cover and cloudy weather.
        In Israel, such things have proven to be extremely effective. But not with us.
        1. stankow
          stankow 19 October 2022 22: 59
          +1
          And in cloudy weather, optical reconnaissance satellites also do not see, there is no need to blind them!
      5. Negro
        Negro 20 October 2022 11: 32
        +1
        Quote: yuriy55
        but there is a statement about weapons based on the new principles of "Peresvet

        Quote: yuriy55
        Again, everything depends on the political will of the Russian leadership.

        Well, or the fact that declaring is not tossing bags.
    2. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 05: 27
      -1
      Quote: Vladimir80
      I will express my opinion - we cannot, and the point is not in agreements, but in the real absence of such means in our army.

      It is quite possible to jam a satellite over a specific area with interference. He has one non-directional receiving antenna for several hundred (thousands, I don’t remember) subscribers, very sensitive. Accordingly, the directional interference accompanying the satellite will not allow the signal to be received from the terminals, and that's it, for transmission, without knowing the coordinates, the satellite will not be able to work. Not easy, of course, but doable.
      1. Barmaglot_07
        Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 06: 47
        +24
        The Azovstal inmates had a connection with the command through Starlink, despite the fact that they were completely surrounded. It seems to me that this fully characterizes the capabilities of existing electronic warfare systems to suppress or even simply detect the terminals of this system.
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 06: 56
          +1
          Quote from: Barmaglot_07
          It seems to me that this fully characterizes the capabilities of existing electronic warfare systems to suppress or even simply detect the terminals of this system.

          Army electronic warfare and will not be able to crush user terminals, it is necessary to crush the satellite reception.
          1. Barmaglot_07
            Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 07: 07
            +7
            it is necessary to press the reception of the satellite.

            Which of the more than three thousand? And why was he not crushed in Mariupol?
            1. Vladimir_2U
              Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 07: 33
              -4
              Quote from: Barmaglot_07
              Which of the more than three thousand? And why was he not crushed in Mariupol?

              Do you seriously imagine that all of them simultaneously hang over a specific area? Yeah... They fly over it, replacing each other.
              Already wrote, wipe your eyes.
              Quote: Vladimir_2U
              Army electronic warfare and will not be able to crush user terminals, it is necessary to crush the satellite reception.

              1. Barmaglot_07
                Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 07: 57
                +6
                Army electronic warfare and will not be able to crush user terminals, it is necessary to crush the satellite reception.


                I repeat the questions:
                1. What electronic warfare can?
                2. Where were they when the Azovstal inmates chatted freely with the command and in general with the whole world?
                1. Vladimir_2U
                  Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 08: 10
                  -3
                  Quote from: Barmaglot_07
                  I repeat the questions:
                  1. What electronic warfare can?

                  Interference directed at a passing satellite. This is no longer a military EW system.
                  Quote from: Barmaglot_07
                  2. Where were they when the Azovstal inmates chatted freely with the command and in general with the whole world?
                  In the same place as systematic strikes on energy and bridges.
      2. Blackmokona
        Blackmokona 19 October 2022 07: 12
        -1
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        Quote: Vladimir80
        I will express my opinion - we cannot, and the point is not in agreements, but in the real absence of such means in our army.

        It is quite possible to jam a satellite over a specific area with interference. He has one non-directional receiving antenna for several hundred (thousands, I don’t remember) subscribers, very sensitive. Accordingly, the directional interference accompanying the satellite will not allow the signal to be received from the terminals, and that's it, for transmission, without knowing the coordinates, the satellite will not be able to work. Not easy, of course, but doable.

        Satellites have a whole array of electronically controlled directional antennas
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 07: 34
          +2
          Quote: BlackMokona
          Satellites have a whole array of electronically controlled directional antennas

          If only they were curious a little bit ... One at the reception, and non-directional!
          1. Blackmokona
            Blackmokona 19 October 2022 07: 37
            +3
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            Quote: BlackMokona
            Satellites have a whole array of electronically controlled directional antennas

            If only they were curious a little bit ... One at the reception, and non-directional!

            The main payload of the Starlink satellite is 2 antenna complexes for communication with gateway stations (gateways) and with user terminals.

            The antenna complex for communication with gateways (or feeder line) is a parabolic antennasы, induced during the flight to the point on the Earth where the gateway is located. The feeder line operates in the Ka-band (18/30 GHz).

            Also on board are 4 flat square antennas with phased array - three for transmitting information from the satellite to the user terminal and one for receiving a signal from the terminal.
            1. Vladimir_2U
              Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 08: 08
              +1
              Quote: BlackMokona
              three for transmitting information from the satellite to the user terminal and one for signal reception from the terminal.

              ONE is used to work with receiving terminals! One non-directional sensitive antenna.
              1. Blackmokona
                Blackmokona 19 October 2022 11: 21
                -1
                Quote: Vladimir_2U
                Quote: BlackMokona
                three for transmitting information from the satellite to the user terminal and one for signal reception from the terminal.

                ONE is used to work with receiving terminals! One non-directional sensitive antenna.

                Directional, each Starlink satellite emits multiple beams.
                1. Vladimir_2U
                  Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 11: 46
                  -3
                  Quote: BlackMokona
                  Directional, each Starlink satellite emits multiple beams.

                  Rays are emitting! They emit, but do not receive ... This is how illiterate you need to be in order not to understand the difference between transmitting to hundreds of subscribers and receiving from hundreds of subscribers.
                  1. Blackmokona
                    Blackmokona 19 October 2022 15: 52
                    +1
                    Quote: Vladimir_2U
                    Quote: BlackMokona
                    Directional, each Starlink satellite emits multiple beams.

                    Rays are emitting! They emit, but do not receive ... This is how illiterate you need to be in order not to understand the difference between transmitting to hundreds of subscribers and receiving from hundreds of subscribers.

                    If you are talking about terminals, then they also give directional beams to the satellite.
                    1. Vladimir_2U
                      Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 16: 21
                      -1
                      Quote: BlackMokona
                      If you are talking about terminals, then they also give directional beams to the satellite.

                      Pfff, so what? In order to receive a signal from at least several terminals, yes, from a phased antenna, yes, the receiving antenna cannot physically be directional! And now the sensitive omnidirectional receiving antenna is suppressed quite easily. Elementary things...
                      1. Blackmokona
                        Blackmokona 19 October 2022 16: 35
                        0
                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        If you are talking about terminals, then they also give directional beams to the satellite.

                        Pfff, so what? In order to receive a signal from at least several terminals, yes, from a phased antenna, yes, the receiving antenna cannot physically be directional! And now the sensitive omnidirectional receiving antenna is suppressed quite easily. Elementary things...

                        Why can't? She can easily scan the area under , jumping between the sectors allotted for this satellite at the current moment.
                      2. Vladimir_2U
                        Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 17: 20
                        -1
                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        Why can't? She can easily scan the area under , jumping between the sectors allotted for this satellite at the current moment.

                        Are you a fool at all? Reception from different subscribers, several hundred, is continuous, in this case there cannot be a directional receiving antenna! The subscribers themselves point to the satellite to transmit the request, and guide the beam themselves, only in this way the satellite can point the transmitting antennas at them.
                      3. The comment was deleted.
                      4. Blackmokona
                        Blackmokona 19 October 2022 17: 24
                        +1
                        Quote: Vladimir_2U
                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        Why can't? She can easily scan the area under , jumping between the sectors allotted for this satellite at the current moment.

                        Are you a fool at all? Reception from different subscribers, several hundred, is continuous, in this case there cannot be a directional receiving antenna! The subscribers themselves point to the satellite to transmit the request, and guide the beam themselves, only in this way the satellite can point the transmitting antennas at them.

                        Why can't? Why accept the entire area under the satellite when you can only accept the allotted hex? winked
                      5. Vladimir_2U
                        Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 17: 29
                        -1
                        Quote: BlackMokona
                        Why can't? Why accept the entire area under the satellite when you can only accept the allotted hex?

                        Why am I talking to a fool? Go learn physics for grades 7-8.
              2. stankow
                stankow 19 October 2022 23: 06
                0
                Vladimir_2U Well, it is directed a little, down to the ground. There is no need to direct noise from space into the receiver. But you're right - it is not narrowly focused. And it is impossible to direct it, because the terminal signal can come from any direction. Many directions at the same time.
                1. Vladimir_2U
                  Vladimir_2U 20 October 2022 03: 14
                  +1
                  Quote: stankow
                  Vladimir_2U Well, it is directed a little, down to the ground. There is no need to direct noise from space into the receiver.

                  Of course, 180 degrees compared to 360 can be considered a direction. ))) hi
      3. Shah101
        Shah101 19 October 2022 11: 23
        0
        And why try to jam or destroy the relay satellite? Maybe you need to go the other way?
        Isn't it possible to broadcast a similar signal to receivers - starlink antennas from our carriers (not necessarily satellites, we don't need to cover the whole world, but only to parts of Ukraine), while simultaneously receiving their coordinates and highlighting them for weapons of destruction? After all, delivering accurate strikes at the identified coordinates can deprive the enemy not only of the signal receiver, but also with the luck of the command staff.
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 20 October 2022 14: 58
          0
          Quote: Shah101
          Isn’t it possible to broadcast a similar signal to receivers - starlink antennas from our carriers (not necessarily satellites, we don’t need to cover the whole world, but only in part of Ukraine)

          An interesting approach, but I'm afraid it's difficult to implement.
          Firstly, signal encoding will require hacking, but these are trifles, secondly, what is more important - this is a hypothetical device, very advanced in electronic terms, should fly / hang over the area, which is fraught with a downing, and thirdly - what to do with the original satellite?
          Something like this.
          But over your territory, it’s probably easier - to catch all sorts of LRGs, but interference is still cheaper.
      4. Negro
        Negro 20 October 2022 11: 38
        0
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        Accordingly, directional interference accompanying the satellite

        How are you going to "direct" interference to the satellite, given in particular their number?
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 20 October 2022 15: 01
          0
          Quote: Negro
          How are you going to "direct" interference to the satellite

          What, you don’t know about directional transmitting antennas?

          Quote: Negro
          considering in particular their number?

          Ah, you're one of those who imagines that all the Starlink satellites are hovering over the edge at the same time. Question about directional antennas removed ...
          1. Negro
            Negro 20 October 2022 15: 12
            0
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            What about directional transmitting antennas

            Such that they can orbit a satellite of several square meters? No.
            Quote: Vladimir_2U
            Ah, are you one of those who imagines that all the Starlink satellites are simultaneously hovering over the edge

            If you count on your fingers, then Ukraine is 1/1000 of the Earth. Accordingly, at least 3 satellites. Their same considerations constantly one satellite goes beyond the horizon, and the other rises.
            1. Vladimir_2U
              Vladimir_2U 20 October 2022 16: 00
              -1
              Quote: Negro
              Such that they can orbit a satellite of several square meters? No.

              It is a sin to laugh at the poor, but I laugh out loud !!! The Starlink Witness doesn't know how an object of worship works!!! Well, at least read how this thing works .... Hosspadi.

              Quote: Negro
              Their same considerations constantly one satellite goes beyond the horizon, and the other rises.
              Stunned, mind-blowing figure of three. Can you figure out how many pieces are hanging over the front line?
              1. Negro
                Negro 20 October 2022 21: 07
                -1
                Quote: Vladimir_2U
                Stunned, mind-blowing figure of three. Can you figure out how many pieces are hanging over the front line?

                At least three over any point.
                Quote: Vladimir_2U
                laugh out loud!!

                You will never hit a satellite with your death ray, even if you had one.
                1. Vladimir_2U
                  Vladimir_2U 21 October 2022 03: 33
                  0
                  Quote: Negro
                  At least three over any point.

                  This figure should thrill, and the adept, apart from the fact that this is a stupid tryndez? 1 (one) with the interception of the second within 5 minutes.
                  Quote: Negro
                  You will never hit a satellite with your death ray, even if you had one.
                  So was it smart or not to read how a terminal with an antenna meter by meter and an energy of a hundred watts sends a request to the satellite, I don’t understand? Or am I still trying to explain something to the debbil?
              2. Barmaglot_07
                Barmaglot_07 21 October 2022 13: 59
                0
                Why pretend? Go to https://satellitemap.space and see. For example:

    3. svp67
      svp67 19 October 2022 05: 33
      0
      Quote: Vladimir80
      I will express my opinion - we cannot, and the point is not in agreements, but in the real absence of such means in our army.

      We can, but it is VERY energy-intensive, creating problems for our long-distance communication lines and positioning systems
    4. Victor Leningradets
      Victor Leningradets 19 October 2022 07: 11
      +2
      The question of the effect/cost ratio is not as simple as the ratio of the costs of the object being destroyed and the means of destruction. Firstly, with the MASS use of weapons (cluster warhead, cheap upper stage), the cost ratio may change in the opposite direction. Secondly, the use of Starlink liquidators on the eve of the general offensive will ensure the fulfillment of operational tasks for the implementation of the strategic plan and, along the way, throw in a bunch of additional "two hundredths" from the enemy. This will pay back many times the cost of creating / using means of combating the enemy satellite constellation.
    5. Plate
      Plate 19 October 2022 10: 04
      +2
      Quote: Vladimir80
      I will express my opinion - we cannot, and the point is not in agreements, but in the real absence of such means in our army.

      And I will say that we can drown out, but not the signal from the satellite, but the signal from the terminals. They will continue to receive information, but they will no longer be able to send it. For example, let the terminal be 150 kilometers on the earth's surface, the satellite is directly above it at an altitude of 500 kilometers. We calculate from the simplest geometric considerations that we are about 6400 kilometers away from the satellite (let the radius of the Earth be 522.014 kilometers). Thus, the power of our emitter must exceed the power of the transmitting terminal by only 9% in order to suppress the signal coming from the ground. Suppress it not near the terminal, but near the satellite itself. In my opinion, we can achieve an excess of the power of EMP emitters over the power of terminals.
      Of course, I considered the signals to be propagating in all directions, and not directed, but I do not think that the required energy will change seriously enough that the RF Armed Forces could not provide it.
      And if the terminal is 500 kilometers from the Earth's surface, and the satellite is directly above it (let's say, to simplify the task - we only estimate, but do not take it seriously), then from us to the satellite is 707.017 kilometers, which, again, is not so big difference. The difference between the squares of the values ​​is almost 2 times, but, as a reminder, we need to suppress a sufficiently mobile terminal that can be carried by hand.

      Above suggested other ways to influence Starlink. If you scratch your turnip, then I think we'll find a way to crush him.
      1. Genry
        Genry 19 October 2022 12: 03
        +3
        Quote: Plate
        the power of our emitter must exceed the power of the transmitting terminal by only 9% in order to suppress the signal coming from the ground.

        Hey, daddy! Yes, you do not know radio engineering at all!
        There in 2 times - imperceptible value.
        And the interference signal, in terms of level, must completely overload the receiving channel, otherwise the digital signal processing (PAR part) will select the desired signal and simply discard all interference.
        1. Plate
          Plate 19 October 2022 12: 12
          +1
          Quote: Genry
          Hey, daddy! Yes, you do not know radio engineering at all!

          Of course, I argue on the basis of what I have studied in purely theoretical physics. Energy is inversely proportional to the square of the distance - that's all my guess.
          Quote: Genry
          And the interference signal, in terms of level, must completely overload the receiving channel, otherwise the digital signal processing (PAR part) will select the desired signal and simply discard all interference.

          Well, by the way. I, as a deep theorist, took for granted that we will fulfill the conditions of interference and extinguish the enemy wave, if we just want to.
        2. stankow
          stankow 19 October 2022 23: 18
          0
          And also the power density must be ensured in each terminal frequency band, and there can be many of them in the range. And yet, drowning out - it is quite possible!
    6. cold wind
      cold wind 19 October 2022 11: 08
      +5
      Oh, what happened? They explained to us that Musk is a swindler and a swindler, and all his projects are just marketing.
      There is such a harsh article here ... Previously, they wrote differently:

      Pasta Monster Ilona Mask, or the logical result of the adventure

      My young reader! Of course, you go to the rocket modeling section, and you are wondering why Russian engineers are neighing like horses from this Canadian father Elon Musk - in the engineering sense, and not in the sense of a clever crook who launched the Invisible Hand of the Market into the American budget up to his shoulder.


      https://topwar.ru/95392-makaronnyy-monstr-ilona-maska-ili-zakonomernyy-itog-avantyury.html?ysclid=l9fclotdzp616471850
      1. runway-1
        runway-1 19 October 2022 21: 03
        +1
        Oh, what happened? They explained to us that Musk is a swindler and a swindler, and all his projects are just marketing.
        There is such a harsh article ... Previously, they wrote differently
        Yeah, there was an epic article (and many comments on it too) ... lol
    7. Knell wardenheart
      Knell wardenheart 19 October 2022 13: 14
      +1
      Sue if we turn it off. Because formally there is no war between us and Ukraine - neither they declared to us, nor we to them. Therefore, Elon's help is not, from the point of view of international law, the help of one of the belligerents.
      From a legal point of view, Starlink provides communication services to a mass of individuals and not to some "warring state". Since Starlink is a company under American jurisdiction, any damage to its infrastructure in formally "peaceful" time will be regarded from the point of view of international law as an act of direct aggression and damage from or from the territory or means of the Russian Federation.
      Considering how many skilled crocheters and Jesuits are in the West, in the event of such a fact, from our funds, which are currently hostages of the situation, Ilona and Co. will be more than compensated - for damage, for lost profits, etc.
      If this little egg empties too, it doesn’t matter, because we have movable and immovable property, shares in companies over the hill.
      Either way, our hands are tied at the moment. If there had been an official war, there would have been a different conversation. However, in this case there would be other problems.

      Concerning
      The Russian army must without fail receive a workable system of a similar level in the very near future

      That even sounds ridiculous. We present the scale and scale of launches for an approximately similar grouping of devices? How many microelectronics and what is the quality of the assembly for this - are we presenting? Do we already know how to launch small spacecraft in batches the way SpaceX does? But, suppose we have satellites (100500), suppose they are our own and reliable (I’m even afraid to imagine how much the MO flew in) - how will we launch them in the foreseeable future? "Angara"? Ruled out. Disposable product, piece release. For mass launches in the foreseeable future for this task, we will only have conversion launch vehicles, with their penny payload - but only with them we could do this in a reasonable time. Because we do not have reusable SpaceX rockets of the appropriate reliability and carrying capacity.

      Making this connection through larger spacecraft is more expensive and more dangerous in terms of its effectiveness and sustainability. Generally speaking, making it purely military is madness for our budget, which is very modest.
      For good reason, we need a military-civilian with a claim to the global market (like GLONASS), only in this case we could "recapture" the costs in the future and load ROSCOSMOS with work (and not ruin the Moscow Region at the same time). But for all this, we need a launch vehicle suitable for this task (reusable or extremely cheap and mass disposable), or a radical study of the conversion option for a large-scale launch - and most importantly, we need our own microelectronics for thousands of such spacecraft, or at the VERY edge of a long-term contract with China for supply such .
      Is all this real? No, it's a utopia.
      1. Scientist
        Scientist 19 October 2022 13: 31
        0
        As for the delivery, you are mistaken, and we can launch Soyuz-2 in packages. That's just to run, this is really a problem. Well, and the durability of the satellites.
        1. Barmaglot_07
          Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 13: 57
          0
          Soyuz-2 launches 7-8 tons and flies 1-2 times a month. Falcon 9 launches 15 tons (with return of the first stage) and flies 1-2 times a week.
          1. Scientist
            Scientist 19 October 2022 17: 55
            +2
            Firstly, 8-20 pieces will fit into 25 tons, secondly, up to 9,2 tons into low orbit, and thirdly, there is no payload for them to fly every week. If there were no Starlinka, the Falkon would not fly so often.
            1. Barmaglot_07
              Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 19: 02
              +1
              There was OneWeb, the satellites were in line for takeoff, however, there were no weekly launches. And for some reason they brought out 150kg of OneWebs in packs of 34, i.e. 5.1 tons per launch.
    8. alexey sidykin
      alexey sidykin 19 October 2022 17: 06
      -3
      And no one can... at the moment.
    9. smart ass
      smart ass 19 October 2022 19: 25
      -3
      Well, in principle, you can simply put a couple of buckets of bolts and nails into orbit ....
  2. Zx_spectrum
    Zx_spectrum 19 October 2022 05: 25
    -10
    It's time to burn Elon's satellites with a laser.
    Let our Peresvet show a strength.
    1. Silver99
      Silver99 19 October 2022 05: 35
      -12
      Put Musk himself on the wanted list and send Petrov and Bashirov to tea with him.
      1. Luenkov
        Luenkov 19 October 2022 06: 13
        +7
        Companions from tea will cease to be harmful?
      2. Charik
        Charik 19 October 2022 07: 30
        +5
        so Musk is not hiding, but someone would look for Chubaisik-Serdyuk and ask them
      3. Edas
        Edas 19 October 2022 08: 12
        -7
        I think Musk is a media figure who goofs around the world and tells fairy tales. The CIA controls everything there
        1. Negro
          Negro 20 October 2022 11: 42
          0
          I don't remember the CIA managing anything well.
    2. Luenkov
      Luenkov 19 October 2022 06: 14
      -1
      Will not show ... there is nothing to show. Peresvet turned off the light without turning it on
  3. Arslan17
    Arslan17 19 October 2022 05: 47
    -4
    After the failure of a dozen satellites, there will be risks of their collisions, after which a chain reaction of collisions will begin. And after 30 years no one will be able to fly into space.
    1. Luenkov
      Luenkov 19 October 2022 06: 12
      +2
      No one will need it now then ... you have to be a realist
      .
    2. Plate
      Plate 19 October 2022 10: 08
      0
      Quote: Arslan17
      After the failure of a dozen satellites, there will be risks of their collisions, after which a chain reaction of collisions will begin.

      What would that be? Is it because of space debris? It must also be directed in such a way during destruction that it collides with other satellites.
  4. samarin1969
    samarin1969 19 October 2022 05: 55
    +2
    This whole communication army eats electricity. It remains, as in the "Matrix" - to turn off the power system.
    It seems that one of the politicians promised Ukraine the "XVI century"? ... Or is the "quiet Ukrainian night" incompatible with the turbines of the "sacred stream"?
    1. novel66
      novel66 19 October 2022 08: 18
      +10
      well, the army will be powered by diesel generators
  5. Asad
    Asad 19 October 2022 06: 07
    +13
    What is the article all about? I just realized that there is a connection problem. In Ukraine, it is being solved by the efforts of Musk, but in our country it is not being solved at all. I saw the release on YouTube, the communications department was given a hundred sets of walkie-talkies from storage, and they managed to collect only a few pieces. I think when Musk and the Pentagon created Starling, they calculated options for dealing with him.
  6. Luenkov
    Luenkov 19 October 2022 06: 10
    -4
    We fired Rogozin ... He asked for money for satellites, he cursed with Musk ... They put this one in. Faithful.
    1. novel66
      novel66 19 October 2022 08: 20
      +4
      Rogozin simply asked for money and ruined and sold everything he could reach.
    2. Genry
      Genry 19 October 2022 12: 12
      -1
      Quote: Luenkov
      We fired Rogozin ... He asked for money for satellites, he cursed with Musk ... They put this one in. Faithful.

      That's right!
      Why do we need a civilian leader in the commercial Roscosmos. It will now again be a military organization.
      Immediately cut off all advertising and PR.
  7. Luenkov
    Luenkov 19 October 2022 06: 20
    +2
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    It is quite possible to jam a satellite over a specific area with interference. He has one non-directional receiving antenna for several hundred (thousands, I don’t remember) subscribers, very sensitive. Accordingly, the directional interference accompanying the satellite will not allow the signal to be received from the terminals, and that's it, for transmission, without knowing the coordinates, the satellite will not be able to work. Not easy, of course, but doable.

    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    It is quite possible to jam a satellite over a specific area with interference. He has one non-directional receiving antenna for several hundred (thousands, I don’t remember) subscribers, very sensitive. Accordingly, the directional interference accompanying the satellite will not allow the signal to be received from the terminals, and that's it, for transmission, without knowing the coordinates, the satellite will not be able to work. Not easy, of course, but doable.

    Quite when we want to do it. It’s more important for us to shoot a movie in space and fire the one who swears with Musk ...
  8. Konnick
    Konnick 19 October 2022 06: 23
    +7
    The connection of the Armed Forces of Ukraine had to be dealt with at the very beginning, following the example of the liberation of Crimea. But someone wanted Caliber at airfields. The elimination of enemy communications is the most important component of victory.
  9. FoBoss_VM
    FoBoss_VM 19 October 2022 06: 50
    -6
    Interestingly, and how does the author propose to destroy the starlink group? What forces and means?))))) IMHO it is much easier and cheaper to destroy Elon Mask personally
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 19 October 2022 07: 15
      +8
      Quote from: FoBoss_VM
      Interestingly, and how does the author propose to destroy the starlink group? What forces and means?))))) IMHO it is much easier and cheaper to destroy Elon Mask personally

      And from his destruction, the Starlink group will disappear? Is he a dark sorcerer who conjured satellites and with his death all the equipment will dissipate in the air? Or will it continue to work absolutely calmly as if nothing had happened? wink
      1. Monster_Fat
        Monster_Fat 19 October 2022 08: 00
        -3
        The only realistic way to deal with Starlink satellites is with laser weapons. Exposure to a laser beam can disable it. But if we have lasers with such energy, the question is. This is the first. Second, at the very beginning of the NMD, the US warned that any impact on the satellites of the US and its allies would be considered by the US as an act of war, with all the consequences. So that nothing remains but electronic warfare.
        1. single-n
          single-n 19 October 2022 08: 30
          0
          Or hacker attacks to lose control over the satellites.
          1. Plate
            Plate 19 October 2022 10: 11
            0
            Well, they will lose control of the satellite. And then they will restore it. I personally don't think that Starlink satellites have engines that would allow it to be deorbited. Destabilize - yes. But stabilization systems also do not exist in vain.
            1. single-n
              single-n 19 October 2022 11: 25
              -2
              It would be much more interesting not to jam, but to intercept. Let them chat. And if you also turn off / make distortions on demand certain sections .. mmm ... Such open spaces for activity
              1. Plate
                Plate 19 October 2022 11: 54
                +1
                Quote: Single-n
                It would be much more interesting not to jam, but to intercept. Let them chat.

                It still needs to be deciphered. And to do this, either significantly surpass them in their computing capabilities, which is unlikely, or penetrate their, so to speak, encryption center and install a "bug" on the encryption channel there, which is also not easy. But for jamming, from the requirements for equipment, only energy is needed, which is easy to add with a stupid diesel generator if necessary.
                1. Blackmokona
                  Blackmokona 19 October 2022 15: 54
                  +1
                  Quote: Plate
                  Quote: Single-n
                  It would be much more interesting not to jam, but to intercept. Let them chat.

                  It still needs to be deciphered. And to do this, either significantly surpass them in their computing capabilities, which is unlikely, or penetrate their, so to speak, encryption center and install a "bug" on the encryption channel there, which is also not easy. But for jamming, from the requirements for equipment, only energy is needed, which is easy to add with a stupid diesel generator if necessary.

                  For a long time there are no encryption centers. Encryption takes place between two communication entities at the final site within their devices. Everything
        2. FoBoss_VM
          FoBoss_VM 20 October 2022 02: 18
          0
          So Putin also said on February 24 that those countries who dare to intervene directly or indirectly in the conflict in Ukraine will suffer such total damage as they did not know. So what ? They participate without hiding, both directly and indirectly, and they transfer weapons and equipment and ammunition, camps have been organized in Europe and the UK, training has been put on stream. Gas pipelines were blown up without hiding. Europe is being pushed open. So what ? Absolutely nothing. So if we damage a couple of three satellites, the third world war will not start in their orbit, but we will show our teeth. And we have them, but apparently we also need steel eggs to show steel teeth. And with that, yes, problems
        3. Negro
          Negro 20 October 2022 11: 43
          -2
          Quote: Monster_Fat
          But if we have lasers with such energy, the question is

          No problem.
    2. alexey sidykin
      alexey sidykin 19 October 2022 17: 26
      -1
      Quote from: FoBoss_VM
      Interestingly, and how does the author propose to destroy the starlink group? What forces and means?))))) IMHO it is much easier and cheaper to destroy Elon Mask personally

      And what will it give? Will the satellites stop working?
  10. odometer
    odometer 19 October 2022 06: 52
    +10
    All right. We have problems, eternal, with communication, and Musk is to blame ... How do you like that, Elon? winked
  11. Charik
    Charik 19 October 2022 07: 21
    +6
    chivo? priority? et he stole 1,5 lyama sets of uniform-walkie-talkie 50 year old he supplies?
  12. Charik
    Charik 19 October 2022 07: 23
    0
    should receive a workable system of a similar level in the very near future. or should have received it already?
  13. Charik
    Charik 19 October 2022 07: 25
    0
    In the meantime, let's analyze the subtleties of enemy technology and the scandal that erupted around it. better deal with this-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCu0cDGQigo
    1. Genry
      Genry 19 October 2022 12: 28
      -2
      Muddy video! And the turbidity band, apparently, hides the signs of belonging.
      There are no faces, everything is shown briefly, there is no packaging, the inscriptions on the blocks are not shown.
      Most likely, these are written-off garbage, which could be in Ukraine.
      CIPSO?
      1. Dmitry Rigov
        Dmitry Rigov 19 October 2022 12: 58
        0
        The Internet is in the norms of quality. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=40HnVDkLtLc
        TG channel Rybar yesterday confirmed the authenticity of this video and said that they figured it out and they had already been supplied with new Azart.
        1. stankow
          stankow 19 October 2022 23: 41
          -3
          The radios were given not to the mobilized, but signalmen. Understand. Out of 100 rejected collected 6 workers. Which is not bad, they will be in reserve. And quite correct is 100 times more.
      2. Charik
        Charik 19 October 2022 13: 00
        +1
        yes, everything is tsipso to you, with such rubbish, God forbid, enter into a clash, but the article is about the enemy’s Amer connection
  14. Losyara
    Losyara 19 October 2022 07: 54
    0
    Can it come in from the other side, create in orbit even a small constellation of repeater satellites for local suppression of their network? Maybe so?
    1. Plate
      Plate 19 October 2022 10: 16
      0
      When placed at the same height as Starlinks, a small grouping will not suffice. Otherwise, she will be able to suppress enemy communications only occasionally. Placement in geostationary orbit will require a suppressor power much greater than would be required from a ground-based one, which again makes the idea meaningless. So you need either a large group - several thousand, like Starlink - or somehow press from the ground.
    2. maksbazhin
      maksbazhin 19 October 2022 11: 00
      +1
      Indeed, perhaps on the other hand it is easier to influence their antennas or batteries than from the ground. Up to "paint over / smash / burn" solar panels.
  15. Adagka
    Adagka 19 October 2022 07: 56
    +10
    The fact that the Kremlinbots in the jambs of their employers is always someone to blame, this has long been known. Now, Musk is to blame for the fact that the second army of the world is fighting like a deaf-blind kitten, and not the ghoul Rogozin, who instead of satellites was engaged in Khokhloma painting, songs, and launching third-class actresses into near-Earth orbit. But as usual, "Rafik is not a fool"
    1. Monster_Fat
      Monster_Fat 19 October 2022 10: 49
      +3
      He (and a bunch of different types of uryakls) were still proud of the "unsurpassed" RD-180, without which the "USA can't do it" ... like, "only a trampoline" ... "Trammed", "how do you like Elon Musk" ... .
    2. stankow
      stankow 19 October 2022 23: 46
      -3
      Musk also launched Tesla into space, he also made effective costumes for Dragon for the movie. But Tom Cruise, although first-rate, did not fly. Not those years already. And I wanted so much ... Julia - well done!
  16. rocket757
    rocket757 19 October 2022 07: 59
    -1
    Elon Musk is the priority enemy of the Russian army
    And not a friend and not an enemy, but HOW???
    Nobil also realized that the world is more precious than anything in the world, after he created / gave the military such a killer thing as dynamite! ... however, these are fairy tales ... capitalist, PROFIT, everything beats, everything is clear.
    1. Plate
      Plate 19 October 2022 10: 17
      +1
      Quote: rocket757
      And not a friend and not an enemy, but HOW???

      But no way. They have their own business interests, Russia has its own. They crossed. That's all. No friendship, no enmity, nothing.
  17. Adagka
    Adagka 19 October 2022 08: 01
    +1
    Quote from: Barmaglot_07
    Stop-stop-stop, because it is well known that the "American billionaire" Elon Max is a swindler and a charlatan. Are you calling for the production of swindlers and charlatans in Russia?

    Where else to breed them? And so the whole Kremlin is packed
    1. Barmaglot_07
      Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 09: 12
      +3
      Since the whole Kremlin is full of scammers and charlatans, where is the domestic broadband satellite communication system that has no analogues in the world? Oh yes, there is "Messenger" - 2400 bits per second.
      1. for
        for 20 October 2022 18: 30
        -1
        Quote from: Barmaglot_07
        "American billionaire" Elon Max is a swindler and a charlatan.

        So this is sarcasm, and these are real, purebred.
    2. hangar200
      hangar200 19 October 2022 09: 26
      -5
      it seems that something is coming.... too much of everything
  18. 1939_1940
    1939_1940 19 October 2022 08: 13
    +4
    We are so smart here, we are sitting discussing what means can be used to suppress Starlink .. And in the Army, 99 percent of the personnel do not even know about its existence, including generals .. Who, pleased with themselves, pose for the press with the ancient Baofengs, believing that it is cool. . laughing
    1. Plate
      Plate 19 October 2022 10: 18
      +2
      What makes you think that the army is not aware of the existence of Starlink?
      1. 1939_1940
        1939_1940 19 October 2022 13: 28
        -3
        Judging by what we are seeing, photos and videos from the fronts, by what kind of radio stations, for example, caring citizens send to the troops .. The troops do not even suspect the existence of gambling .. And a captured motorola is the height of dreams .. And then Starlink .. .
  19. Bingo
    Bingo 19 October 2022 08: 23
    +1
    Formally, it has remained a private network, that is, it is not directly related to the US government.

    Ah there precisely that formally. Scandals began even before deployment. when at the Pentagon presentation they demonstrated "new generation reconnaissance satellites" (they all have a new generation), only it was the Starlink satellite. Initially, the Pentagon project, like its rocket program, was supposedly entirely NASA. And even now there are persistent rumors that Musk still knocked out a grant from the Pentagon, with which his complaisance is connected.
    This music in the states is eternal, PMCs are also private, and that every year they are collected for a report at the Pentagon ... It just happened!
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 19 October 2022 12: 01
      +1
      Quote from Bingo
      Formally, it has remained a private network, that is, it is not directly related to the US government.

      Ah there precisely that formally. Scandals began even before deployment. when at the Pentagon presentation they demonstrated "new generation reconnaissance satellites" (they all have a new generation), only it was the Starlink satellite. Initially, the Pentagon project, like its rocket program, was supposedly entirely NASA. And even now there are persistent rumors that Musk still knocked out a grant from the Pentagon, with which his complaisance is connected.
      This music in the states is eternal, PMCs are also private, and that every year they are collected for a report at the Pentagon ... It just happened!

      That contract uses Starlink's satellite platform, but not Starlink itself. All military payloads are not made by SpaceX.
  20. Luenkov
    Luenkov 19 October 2022 08: 26
    +1
    Quote: novel xnumx
    Rogozin simply asked for money and ruined and sold everything he could reach.

    Fake from Chubais? Who stopped theft in the East? Everything there was nothing to complain about.
  21. Barmaglot_07
    Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 08: 33
    +2
    Quote: Vladimir_2U
    Interference directed at a passing satellite. This is no longer a military EW system.


    And what? GRAU index please, or some other designation. And why was it not used at Azovstal?
    1. Vladimir_2U
      Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 08: 41
      -2
      Quote from: Barmaglot_07
      And what? GRAU index please, or some other designation.

      Index of the Main Rocket and Artillery Directorate? For a hypothetical but quite feasible electronic warfare system? Fool of the gallery?
      1. Barmaglot_07
        Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 09: 06
        +1
        What about a hypothetical system? Well, that means they will use it in a hypothetical war. And in a real special operation, it turns out that there is nothing to deprive the enemy of communication.
        1. Vladimir_2U
          Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 09: 09
          -3
          Quote from: Barmaglot_07
          What about a hypothetical system?

          I'm not the head of the GRAU laughing I don't have specific data, so I'm only guessing, based on elementary knowledge.
          Quote: Vladimir_2U
          It is quite possible to jam a satellite over a specific area with interference. He has one non-directional receiving antenna for several hundred (thousands, I don’t remember) subscribers, very sensitive. Accordingly, the directional interference accompanying the satellite will not allow the signal to be received from the terminals, and that's it, for transmission, without knowing the coordinates, the satellite will not be able to work. Not easy, of course, but doable.

          And yet, owning the means of destruction, why were neither the bridges nor the power plant put out of action, huh? Just when Mariupol was taken, can you argue that Russia did not have such missiles?
          1. Barmaglot_07
            Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 09: 49
            +3
            And bridges and energy were put out of action. Only for a short time, since the enemy is not an idiot, and has the means to quickly repair them.
            1. Vladimir_2U
              Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 10: 09
              -2
              Quote from: Barmaglot_07
              And bridges and energy were put out of action. Only for a short time, since the enemy is not an idiot, and has the means to quickly repair them.

              During the fighting in Mariupol?! No need for fairy tales.
              1. Barmaglot_07
                Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 10: 23
                0
                April 26, April 27, May 2 - attacks on the bridge in Zatoka. The last inmates in Mariupol surrendered on May 20.
                1. Vladimir_2U
                  Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 10: 34
                  -4
                  Quote from: Barmaglot_07
                  April 26, April 27, May 2 - attacks on the bridge in Zatoka. The last inmates in Mariupol surrendered on May 20.

                  A whole bridge? And how many power substations have been disabled? And until April 10, when Azovstal was completely blocked, something was blown up / fired with rockets? NIFIGA!
                  So why, even having the means, to interfere with American satellites, moreover, without understanding the significance of Starlink for communications? Try it, answer.
                  1. Barmaglot_07
                    Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 12: 29
                    +1
                    Well, yes, not complete imbeciles are sitting in the General Staff, and watching how strikes with expensive and scarce weapons produce a minimal effect in the form of interrupting movement for a few hours, they decided to use these weapons with greater sense.
                    1. Vladimir_2U
                      Vladimir_2U 19 October 2022 13: 57
                      -1
                      Quote from: Barmaglot_07
                      Well, yes, not complete imbeciles are sitting in the General Staff, and watching how strikes with expensive and scarce weapons produce a minimal effect in the form of interrupting movement for a few hours, they decided to use these weapons with greater sense.

                      It's funny, but now how do you explain the break in any strikes on Ukraine from May to October?
  22. Dedok
    Dedok 19 October 2022 08: 46
    +5
    if we are hand-assed, then all the rest are Enemies?
    put the questions in the article correctly - Rogozin, Shoigu, etc. - did not understand what business they took up, and now we have problems because of them.
    And what about Musk?
    1. agond
      agond 19 October 2022 09: 08
      -1
      Starlink satellites, in fact, repeaters transmit intelligence received from outside, for example, from low-orbit satellites with orbital altitudes of 90-100 km, the latter can be effectively irradiated from the ground while they are flying over our territory
    2. NG inform
      NG inform 19 October 2022 13: 16
      -2
      NATO promotion - is it because of Rogozin and Shoigu? Zombification of people by the West - is Shoigu also to blame?
      They are in trouble because of their enemies. The solution requires budgets and specialists, which the system simply does not have. The guys are doing what they can.
  23. Maks1995
    Maks1995 19 October 2022 09: 09
    +1
    It looks like the fable of the Fox and the Grapes.

    Musk has Starlink, we don't. Only Rogozin's trampolines (just kidding)
    And capitalism is in the yard, whoever pays, he works. (he exports the grain, just pay))))
    Musk pays, the State Department, Ukraine, funds for sure, etc. ...
    Well, Rogozin and K managed to fail and quarrel ...

    And there is nothing to be surprised...
  24. Russian Patriot
    Russian Patriot 19 October 2022 10: 35
    +2
    Starlink cannot be suppressed from the ground. Talk about "overexposure", "tirades" are just fairy tales.
    There are two ways. The first is to shoot down satellites with missiles.
    The second is to place a jamming satellite next to each satellite.
    It is pointless to talk about the realism of these methods.
  25. certero
    certero 19 October 2022 10: 38
    +4
    Before the operation, we were told about the presence of a setocentric structure in the Russian army, which allows creating, on the basis of a special cell, an interference-proof communication between troops. And when the operation began, you have to buy Chinese or Russian radio stations. No honeycombs. The fact that Starlink has a military component, only the lazy did not write, and providing communications for the Ukrainian military is the smallest part of it.
    Russia cannot do anything like this, not because there is no mind, because there is no technology capable of mass-producing cheaply a huge number of satellites
  26. AG-76
    AG-76 19 October 2022 11: 08
    +1
    The eternal problem of the Soviet / Russian army is the lack of modern means of communication and command and control
  27. Sinner
    Sinner 19 October 2022 12: 51
    -1
    Is it possible to disable these satellites?
  28. Suslik_2
    Suslik_2 19 October 2022 12: 58
    0
    Starlink has always claimed to be a military system.


    I would not be so categorical, given that war is a business with the redistribution of property and markets, it is not surprising that many things are dual-use.

    For example, with the help of the Tirada-2S electronic jamming complex


    Nothing will help in this case, because. StarLink satellites have an auxiliary FSO connection that cannot be jammed at the current level of technology.
  29. Alexander_K
    Alexander_K 19 October 2022 13: 12
    -3
    in my unprofessional opinion, there are 2 more ways to suppress this enemy communication, in addition to destroying satellites and jamming. This is a resuscitation of the Soviet shuttle Buran with the ability to physically capture satellites. Most likely, this possibility was laid initially. The second is the creation on the ground on the territory of the enemy of a no-fly, no-pass, no-radiating zone. That is, total control from the air and the destruction of everything that moves and / or radiates outside settlements. In a tougher version - the destruction of everything that is active outside the settlements. In other words, a modern siege of cities and towns. The first option is more expensive and more difficult. The second one can really be organized today, within the framework of the NWO. But this is a military solution to the conflict. So far, preference is given to political and economic methods. Perhaps this is better, but we feel sorry for our guys. And there is a general misunderstanding of the situation.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 19 October 2022 15: 59
      +2
      Quote: Alexander_K
      shuttle

      One Buran flight costs as many as several hundred Starlink satellites. Therefore, it will be unprofitable, and it will not be difficult for Mask to install a small explosive charge in a satellite to make Buran unpleasant. Boom and no shuttle.
    2. Barmaglot_07
      Barmaglot_07 19 October 2022 19: 05
      +2
      This is a resuscitation of the Soviet shuttle Buran with the ability to physically capture satellites.


      Then immediately build a photon starship on meson propulsion. The chances of implementation are about the same.
  30. NG inform
    NG inform 19 October 2022 13: 13
    -2
    Yes, this is a weapon that is used against us, like other civilian and military intelligence satellites. And there are two conclusions:
    1. You need to be able to destroy them. This is a prerequisite for survival.
    2. It is necessary to put forward an ultimatum to civilian satellites - either they are guaranteed not to participate in data transmission in the interests of terrorists, or they are destroyed as a weapon fighting on their side.
    Otherwise, Tirade is not a panacea.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 19 October 2022 16: 00
      +3
      Quote: NG inform
      Yes, this is a weapon that is used against us, like other civilian and military intelligence satellites. And there are two conclusions:
      1. You need to be able to destroy them. This is a prerequisite for survival.
      2. It is necessary to put forward an ultimatum to civilian satellites - either they are guaranteed not to participate in data transmission in the interests of terrorists, or they are destroyed as a weapon fighting on their side.
      Otherwise, Tirade is not a panacea.

      The trouble is that destroying Starlink satellites is much more expensive than launching them. And the US is much richer than Russia and can play this game for a very long time.
      1. NG inform
        NG inform 19 October 2022 20: 45
        -3
        It's cheaper to destroy them. It can be more expensive only because of the poor organization of the process, which is not an excuse.
  31. Petr_Koldunov
    Petr_Koldunov 19 October 2022 13: 55
    0
    ... there were no problems for the gradual, albeit slow, destruction of the large Starlink grouping in Ukraine, as there were, and there are none.

    Well, since there are no problems, then maybe it's time to start destroying them?
    1. NG inform
      NG inform 19 October 2022 14: 49
      -1
      They know how (there are anti-satellite missiles), it just needs a systematic approach - a complex of specialized factories that will produce missiles on an assembly line, tens of thousands. Unified control systems for them, from Geraniums (which need millions) and small drones, to anti-satellite ones.
      Scaling production and unification can reduce the cost of the product by dozens of times, which will make it possible to use them on a massive scale, including for shooting down thousands of satellites and instantly destroying the military potential of objectionable countries.
      But this is a two-step plan, i.e. it is necessary to invest in a specific perspective, and in our country, in principle, they are not able to do this, with very rare exceptions like Rosatom.
      This is a national catastrophe that could kill us.
  32. Capral_Ykt
    Capral_Ykt 19 October 2022 15: 40
    +1
    The virus cannot be interestingly brought to them on electronics :)?
    I think the captured equipment is enough.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 19 October 2022 15: 56
      +2
      Quote: Capral_Ykt
      They know how (there are anti-satellite missiles), it just needs a systematic approach - a complex of specialized factories that will produce missiles on an assembly line, tens of thousands. Unified control systems for them, from Geraniums (which need millions) and small drones, to anti-satellite ones.

      It is impossible, the satellite does not communicate with the client equipment at all. To communicate with control stations, he generally has separate independent equipment, at completely different frequencies.
  33. bulgaria_
    bulgaria_ 19 October 2022 16: 42
    -2
    1 satellite with a mass of 100 kg, if its energy in dopir from the ground hangs at 500 km, even if exactly 100 kg of TNT has not accelerated. Stuff the sky with satellites, each with 100 kg of iron or 1000 kg of iron. Make 10 satellites, leave them in the US geostation and ..... you have 000 bombs you can send them anywhere. if you want to increase energy, give the first impetus. if not one g (10), but 000..multiply everything by 9.8.
  34. alexey sidykin
    alexey sidykin 19 October 2022 17: 36
    -3
    Fuck comments ... kindergarten is simple.
  35. futurohunter
    futurohunter 19 October 2022 18: 23
    0
    Cho then bred here: nails, lasers, electromagnetic pulses, a cellular network behind enemy lines. In fact, the means are much simpler. Any system has its vulnerabilities. Starlink has a radio channel. Firstly, the radiation of the terminals can be detected, and something can be directed to the area. Up to the banal shelling. For example, at one time, the AWACS A-50 aircraft detected the signal of Dudayev's satellite phone. This was his last conversation. I do not think that the terminals have a much weaker signal. It is even possible to install a GOS on the simplest kamikaze drones, configured to search for a signal from the Starlink terminal. You don't need any "nets" to jam. In the operating range of the system, powerful broadband noise interference is simply emitted, which jams the communication channel. The generators of such interference are very simple and cheap. True, it is easier to suppress in the Ku-band than in the Ka-band. It is even possible to use in the field such generators with a directional antenna, which simply irradiate a certain sector with a fan. From aircraft, it is possible to irradiate an even larger area. It is possible that this is already being used at the front.
    Companions are more difficult. It takes too much power to burn it off the ground. But a powerful directional interference will overload the input and output paths of the satellite, temporarily blinding it. The most rational such design is: a converted radar that scans outer space, and when it finds a target, it begins to irradiate it with a noise signal. A satellite can also be searched for by its radiation. The problem is that you can inadvertently suppress the "wrong" satellite (and don't care to fly over Ukraine), and the suppression is temporary. But even temporary system failures can greatly interfere with system users.
    1. Nest
      Nest 19 October 2022 19: 36
      0
      I will support your idea. It is completely unnecessary to destroy something, because. it is costly and will have consequences. Most likely, the signal to the satellites goes in the TDMA mode (multiple access with channel division in time), because. There is only one receiving antenna, but there are many transmitting terminals. Each terminal transmits its own data packet in its allocated time slice using a preamble that its satellite synchronizes and recognizes. The distribution of time slots can be organized in different ways, but in any case, if we start transmitting a signal with the correct parameters (modulation, etc.) to the satellite at a random time, then our data packet will distort the terminal packet, which honestly wanted to transmit what - something of your own. Thus, it is enough to make a transmitter of legitimate TDVR blocks + an antenna leading the satellite (PAR is unlikely to do so quickly) and it will be possible to spoil the signal from the terminals to the satellite. There should be a minimum of such systems in terms of the number of satellites in the visibility zone (there are about 6 of them at the same time) and interference must be transmitted to all at once, since the Starlinka terminal sees all these satellites and immediately switches to another if it is impossible to communicate with one satellite. Since the receiving antenna of the satellite forms the reception of data from a certain cell on the ground, in order to effectively suppress, one must be located approximately in this cell. Those. this method will work at the front line. To suppress terminals in deep cells, the size of the antennas and the complexity of tracking satellites are greatly increased. From a relatively inexpensive one, I would also add the direction finding of working Starlink terminals (apparently, they are turned on quite constantly) using 4-6 direction-finding satellites (not geostationary) of the signal precisely over the territory of the Ukrainian SSR. If they fly over or under the Starlink satellites and manage to find the signal from the terminal to the satellite (it is transmitted with a fairly narrow beam), then after a while a map of the terminals' positions can be formed.
      1. futurohunter
        futurohunter 20 October 2022 13: 35
        0
        You have a good idea)) Is it even possible to create a DDOS attack on Starlink? There are several problems, in my opinion. It is possible that the encoding equipment operates at such frequencies that we simply do not have the available element base to make the equipment that forms curved packets ourselves. True, you can use captured terminals. After reprogramming them, they can flood the starlink network with crooked packets. It is possible that the network uses some kind of protocol/algorithm for identification and cryptoprotection, which makes it possible to distinguish "own" packets from "foreign" packets. For example, from captured terminals. Direction finder satellites - in my opinion, a little expensive. A radio reconnaissance aircraft is enough (perhaps even an AWACS aircraft can handle it), or an UAV with detection equipment. By the way, there seems to be an Orlan UAV with electronic warfare equipment. Why not hang equipment on them to detect terminals and blocking noise interference for them? Well, loitering kamikaze drones are also not so expensive. Even if he misses, when diving on the target, he can manage to send his coordinates to cover the area with artillery, MLRS or aircraft. Additionally, it is possible to equip the kamikaze with a smoke tracer and a fired smoke bomb for visual guidance at the point of its fall (if the coordinates could not be obtained, for example, due to enemy electronic warfare)
        1. Nest
          Nest 20 October 2022 16: 23
          0
          To intercept the beam from the terminal to the satellite, you must be in the beam at that moment or in one of the side lobes (this requires very large antennas), in fact, this is above or below the satellite. The most interesting thing is that the respected Elon Musk posted most of the code of the main Linux computer systems of the satellite (they were 5) in the public domain on github for a long time (you can google it). Moreover, enthusiasts hacked the terminal a year or more ago and gained access from another region (see google), the entire hacking process is posted on the Internet with detailed comments on the code. Starlink may have already made adjustments in new versions, but it's interesting to look at to understand the scope of the work needed. One intelligent engineer alone was able to do this in a very short time. Yes, and one more thing. If it is possible to decode packets from the terminals, then some explicitly contain the GPS coordinates of the terminal, so there is no need to take direction finding in this case.
  36. Luenkov
    Luenkov 19 October 2022 18: 56
    0
    Quote: Genry
    Quote: Luenkov
    We fired Rogozin ... He asked for money for satellites, he cursed with Musk ... They put this one in. Faithful.

    That's right!
    Why do we need a civilian leader in the commercial Roscosmos. It will now again be a military organization.
    Immediately cut off all advertising and PR.

    Well, yes, I remember when I was there to see a civilian - a luxury. Now it's the other way around. But no one will dispute the fact that Rogozin rejuvenated and thinned out the flow / space. He cut costs and was already moving away from the amers. And do not tell me who, what kind of woman flew with the Americans now? Generalsha from Serdyukov? Again love from the "military"?
  37. futurohunter
    futurohunter 19 October 2022 19: 13
    -3
    2 more facts. A few years ago, a single Su-24 with a jamming station knocked out all the electronic systems of the cruiser Donald Cook in the Black Sea for half an hour. What's stopping you from repeating? I think that Starlink terminals are much less resistant to suppression than the systems of a warship. It is possible to suppress radio assets in a certain territory without even approaching the front line. The only negative is that its own electronics will also fall "under the distribution."
    About satellites. For some reason, no one remembers that Russia has a sufficient number of powerful radars to control outer space. These radars can not only detect satellites, but also interfere with them. It is enough to irradiate the satellites with a complex-modulated signal, which will cause malfunctions in the semiconductor devices of the input and output paths. And no number will help. Someone talked about a phased antenna array? So you can modulate the signal so that this grating will give out something obscene
    1. runway-1
      runway-1 19 October 2022 21: 23
      0
      2 more facts. A few years ago, a single Su-24 with a jamming station knocked out all the electronic systems of the cruiser Donald Cook in the Black Sea for half an hour. What's stopping you from repeating?
      Two "facts" are not needed, one is enough - about "Cook". lol Over this propaganda duck has already finished laughing. You can't continue!
      1. futurohunter
        futurohunter 20 October 2022 13: 23
        0
        I didn't hear any laughter. Give the facts if you know how it was "really". Better yet, a link
        1. runway-1
          runway-1 20 October 2022 20: 09
          0
          To begin with, ask: could the Su-24 carry the appropriate jamming station and was it possible to "disable all the electronic systems of the cruiser" for half an hour?
          Although, judging by the fact that you call the URO destroyer a cruiser, there is nothing to be surprised at ... winked
  38. RoTTor
    RoTTor 19 October 2022 19: 40
    +1
    For how many decades, both in the USSR and in the Russian Federation, engineers, designers, and scientists were slandered and humiliated?
    Now it is impossible to prepare them in large quantities and with high quality: there is no one, and school education is below the baseboard.
    How many millions of literate and educated people were forced to leave our country for the West - that was the biggest, irreparable loss.
    The result is obvious!
    General Managers, Lawyers, etc. international affairs - a massively graduated for money shelupon will not help here.
    1. Nest
      Nest 19 October 2022 20: 10
      0
      Yes, no one humiliated anyone. They paid little - yes, but a real scientist, as a rule, is obsessed with his line of research. And if you compare what happened 25-30 years ago and now, even under the conditions of sanctions, now you can reach a serious level 1000 times faster, because. absolutely everything is in electronic / digitized / video form. All you need is a desire to learn. And where will the desire come from among young people if they look up to Buzova and Dziuba, and not to Mikhail Kovalchuk (director of the Kurchatov Research Institute). And why are they looking up to athletes and playboys? Well, probably, most of the former sambist figure skaters, and not scientists and academics, are in our power, and, naturally, they develop sports, and not microelectronics and IT, since they understand it better.
  39. runway-1
    runway-1 19 October 2022 20: 44
    0
    And this means that there were no problems for the gradual, albeit slow, destruction of the large Starlink grouping in Ukraine, as there were, and there are none.
    Of course of course! We just don't want/want to do it... winked
  40. Sedoy
    Sedoy 19 October 2022 22: 37
    -2
    Formally, it has remained a private network, that is, it is not directly related to the US government.

    well ... since it is private, then we can consider it a sponsor and declare the company and its owner a legitimate target ...
    and you don’t have to bring down all the satellites, just those in the “strip” are tamed ...
    since the "band" of communication with the terminals is quite narrow, then neighboring satellites will not be able to capture "out-of-zone" terminals on the ground ...
    in general, mow down everything that "flies" over the territory of Russia ...
    the end result is not important right away - the very fact of destruction is important - he himself will turn it off if only part of the satellite constellation is not demolished ...
    although this is all lala - the Kremlin has a thin gut, stir up something like that ...
    remember the statement of the father of the nation, saying that if the West starts to supply, they will be recognized as participants and then ... all sorts of consequences ...
    Well, they started to deliver - and what ... but what the hell ... they don’t even remember ...
    The West has long understood that the Kremlin is a weakling and now does not pay any attention to it at all ...
  41. stankow
    stankow 19 October 2022 23: 51
    0
    Quote: Plate
    What makes you think that the army is not aware of the existence of Starlink?

    So they said according to Deutschewel, they won’t lie! laughing laughing
  42. garik77
    garik77 20 October 2022 00: 43
    0
    Quote from: Barmaglot_07
    blind all satellite intelligence systems
    - there are no reconnaissance cameras on Starlinks, therefore there is nothing to blind, and in order to burn, energy is needed many orders of magnitude higher.

    There must be optics to orient the satellite in space. Surely he is guided by the stars, this is a general principle for all spacecraft
  43. Negro
    Negro 20 October 2022 11: 52
    +1
    Hm yes.

    I thought it would be something funny, but it's really boring here. Unless surprising is the author's confidence that Fox viewers may have some complaints about Musk, who usually performs precisely on the right side of the American spectrum.
  44. Vladimir Dmitrievich Burtsev
    Vladimir Dmitrievich Burtsev 20 October 2022 13: 29
    -1
    Snapping satellites in space with a laser or electronic warfare means is a couple of trifles. It would be wise to agree with Musk. Musk set the goal of worldwide use for the Internet by Starlink satellites. Who forbids us to agree on mutually beneficial conditions for the use of space communications? Now Musk is suffering huge losses because of Ukraine. Having agreed with Russia, refusing to help the Bandera killers, Musk will receive billions of dollars in income a year. Musk has a head. I believe that Musk will go for a global, mutually beneficial agreement. And it is not at all necessary to publish and advertise a mutual agreement. You can do everything through an intermediary, as is usually done. And if Biden puts a spoke in the wheel, you can create a subsidiary in offshore companies and transfer the business of the space Internet to it. We just need to do it quickly, and not be content with Musk's promises. To begin with, we can show the capabilities of the Russian anti-satellite electronic warfare in space. This should impress Musk.
  45. acetophenone
    acetophenone 20 October 2022 15: 30
    0
    The priority enemy of the Russian army is not Musk. Not in the USA. And not even in Kyiv. And in Moscow.
    The main enemy of our army is the underdevelopment of our science and technology, total theft, bribery of EVERY boss from the smallest to the very best. Terrible incompetence and show-off. Everything that is, is maintained in a state "only so that it does not fall on its own head."
    And everything that works, works not because of it, but in spite of it. Therefore, both in science and in industry, we are not catching up with this very "collective West", but are falling further and further behind.
    The nuclear missile shield saves us from immediate defeat. Inherited to us from fathers and grandfathers. Somehow patched up. While taking out. But not everywhere. One shield cannot cover all problems. Yes, what to say - see for yourself. 500 repeaters, several thousand terminals, and the war with the outskirts turns into a battle between the sighted and the half-blind.
  46. Alex_5
    Alex_5 20 October 2022 16: 28
    -1
    It is enough to put a small nuclear charge into orbit of the Starlink satellites in the center of the network and detonate it, the satellites will lose their orbit and get lost from each other, the connection will be destroyed for a long time. Yes, and the impulse will destroy the satellites themselves.
  47. fuffi
    fuffi 21 October 2022 09: 41
    0
    Quote: kamakama
    He started his journey in South Africa. With PayPal, in which there is no government money

    everything is correct. not to put a nigga from the gateway into the leadership. the fact that he is talented in PR and promotion no one argues. this is one of the greatest PR managers of our time. they noticed a talented one and made him the zitz-chairman.
  48. Alexander_N
    Alexander_N 3 November 2022 09: 44
    0
    In star wars, there will be losses on both sides, and most importantly, humanity will lose a new service in the form of the cosmic Internet. Starlink spacecraft have their own correction propulsion system, with the help of which satellites are launched into the target orbit, and then reduced from it. Disabling spacecraft will turn them into space debris. It is still far from the Kessler syndrome, when as a result of a collision of satellites a lot of fragments will appear, which, with a domino effect, will damage new objects, and so on incrementally. In this scenario, you will have to leave the ISS, because at some point you will have to dodge a large number of unmanaged objects. We'll have to wait ten years until they descend and burn up in the dense layers of the atmosphere. It will be worse when the turn comes to constellations in orbits over 1000 kilometers, from there satellites will fall for hundreds of years. So this will be a problem for the ages.
    Therefore, you will probably have to come to terms with the realities and, instead of star wars, create your own grouping for the space Internet. If you create it higher than OneWeb, you won't need so many spacecraft.