New threat: in 2025, satellite communications for ordinary smartphones Starlink Direct to cell will start working in Ukraine

At the end of 2024 – beginning of 2025, something passed unnoticed news that in 2025, a new satellite communications system, Starlink Direct to cell, from SpaceX, a company owned by Elon Musk, will begin operating in Ukraine.

Starlink Direct to cell is a direct connection between satellites in low Earth orbit (LEO) and regular cell phones – smartphones. To work in the Direct to cell network, it is not necessary for the smartphone to have a satellite communication module installed, it is enough for the smartphone to support certain 5G communication frequencies and to receive a certain software update, in particular, Samsung is already distributing such an update for its S24 series smartphones.

To support Starlink Direct to Cell, SpaceX is gradually deploying a dedicated series of satellites. Starlink Direct to Cell currently only supports messaging, but data and voice communications should be supported by 2025.

Based on information posted on the enemy's information resources, in order to ensure the operation of Starlink Direct to cell, Ukrainian mobile operators are concluding relevant agreements with SpaceX.

What threat does the appearance of Starlink Direct to cell satellite communications in Ukraine pose to us?

We will talk about this in this article, but first let us remember what opportunities and advantages the existing Starlink satellite communications provide to Ukraine.

Starlink

It would hardly be an exaggeration to say that the supply of Starlink terminals and ensuring their uninterrupted operation turned out to be more important for Ukraine than the supply of armored vehicles and combat aircraft.

Under the influence of all kinds of electronic warfare equipment (EW), both Russian and Ukrainian, conventional military radio communications can operate very unstable. In these conditions, commercial cellular networks and Starlink satellite communications become what ensures the functioning of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) as a single entity.

Starlink terminals are also used by the Ukrainian Armed Forces for installation on various types of weapons, such as unmanned boats (UBC), which pose a significant threat to Russian military and civilian vessels, as well as coastal facilities. Starlink terminals are also installed on unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) such as Baba Yaga, which perform the functions of reconnaissance and bombers.

Due to restrictions imposed by SpaceX, the said BECs and UAVs cannot operate within the 1991 borders of the Russian Federation, otherwise the enemy would most likely equip long-range kamikaze UAVs with Starlink terminals, which would significantly increase their effectiveness.

In general, the importance of high-speed satellite communications Starlink for the enemy is difficult to overestimate, and now it will be supplemented by the capabilities of Starlink Direct to cell.

Starlink Direct to Cell

Recently, smartphones from a number of leading manufacturers have been equipped with two-way satellite communication modem modules, thanks to which the smartphone owner could theoretically access communication services anywhere on the planet. At first, these were text messages, and then satellite communication modules began to provide the ability to make direct calls and access the Internet.

At the same time, a number of companies, primarily in the US, began testing the possibility of connecting smartphones to satellite communications that were not equipped with additional satellite communication modules. After a number of successful tests, this technology attracted the interest of major cellular and satellite communication providers, one of which was SpaceX.

Thanks to its existing developments in satellite development and the ability to quickly launch them into orbit, SpaceX has pulled ahead and is now beginning to provide direct satellite communications services for smartphones that are not equipped with additional satellite communications modules.

To this end, an intensive launch of a new series of Starlink satellites to LEO has begun, designed to provide Starlink Direct to cell communications. Currently, only sending and receiving text messages is supported, but direct calls and Internet access are planned to be provided as early as 2025.

Strengths and Weaknesses

There is still little information about the operation of Starlink Direct to cell. Two factors will play a major role - the noise immunity of the Starlink Direct to cell satellite communication and the speed / delay of data transmission.

Accordingly, data transfer speed/latency will impact whether Starlink Direct to Cell communications can be used to control UAVs or UACs in real time, and interference immunity will determine whether this is possible in the presence of electronic warfare (EW) systems.

As is known, existing Starlink satellite communication terminals are quite resistant to interference, but this does not mean that this property will apply to Starlink Direct to cell communication.

Cellular antennas are much smaller in area than those of Starlink terminals, and other parameters may differ, such as frequencies, modulation, and so on, and so forth, all of which can significantly worsen noise immunity, as well as data transfer speed/latency.

However, there is no doubt that these problems will be solved, the operating algorithms will be optimized, and if necessary, craftsmen will attach external antennas to smartphones.

Among the advantages of Starlink Direct to cell, it can be noted that smartphones will most likely have significantly lower power consumption and weight and size characteristics compared to existing Starlink terminals.

Threats and Risks

First of all, it can be definitely stated that the capabilities of Starlink Direct to cell will be used with 100% probability in the interests of the special services of Ukraine and Western countries. In fact, agents of the Main Intelligence Directorate (GUR) of Ukraine and other special services will receive encrypted untraceable communication channels with agents anywhere on the planet.

Most likely, initially the Starlink Direct to cell connection will function only in the newly annexed regions of Russia, including Crimea, but it cannot be ruled out that procedures for connecting “selected” subscribers will be organized throughout Russia - if the special services of Western countries are interested in this, then SpaceX will comply.

But even if we talk about new territories, the use of Starlink Direct to cell communications by traitors and saboteurs will significantly complicate their detection and capture by Russian special services. This will lead to an increase in the number of sabotage operations, murders of Russian citizens, the transfer of information by "waiters" about the deployment locations of equipment and manpower of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation (AF RF) with subsequent strikes by the enemy on them with high-precision weapons. weapons long range.

The next direction could be equipping kamikaze UAVs with Starlink Direct to cell communications to give them the ability to retarget in flight, conduct reconnaissance along the route, and also visually assess the results of a strike when used in a group.

Earlier in the article The Geranium UAV with a video camera and 4G modem promises us more confirmed cases of destruction of HIMARS MLRS and Patriot air defense systems We talked about using modems with Ukrainian SIM cards on Russian long-range kamikaze UAVs like the Geranium-2, apparently precisely to implement the above-described capabilities.

Accordingly, with Starlink Direct to Cell communication, the UAV will be able to send images and receive retargeting information throughout the flight, without losing signal in areas without cell tower coverage.

By the way, judging by everything, something went wrong with the video cameras and cellular modems on the Geranium-2 UAV.

All of the above is something that can be realized with almost 100% probability.

However, if Starlink can provide high-speed, low-latency Direct to Cell data transfer, then direct control of UAVs and UACs will be possible, similar to how it is currently implemented using Starlink terminals. This means that the range of FPV-drones and other UAVs will be limited only by their flight range and Direct to cell coverage area.

This will allow the Ukrainian Armed Forces to conduct a hunt with recognition and confirmation of defeat on those weapons of the Russian Armed Forces that are located in the operational rear, at a distance of several hundred kilometers from the line of combat contact (LBC).

At present, their destruction is only possible with the help of long-range precision weapons, such as operational-tactical missiles (OTR) ATACMS or Storm Shadow cruise missiles, of which the Ukrainian Armed Forces do not have many. However, confirmation is only possible with the help of satellite images of the area taken with a certain delay, or with the help of recruited agents.

The relative cheapness of Direct to cell terminals – ordinary modern smartphones – will potentially allow them to be installed on a huge number of offensive and defensive weapons of the enemy, and the payment for communication services will be taken on by the US government and SpaceX, of course, if Donald Trump does not close the shop.

Finally, I would like to remember something else, namely the material. Space horizons of electronic intelligence and hidden capabilities of Starlink: how Ukrainian long-range UAVs get to Moscow, in which we talked about the possibility of using Starlink satellites for electronic intelligence (EI).

Well, it is unlikely that anyone can doubt that such functionality can be implemented in them, since they can receive signals from ordinary smartphones from the surface. Even if the range of radio signals received by such satellites is limited to only some cellular frequencies, even this can give a lot to the enemy, not to mention the possibility of implementing much more functionality in a low-orbit "radio receiver".

Conclusions

Starlink Direct to cell is a system that can be very useful for those who have it, and very dangerous for those who don't.

The emergence of Starlink Direct to cell once again demonstrates the importance of deploying such systems in orbit, but, unfortunately, in terms of creating low-orbit satellite communication systems, Russia is five to ten years behind, and if we talk about the lag in electronics in general, then it is, apparently, twenty to thirty years.

It will most likely be difficult to counteract the existing methods of Starlink Direct to cell operation, for example, with electronic warfare means; most likely, the effect will be local, although work in this direction is possible and necessary.

Destroy Starlink Direct to cell satellites? Technically it is possible, but are we going to do that? Unlike Ukraine and Western countries, we don't cross red lines, even those we've drawn for ourselves.

The appearance of Starlink Direct to cell in Ukraine in 2025 will not have a significant impact on the situation, but in the future, if the war drags on, the damage caused by it will continuously increase, especially if Starlink Direct to cell operates throughout Russia - in this case, we will face espionage, sabotage and strikes by more dangerous and effective long-range kamikaze UAVs.

Comments

[Vita vko]

Russia will have to increase its group of radio reconnaissance satellites aimed at detecting Starlink signals with the importance of promptly transmitting coordinates to the Kinzhal or Iskander missile systems.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Vita VKO

Russia will have to increase its group of radio reconnaissance satellites aimed at detecting Starlink signals with the importance of promptly transmitting coordinates to the Kinzhal or Iskander missile systems.

This solution may work, but it’s from the series: “Either I die, or the donkey, or the padishah.”
In addition, the Starlink terminal can be located tens of meters away from the object.
In my opinion, without ground-based lasers and a secret ultimatum to Musk: "Either you stop shitting from orbit, or whatever flies over Russia will have problems with its functionality," Russia has nothing to gain.

[Skif3216]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

In my opinion, without ground-based lasers and a secret ultimatum to Musk: "Either you stop shitting from orbit, or whatever flies over Russia will have problems with its functionality," Russia has nothing to gain.

They will start turning off ours, their capabilities are wider. At what speed do they launch satellites into orbit? At what speed do we?

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Skif3216

They will start turning off ours, their capabilities are wider. At what speed do they launch satellites into orbit? At what speed do we?

What kind of opportunities are these? If our guys aren't lying, then the Americans don't have anything even close to Peresvet.
And what about satellites? Yes, we launch fewer, but we are also much less dependent. In addition, commercial satellites are not military, the reaction to their damage, and the laser is capable of damaging without destroying, does not include a nuclear response.

[SovAr238A]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Quote: Skif3216

They will start turning off ours, their capabilities are wider. At what speed do they launch satellites into orbit? At what speed do we?

What kind of opportunities are these? If our guys aren't lying, then the Americans don't have anything even close to Peresvet.
And what about satellites? Yes, we launch fewer, but we are also much less dependent. In addition, commercial satellites are not military, the reaction to their damage, and the laser is capable of damaging without destroying, does not include a nuclear response.

Peresvet's laser is not a weapon of destruction.
This is a means of jamming (illuminating a small area of ​​the Earth's surface) reconnaissance satellites.
and its location is the PGRK missile base.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: SovAr238A

Peresvet's laser is not a weapon of destruction.
This is a means of jamming (illuminating a small area of ​​the Earth's surface) reconnaissance satellites.
and its location is the PGRK missile base.

With megawatt power? Well, maybe.

[Sensor]

For different L.-v. the flash energy ranges from 36 to 100 J; the flash duration from 1/400 to 1/2000 sec.

50 J * 1/0.001 sec = 50 kW. However, no one lost their sight while taking the photo.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Sensor

For different L.-v. the flash energy ranges from 36 to 100 J; the flash duration from 1/400 to 1/2000 sec.

50 J * 1/0.001 sec = 50 kW. However, no one lost their sight while taking the photo.

Ahem. Not only does a flash not produce concentrated light, unlike a laser. Not only is it a flash, a short-term phenomenon. Not only have people completely lost their sight from flashbulbs, especially in the twilight, and not just temporarily, but what kind of figure is 50 kW?
50 kW for these 1/400 seconds? Did you mix something up?

[Sensor]

the figure is 50 kW? 50 kW for these 1/400 seconds? Did you mix something up?

The release of 50 joules per millisecond is a pulse with a power of 50 kW. And if you like 40 ms, then the pulse power is 1.25 kW. This power is dissipated on the flash lamp, only a small part is converted into light, see below a fragment of the methodology for students of the Moscow Higher Technical School (that's where future weapons designers study). Don't be fooled by the efficiency of GaAs, it's a semiconductor laser and it has poor heat dissipation.
Well, they emitted a red beam from a ruby ​​with a flash lamp and an impulse with a power 100 times less than they pumped in, so there is a beam divergence, i.e. the further the target, the larger the spot, the less heating on the spot. For example, they collected sunlight with a magnifying glass - the piece of wood started smoking. There are many more reasons why the energy supplied to the working fluid is many times greater than the energy released on the target.
What was done in Russia (open source search).
1K17 "Compression" - Soviet, Russian self-propelled laser complex for counteraction optical-electronic devices of the enemy.
Terra-3 complex anti-missile and anti-space defense weapons project of a zonal anti-missile and anti-space defense system with a laser-based beam striking element. The program is closed,
the results are not finished, nothing good came out of the finished product.
Gas-dynamic laser RD0600 Multipurpose space-based laser. Development for the "Spiral" system
Radiation power - 100 kW; (beam power)
Tested in ground conditions
Fuel components: oxidizer - air, fuel - carbon monoxide gas, ballast - nitrogen gas.
Summary: Target-destroying lasers are monstrous constructions.

[Sensor]

Forgot to insert a picture

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Sensor

The release of 50 joules in one millisecond is a pulse with a power of 50 kW.

Of course not. That's why I'm writing that you've got it all wrong. It would be 50 kW if the power of 50 J per millisecond was given out for a SECOND, or 50 J in 000/1 s. But a pulse of 1000 J is equal to 50 W.

Quote: Sensor

Don't be fooled by the efficiency of GaAs, it is a semiconductor laser and it has poor heat dissipation.
Well, they emitted a red beam from the ruby ​​with a flash lamp and a pulse, with a power 100 times less than what they pumped in, but there is a beam divergence, i.e. the further the target, the larger the spot, the less heating over the spot.

The power of a laser is measured not by energy consumption, but by the power of the beam that is already produced.)) So the efficiency is not particularly interesting.
As they write a laser with a beam divergence of 1 angle. min. will give a 1,9 km spot on the Moon.
Very rough, of course, but at 380 km the spot will be 1,9 meters. it means that at 600 km the spot will be no more than 3 m. This is 7 square meters. With a megawatt of brought power per meter, there will be 130 kW.
Peresvet can be more powerful and with better "accuracy".

Quote: Sensor

Summary: Target-destroying lasers are monstrous constructions.

Not anymore. And for ground ones it is not critical.

[stankow]

At one angular minute, the spot on the Moon will be 105 km. At one angular minute, seconds will be 1.8 km

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: stankow

At one arc minute, the spot on the Moon will be 105 km. At one arc second it will be 1.8 km.

Exactly, one second.

These laser systems are used for lunar location, spacecraft, and communication with the ISS. The best achievable divergence is about 1 arc second, taking into account the turbulent expansion of the beam in the atmosphere.

Let us calculate the linear diameter D of a light spot with an expansion angle α=1″ at a distance L=1000 km.

D = tgα* L = 0,00000485*1000*1000 = 4,85 m.

If this beam were aimed at the Moon, it would illuminate a spot approximately 1,9 km in diameter.

[Sensor]

Power is the amount of energy transmitted/released/consumed per unit of time 1J/1sec = 1W. 1J/1μs = 1MW see picture.

The power of a laser is measured not by energy consumption, but by the power of the beam that is already produced.)) So the efficiency is not particularly interesting.

If we do not take exotics, the best efficiency has a carbon dioxide laser of about 30%. The remaining 70% is spent on heating the working fluid and several kW of heat must be discharged, otherwise there will be a serious accident.

With a megawatt of delivered power per meter there will be 130 kW.

To destroy a target, the main parameter is the power density W/m

2

and duration of exposure. Beam divergence reduces the first parameter, and movement reduces the second.
Well, and the heat sink also plays a role, I won't go into detail about it, this is not the place for mathematical physics equations, I'll just note one fact. In modern microcircuits, the current density in conductors reaches thousands of amperes per square mm, but that's a completely different story.

Peresvet can be more powerful and with better "accuracy".

I'm not confirming anything, but it's written in the wiki
"The operating principle is based on illuminating people, birds, optical reconnaissance systems, including reconnaissance satellites, with a laser beam. It can be used, in particular, to cover (camouflage) the launch sites of ICBMs"
and not a word about destruction. Blinding makes optical targeting impossible (this is about drones)

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Sensor

Power is the amount of energy transmitted/released/consumed per unit of time 1J/1sec = 1W. 1J/1μs = 1MW see picture.

You're already completely confused. Because 1 µs is a microsecond - one MILLIONTH of a second. A little different from one thousandth, no?
Well, a pulse of 50 J/ms will give 50 watts, because it is a pulse. If it lasted a second, with the same energy, then yes. 50 kV. But 50 kV pulse, mediocre power for a laser

Quote: Sensor

If we do not take exotics, the best efficiency has a carbon dioxide laser of about 30%. The remaining 70% is spent on heating the working fluid and several kW of heat must be discharged, otherwise there will be a serious accident.

Once again, laser power is measured in beam power per second, not in power consumption. So efficiency is of little importance.

Quote: Sensor

To destroy a target, the main parameter is the power density W/m

Don't you know how many watts there are in a kilowatt? 1000 (One thousand).
Is 130 watts normal per meter?

Quote: Sensor

and duration of exposure. Beam divergence reduces the first parameter, and movement reduces the second.

powerful lasers with angular second divergence are already available, and the precision of the drives has long been sufficient for tracking low-orbit satellites.

Quote: Sensor

Well, and the heat sink also plays a role, I won't go into detail about it, this is not the place for mathematical physics equations, I'll just note one fact. In modern microcircuits, the current density in conductors reaches thousands of amperes per square mm, but that's a completely different story.

Yeah, confusing µs with ms and not knowing how many watts are in a kilowatt, but talking about mathematical physics is strong.

Quote: Sensor

The principle of operation is based on illuminating people, birds, optical reconnaissance systems, including reconnaissance satellites, with a laser beam. It can be used in particular to cover (camouflage) the launch sites of ICBMs

disabling the space surveillance equipment of the missile attack warning system (MAWS) of a potential enemy in order to disrupt the operation of the MAWS;

The satellites of this system are in geostationary and highly elliptical orbits.

[Sensor]

You're already completely confused. Because 1 µs is a microsecond - one MILLIONTH of a second. A little different from one thousandth, no?
Well, a pulse of 50 J/ms will give 50 watts, because it is a pulse. If it lasted a second, with the same energy, then yes. 50 kV. But 50 kV pulse, mediocre power for a laser

You are confusing the dimension of power J/sec with its value energy/(time during which this energy is released or absorbed)
All other judgments are negligible compared to this delusion. I will conclude here.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Sensor

You are confusing the dimension of power J/sec with its value energy/(time during which this energy is released or absorbed)

50 J is all the energy. And it doesn't matter if it is given out in an hour or in a millisecond. 50 J is 50 watts.

Quote: Sensor

All other judgments are negligible compared to this delusion. I will conclude here.

[North watchmen]

Why are you destroying the worldview for those who believe in super weapons?
All this nonsense is intended to be embezzled from R&D, both ours and theirs.

[Sensor]

All this nonsense is intended to be embezzled from R&D, both ours and theirs.

If we don’t shake each other apart on Earth, then fights will come in space, and that’s where energy weapons come into their own.

[Egg]

I'm embarrassed to ask... why destroy satellites? To disable optical elements, much less power is needed, effectively and we will have nothing to present, is the satellite intact? - intact, is it flying? It is flying, and what happened to its optics... maybe a speck of dust got in...
I somehow accidentally turned on my PN-1 night light without a lid during the day... the night light is finished :(

[Sensor]

Why destroy satellites?

Here everything is mixed up: UAVs, ICBMs, satellites, the Moon

[FoBoss_VM]

Well then we need to solve the problems radically - physically eliminate Musk. No Musk, no Starlink for the hohols. Stop being soft with them, they don't stand on ceremony with us at all, considering us Russians as bio-waste...

[Kusja]

You have to negotiate with the mask. Especially at a time like this. The negotiators have simply been reborn...

[FoBoss_VM]

You can't negotiate with the enemy. The enemy is destroyed. And Musk is the enemy.

[Dutchman Michel]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

"Either you stop shitting from orbit, or whatever flies over Russia will have problems with its functionality."

That would be a worthy response. But I would also add this: either you stop messing with us by supplying lethal weapons to Ukraine, or we... And we can also respond to them, maybe not with entirely ethical methods, but we can. And why this hasn't been done yet, I don't understand

[Reporter]

"And why this hasn't been done yet, I don't understand"
Because we can't. We have nothing to answer them with. In technical terms and mobilization resources, we are inferior to NATO by a factor of 10. And any escalation of the conflict causes more damage to us than to them.
Hence the constant attempts on our part to freeze the conflict (Istanbul, Minsk, etc.)

[Dutchman Michel]

Quote: Reporter

We have nothing to answer them with

There are many answers. Do you remember how the Twin Towers were blown up? And with our help they will drive all of America and Gayropa under the baseboard. Just don't say that this is terrorism, terrorism is when they blow things up here, and there, it's a good deed

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Dutchman Michel

Do you remember how the Twin Towers were blown up? And with our help they will drive all of America and Gayropa under the baseboard.

Let me remind you that after the Twin Towers were blown up, Article 416 of the NATO Charter was activated, after which Iraq and Afghanistan began to force peace with humanitarian bombings and did not calm down until they shot Osama with the H&KXNUMX that eventually became legendary. And you are wrong to think that NATO will not know whose proxy forces the shepherds in slippers are.

[Dutchman Michel]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

And you are wrong to think that NATO will not know whose proxy forces the shepherds in slippers are.

Knowing and proving are two different things. And they don't dare apply this article to a nuclear power. There is such a fashionable word now, proxy war

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Dutchman Michel

Knowing and proving are two different things.

Yes, I understand. Can you imagine Lavrov and Zakharova, with shameless grins, telling NATO officials "prove it!" and laughing heartily in their faces. And they will puff and mumble something unintelligible in response. But that won't happen. It will be like with the 9M729 missile, because of which the US withdrew from the INF Treaty: the Russian Ministry of Defense held a briefing and invited foreign partners, but they demonstratively didn't show up.

[by land]

Are there really no skyscrapers in Moscow that the CIA could blow up in response? Or maybe you think these are people who care too much about Russian citizens to do something like that?

[AdAstra]

Why did you start then? Was the "Tsar" offended that they showed him the finger?

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

their damage, and the laser is capable of damaging without destroying

Where do you even get the info on what this laser is capable of? Let me remind you that before the start of the SVO, it was believed that in a hot war, the Russian Armed Forces would defeat Ukraine in two days, simonian.mp4

It is extremely difficult to damage something with a laser through the atmosphere at a long distance, something non-optical is even more difficult, something optical but directed in the other direction is just as difficult as something non-optical. At the moment, it is impossible not only to damage starlinks with radio waves, but even to jam them.

Quote: Dutchman Michel

And we can also respond to them, maybe not entirely ethically, but we can. And why this hasn't been done yet, I don't understand

We can tear up their underwater cables, for example. But wait, they tear them up themselves. They literally do our job for us. What an amazing coincidence.

Why am I saying this?.. A. So, the satellites are not disabled because an anchor on a chain (which NATO uses to tear its own cables) is easier to make than a laser (which NATO could use to burn its own satellites).

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Where do you get the info on what this laser is capable of? Let me remind you that before the start of the SVO, it was believed that in a hot war, the Russian Armed Forces would defeat Ukraine in two days, simonyan.mp4

What does an assessment of the military-political situation from God knows who have anything to do with technical specifications? It's not even like comparing soft with warm, but kefir and a sledgehammer.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

It is extremely difficult to damage something with a laser through the atmosphere at a long distance, something non-optical is even more difficult, something optical but directed in the other direction is just as difficult as something non-optical.

The power issue. At 600 km altitude, the sane power is very complex, miniature elements of Starlink phased antennas.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

At the moment, it is impossible to damage or even jam starlinks with radio waves.

You don't know the subject at all. It's useless to jam the transmission from Starlink, but it's certainly possible to receive a signal from a terminal.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

We can tear up their underwater cables, for example. But wait, they tear them up themselves. They literally do our job for us. What an amazing coincidence.
Why am I saying this?.. A. So, the satellites are not disabled because an anchor on a chain (which NATO uses to tear its own cables) is easier to make than a laser (which NATO could use to burn its own satellites).

Again, a comparison of kefir and a sledgehammer. Cables do not make our Army's tasks in the SVO any easier, but disabling Starlinks will certainly make them easier. What a strange narrative.

[Commissar Kitten]

You suggested blowing up American skyscrapers above - obviously, based on the premise that their destruction would make our Army's tasks in the SVO easier. So, destroying cables would make it easier - think of a way. Try a little harder.

[Commissar Kitten]

(Oh, sorry, it wasn't you, it was another person. Actually, my original answer wasn't meant for you, but for him.)

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

You have no knowledge of the topic at all. It is useless to jam the transmission from Stralinka

You are completely ignorant of the topic. Any connection on the Internet is two-way, and if you jam the reception on the Starlink satellite, the terminals will not be able to send requests for sending data and confirmation of receiving packets.

And don't tell me that they don't try to jam them. Other systems (if I remember correctly, "iridium") jammed the SVO quite successfully at the very beginning.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

You are completely ignorant of the topic. Any connection on the Internet is two-way, and if you jam the reception on the Starlink satellite, the terminals will not be able to send requests for sending data and confirmation of receiving packets.

Yes, but what about this statement?

Quote: Commissar Kitten

At the moment, it is impossible to damage starlinks with radio waves, but even to drown out.

Besides, I wrote about jamming the RECEPTION, actually.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

It is useless to jam the transmission from Stralink, but it is certainly possible to receive a signal from the terminal.

And you shamefully cut out the phrase.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

And don't tell me that they don't try to jam them. Other systems (if I remember correctly, "iridium") jammed the SVO quite successfully at the very beginning.

How is this not necessary? No need to tell about the jamming of Iridium, which did not happen. In addition, Iridium does not allow the transmission of data arrays, not to mention the control of drones.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

In some circumstances, technical characteristics have the ability to turn into a politically biased assessment. Like the number pi, whose value in wartime can reach four.

Sledgehammer and kefir. And another joke.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Actually, my original answer was not intended for you, but for him.)

However, for some reason the quote is from my comment.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Quote: Vladimir_2U
their damage, and the laser is capable of damaging without destroying
Where do you get the info on what this laser is capable of? Let me remind you that before the start of the SVO, it was believed that in a hot war, the Russian Armed Forces would defeat Ukraine in two days, simonyan.mp4

By the way, the link to Simonyan is very strange, somehow it doesn't work, why? Maybe because it's a lie?

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

And you shamefully cut out the phrase.

Yes, that's right. I read it incorrectly (as in, you can jam the signal reception from the satellite on the terminal).

Quote: Vladimir_2U

No need to tell me about the jamming of Iridium, which never happened.

Found it — the Viasat operator was jammed. https://www.vesti.ru/article/3277744 So they are trying to jam it. They can't jam Starlink. Sometimes it works for a short time, but the functionality is restored by updating the algorithms.

https://rg.ru/2024/05/17/wp-terminaly-starlink-vyshli-iz-stroia-v-den-nastupleniia-vs-rf-na-harkov.html
https://rg.ru/2024/05/25/mask-rasskazal-o-popytkah-rossii-zaglushit-starlink-na-ukraine.html

Quote: Vladimir_2U

By the way, the link to Simonyan is very strange, somehow it doesn't work, why? Maybe because it's a lie?

Because this quote is known to almost everyone. But if for some reason you don't, then here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVpnnVrpG60

[Dart]

Military Commissar Kitten, well it's obvious that they slept during classes at the VOKU. Obviously.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Yes, that's right. I read it incorrectly (as in, you can jam the signal reception from the satellite on the terminal).

Without high-altitude suppression means it won’t work, yes.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Found it — the Viasat operator was jammed. https://www.vesti.ru/article/3277744 So they are trying to jam it. They can't jam Starlink. Sometimes it works for a short time, but the functionality is restored by updating the algorithms.

That's right, by updating the algorithms. There was no talk of any suppression by means of electronic warfare. In both cases there was an attempt, partially successful, of a cyber attack. Accordingly, it was stopped by updating the software.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Because this quote is known to almost everyone. But if for some reason you don't, then here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVpnnVrpG60

I apologize for the accusation of lying. I was wrong.

However, Simonyan was talking about a "hot war", not a nuclear one of course, but also definitely not about a Strange Military Operation, when the khikhlovs were just about to be kissed in the ass. And this is obvious.

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

That's right, by updating the algorithms. There was no talk of any suppression by means of electronic warfare. In both cases there was an attempt, partially successful, of a cyber attack. Accordingly, it was stopped by updating the software.

You probably don't know how modern communications work. Radio is digitized, and the useful signal is extracted and interference is suppressed digitally. Digital interference filtering is an algorithm. And it can be changed programmatically without changing the hardware, this is called SDR.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

However, Simonyan was talking about a "hot war", not a nuclear one of course, but also definitely not about a Strange Military Operation, when the khikhlovs were just about to be kissed in the ass. And this is obvious.

Your desire to defend and justify the propagandists who shit in your head is quite surprising. What you call "obvious" is a demagogic device "not a single true Scotsman" - like war is when Russia defeats XXLs in two days, and where it does not win, it is not a war. Very convenient. The Russian Federation introduced its armed forces into Ukraine and is conducting military operations against the Armed Forces of Ukraine - this is a war.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

You probably don't know how modern communications work. Radio is digitized, and the useful signal is extracted and interference is suppressed digitally. Digital interference filtering is an algorithm. And it can be changed programmatically without changing the hardware, this is called SDR.

You probably don't know that no matter how digital the signal is, it is suppressed by the power of interference. And 20 watts of the Starlink terminal will be suppressed by 120 watts of directional noise from a specialized electronic warfare device. So don't do that here.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Your desire to defend and justify the propagandists who shit in your head is quite astonishing. What you call "obvious" is a demagogic device "no true Scotsman" - like war is where Russia defeats XXLs in two days, and where it doesn't win, it's not war.

Demagogy is lumping together technical specifications with the statements of propagandists.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Where do you get the info on what this laser is capable of? Let me remind you that before the start of the SVO, it was believed that in a hot war, the Russian Armed Forces would defeat Ukraine in two days, simonyan.mp4

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

And 20 watts of the Starlink terminal will be overwhelmed by 120 watts of directional noise from a specialized electronic warfare device.

Ahahahaha, this is not true even for prehistoric times, when the old men twisted signals from phased arrays with analog phase shifters )))))) Google "formation of radiation pattern nulls", "correlation filters".

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Ahahahaha, this is not true even for prehistoric times, when the old men twisted signals from phased arrays with analog phase shifters )))))) Google "formation of radiation pattern nulls", "correlation filters".

How will this help if Starlink can't pick out the signal from the terminal in the noise, and therefore can't even determine the location of the terminal and point the petal at it? How?
And yet, you also need to receive a dense flow of information, video for example.
Why write smart words without understanding the process, huh?

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

How will this help if Starlink can't pick out the signal from the terminal in the noise, and therefore can't even determine the location of the terminal and point the petal at it? How?
And yet, you also need to receive a dense flow of information, video for example.
Why write smart words without understanding the process, huh?

Glad you asked! This is a very interesting area of ​​engineering knowledge. First, Starlink will determine the location (or rather the direction to) the noise source and zero the characteristic on it. Then it will determine the direction to the terminal due to the high information redundancy (and, accordingly, high noise immunity) of the pilot signal using correlation filtering - this is when the received signal is added to itself in a certain way, and the signal of the desired shape only amplifies itself, and the noise is added to itself, sometimes plus, sometimes minus. The longer the pilot signal, the more it can be added in this way, the stronger the relative noise suppression. And AFTER it has aimed the petal at it, it will switch to video transmission. This is all really very interesting, I recommend it.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Demagogy is lumping together technical specifications with the statements of propagandists.

So where are these specifications? And what is the possibility of confirming them? Statements like "our laser has no analogues in the world, NATO is in shock, the White House is horrified, the Pentagon is in panic, the State Department is hysterical" are not technical specifications, Simanyan's statement about two days is closer to a technical specification - it contains at least one number.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Glad you asked! This is a very interesting area of ​​engineering knowledge. First, Starlink will determine the location (or rather the direction to) the noise source and zero the characteristic on it. Then it will determine the direction to the terminal due to the high information redundancy (and, accordingly, high noise immunity) of the pilot signal using correlation filtering - this is when the received signal is added to itself in a certain way, and the signal of the desired shape only amplifies itself, and the noise is added to itself, sometimes plus, sometimes minus. The longer the pilot signal, the more it can be added in this way, the stronger the relative noise suppression. And AFTER it has aimed the petal at it, it will switch to video transmission. This is all really very interesting, I recommend it.

Starlink DOES NOT point to the signal, it receives the coordinates of the terminal location, and only then points the petal to it. That's all. The Starlink antenna is not a direction finder.
And the laser is not out of the general development of lasers. And megawatts with a second of divergence are no longer science fiction.

[Commissar Kitten]

Starlink does what it gets in the software update. The conversation was about how to ensure communication when jamming, and that 120W of interference with a 20W signal is not a silver bullet.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Starlink does what it gets in the software update.

No software will turn a non-directional receiving antenna into a direction finder.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

The conversation was about the methods used to ensure communication when jamming, and that 120W of interference with a 20W signal is not a silver bullet.

There was no conversation about anything there. The conversation was specifically about Starlink. And yes, 120 W is just an example, 500 W is also possible. But 20 W from the terminal is specific.

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

No software will turn a non-directional receiving antenna into a direction finder.

You just called a phased array antenna a "non-directional receiving antenna"? Shame.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

You just called a phased array antenna a "non-directional receiving antenna"? Shame.

The Starlink receiving antenna, although a phased antenna array, is precisely non-directional. Because it works to receive from several hundred terminals.

[Commissar Kitten]

It has as many directions as it needs, and all at the same time. The receiving direction of an antenna array is a way to combine signals from the receiving elements in a certain way. Combined in one way - you select one direction, from one terminal. Combined (the same signals) in another way - you select another direction, from another terminal. Magic, right?

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

It has as many directions as it needs, and all at the same time. The receiving direction of an antenna array is a way to combine signals from the receiving elements in a certain way. Combined in one way - you select one direction, from one terminal. Combined (the same signals) in another way - you select another direction, from another terminal. Magic, right?

What nonsense...You are confusing the receiving antenna with the transmitting one, so there is no magic. Separation of signals from different terminals is done programmatically.

[Commissar Kitten]

No, you saw an animated gif on Wikipedia showing how phased array antenna transmission works, and decided that now you know and understand everything about phased array antennas. They can not only coherently emit a signal from different elements, setting the desired transmission direction, but also coherently receive it, setting the desired reception direction, and so on. ("Software method" is a statement about nothing, because in SDR all processing is done software-based, including filtering by direction.)

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

They can not only coherently emit a signal from different elements, but also coherently receive it, highlighting the desired direction, and so on.

They can, yes. But not the size of the Starlink antenna. And not with the number of simultaneous subscribers. Such an antenna was adopted for Starlink to reduce the size and at least some unification.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

"Software method" is a statement about nothing, because in SDR all processing is done software-based, including filtering by direction.

Not about anything, but specifically about Starlink.
So, specifically, Starlink's receiving antenna is non-directional.

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

They can, yes. But not the size of the Starlink antenna.

My God, what nonsense. The Starlink terminal is large enough to transmit directional data to the satellite, but the antenna on the satellite that receives the terminal's signal at that wavelength is several times larger.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

My God, what nonsense. The Starlink terminal is large enough to transmit directional data to the satellite, but the antenna on the satellite that receives the terminal's signal at that wavelength is several times larger.

Yes, I'm reading absolute nonsense right now. What do the dimensions of the TRANSMITTING antenna matter when power and directionality are important? But the dimensions of the receiving antenna, even out of phase, are still very important for determining the direction of the signal, for the base.
But here's the problem, there are no multiple times. The estimated dimensions of the Starlink antennas are 80*80 cm.

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

What about the dimensions of the TRANSMITTING antenna when power and directionality are important?

Because the directionality (spatial selectivity) is determined by the ratio of the antenna size and the signal wavelength. And it is determined in this way equally for both the transmitting phased array and the receiving phased array.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

But here's the problem, there are no multiple times. The estimated dimensions of the Starlink antennas are 80*80 cm.

The wavelength in the Ku-band is 3 cm. 80 cm is enough to add signals either out of phase or in phase in any direction of reception.

[nerd.su]

You have an interesting technical discussion. Can you explain how a phone that is not powerful enough to communicate with a base station 50 km away will communicate with a satellite that is above 200 km? Especially 5G?

[Commissar Kitten]

It will work at a very low speed. There will be no video communication, even the ability to make voice calls is not expected.

[nerd.su]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

There will be no video communication, and there is not even the possibility of voice calls.

So roughly speaking only tests/sms are available? It's good for spies.

But the article says something completely different:

Recently, smartphones from a number of leading manufacturers have begun to be equipped with two-way satellite communication modem modules, thanks to which the smartphone owner could theoretically gain access to communication services anywhere on the planet. At first it was text messages, and then satellite communication modules began to provide the possibility of direct calls and Internet access.

And the entire subsequent article is based on these statements.
So I want to understand whether there is a technical possibility of all those problems described in the article? Or is this just a sensation sucked out of a finger? Otherwise, people are already planning to shoot down satellites
But for me, iridium is much more dangerous.

[Commissar Kitten]

Starlink is dangerous even with standard terminals. And in terms of espionage, the regular Internet with protocols like Tor is more dangerous

[nerd.su]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Starlink is dangerous even with standard terminals.

With standard ones it’s dangerous.

But still, I wonder how much progress has been made with the possibility of satellite communication via regular smartphones?

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Quote: Vladimir_2U
But here's the problem, there are no multiple times. The estimated dimensions of the Starlink antennas are 80*80 cm.
The wavelength in the Ku-band is 3 cm. 80 cm is enough to add signals either out of phase or in phase in any direction of reception.

Then where did "several times" come from?
And how will "signal addition" help if the interference power is ten times higher than the signal?
Regarding the fundamental impossibility of direction finding with the Starlink receiving antenna, I take back my words, but I remain on my position regarding the practical possibility. Because the dimensions, however, will not provide any reasonable accuracy in direction, that's one. And the multitude of signals being processed simply will not allow this possibility to be realized.

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Then where did "several times" come from?

I estimated it by eye. It is enough that it is larger. If directional transmission by an antenna of a certain size is possible and reasonable, then directional reception by an antenna of the same (or larger) size is automatically possible and reasonable. There for the width of the main beam of the directional diagram there is literally the same formula for reception and transmission.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

And the multitude of signals being processed simply will not allow this possibility to be realized.

Let me repeat: the number of allocated reception directions is not a radio engineering problem. It is a computational problem. Moreover, it is a computational problem of the same complexity as transmission. If directed transmission to the required number of subscribers is a solvable computational problem, then directed reception from the required number of subscribers is automatically a solvable computational problem.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

And how will "signal addition" help if the interference power is ten times higher than the signal?

There is no time to explain, but I will.jpg

Let us assume that a selected interference signal is received using two sets of coefficients W and a dedicated terminal signal X. The selection is not perfect, so the terminal signal is present in the interference signal. aX, and there is an interference signal in the terminal signal bW. a и b — the suppression coefficients determined by the antenna pattern are both less than one. That is, we received two signals — (W+aX) и (X+bW). Let's now multiply the first signal by -b and add it to the second one. We get -b(W+aX)+(X+bW) = -bW-baX+X+bW = -baX+X = (1-ab)X That is, we have completely suppressed the noise, leaving only the useful signal multiplied by some coefficient. Since a и b less than one, then (1-ab) is different from zero, the signal at the output is present, and the noise is completely removed, and this does not depend on its power. In reality, some noise will remain due to the inaccuracy of the estimate b, but improving the evaluation algorithms b You can make the final noise value as close to zero as you like.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

This is a computational problem. And it is a computational problem of the same complexity as the transmission problem.

I agree. But this is in the absence of interference.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

In reality, some noise will remain due to the inaccuracy of the b estimate, but by improving the b estimate algorithms, the final noise value can be made arbitrarily close to zero.

And here is where the need to separate multiple signals from the interference begins to have an effect. Moreover, this interference is not just white noise, but, roughly speaking, a cut of the terminal signal imitation. And here there may be a small shortage with computing power. Including in energy.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

There is no time to explain, but I will.jpg

Funny picture.

Well, if everything comes together, and noise immunity, and computing power and energy capacity, then a laser is needed. And as we have already understood, both antennas and solar batteries are quite within its power.

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

I agree. But this is in the absence of interference.

If a receiver tracks 1000 signal sources, and one jammer is added to them, then to "zero" it in the manner described above, the receiver will need to track 1001 signal sources. Rating b is conceptually complex (so there will always be room for improvement), but not computationally complex, it does not require multiplying and adding millions of samples per second from thousands of receivers.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Moreover, this interference is not just white noise, but, roughly speaking, a cut-up imitation of terminal signals.

No amount of signal cutting will simulate that the signal came to the phased array from a direction other than the one it came from.

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Well, if everything comes together, and noise immunity, and computing power and energy capacity, then a laser is needed. And as we have already understood, both antennas and solar batteries are quite within its power.

I'm not prepared to take anyone's word for its power. Especially in the context of claims that it is designed to suppress optics, but is capable of destroying structural materials in orbit. It's like making a tool designed for neurosurgery and quarrying.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

If a receiver tracks 1000 signal sources, and one jammer is added to them, then to "zero" it using the method described above, the receiver will need to track 1001 signal sources.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

No amount of signal cutting will simulate that the signal came to the phased array from a direction other than the one it came from.

The thing is that Starlink does not track each signal individually. It tracks signals and sends them from several fairly large areas, each approximately 24 km. And since we do not know the characteristics of the receiving phased array, but the fact is that with an 80 cm side the base for clearly determining the direction of the signal is clearly small, then we can say that interference from the borders of this area will drown out the signal from the terminals. And most likely not from one such area.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

I'm not prepared to take anyone's word for its power. Especially in the context of claims that it is designed to suppress optics, but is capable of destroying structural materials in orbit. It's like making a tool designed for neurosurgery and quarrying.

Well, it's clear what we're talking about...
But it depends on who makes the statement, but from me you can believe the statement.
You missed the point that a number of reports are talking about suppressing the optics of satellites of the early warning system for missile launches. And they are either in geostationary orbits or in high elliptical orbits. And accordingly, it is one thing to blind at 500 km altitude, and quite another at 32 km. So consider such a laser a surgical quarry dump truck, you will not be mistaken.

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

The thing is that Starlink does not track each signal individually. It tracks signals and sends them from several fairly large areas, each approximately 24 km. And since we do not know the characteristics of the receiving phased array, but the fact is that with an 80 cm side the base for clearly determining the direction of the signal is clearly small, then we can say that interference from the borders of this area will drown out the signal from the terminals. And most likely not from one such area.

Yes, that's right. Here we must keep in mind that a "region" is not an area within which the connection is uniform. It is a conditional area in the center of which the sensitivity is maximum, with distance it gradually decreases, and the boundary is considered to be the line on which the main lobe drops to a certain level, say, -3 dB. Therefore, two areas whose centers do not coincide (including intersecting ones) will generally contain signals from spaced sources in different proportions. This is what makes it possible to "nullify" the interference, as described above. It will be more difficult, the lower the spatial selectivity, but the fundamental possibility remains as long as the characteristic is at least somehow different from completely non-directional (the coefficient 1-ab is different from zero).

Quote: Vladimir_2U

You missed the point that a number of reports are talking about suppressing the optics of the satellites of the early warning system for missile launches

The same laser cannot suppress reconnaissance satellites in the optical range and thermal IR (which is used in launch warning satellites). Lenses for light are opaque to thermal IR, lenses for thermal IR (germanium) are opaque to light.

[Vladimir_2U]

This is what makes it possible to "zero out" the interference, as described above.

Once again, we do not know the characteristics of the phased array, so the zeroing may be very inaccurate, and it will definitely not affect nearby terminals.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Lenses for light are opaque to thermal IR, lenses for thermal IR (germanium) are opaque to light.

Well, firstly, the range can be near IR, and this is still permeable to the visible, and secondly, this is decided by power. If a laser is capable of blinding optics at 30 km, then at 000 km it will at least cause irreversible erosion of the phased array and batteries. And a second one with a beam of 600 MW will give 1 kW per square meter/s at this distance. So at 130 km it doesn't matter at all what kind of optics, and erosion alone will not be the end of it. It's just a matter of keeping the beam on target.

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Once again, we do not know the characteristics of the phased array, so the zeroing may be very inaccurate, and it will definitely not affect nearby terminals.

Let me remind you that the conversation started with the words that nothing can be done with 120W (500W, etc.) interference with a 20W signal, therefore the claims that they are trying to jam Starlink are incorrect. We came to the conclusion that this claim is false. And based on the fact that Starlink continues to operate over Ukraine, the existing characteristics of the phased array with the existing accuracy of signal processing are enough for it. In fact.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Let me remind you that the conversation started with the words that with 120W (500W, etc.) interference nothing can be done with a 20W signal, therefore the statements that they are trying to jam Starlink are incorrect. We came to the conclusion that this statement is false.

No, let me remind you that we came to the conclusion that this statement may be partially incorrect.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

Yes, that's right. Here we must keep in mind that the "area" is not an area within which the connection is uniform. It is a conditional area in the center of which the sensitivity is maximum, with distance it gradually decreases, and the boundary is considered to be the line on which the main lobe drops to a certain level, say, -3 dB.

Quote: Commissar Kitten

And based on the fact that Starlink continues to operate over Ukraine, the existing characteristics of the phased array with the existing accuracy of signal processing are sufficient for it. In fact.

In fact, we know nothing about the phased array antenna and its ability to determine the direction of interference and its ability to nullify, nor about attempts at jamming, nor about the methods of these attempts. And even more so about the power of interference. (As I found out during the dispute, the central antenna antenna has quite broad capabilities for nullifying, but the phased array is limited).
Well, for example, the ability of Starlink to form only 16 beams with 3 antennas (probably due to overheating) may indicate that its receiving antenna can also operate only 16 shading areas. And this, for the serviced surface, I think is not much.
In addition, the dimensions of the phased array are small, and even in the case of a phased array, it is the base that determines the accuracy of direction finding.

[Svetlana]

How does the modern means of communication - Starlink - work:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAOAbqRiN4A

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Svetlana

How does the modern means of communication - Starlink - work:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAOAbqRiN4A

There is more about how the phased array works. For example, not a word about how the satellite finds the terminal. By direction finding or by GPS coordinates. Plus an error in the assignment of the satellite antennas.
But basically nothing.

[Commissar Kitten]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

What does an assessment of the military-political situation from someone unknown have to do with technical characteristics?

In some circumstances, technical characteristics have the ability to turn into a politically biased assessment. Like the number pi, whose value in wartime can reach four.

[realing]

assessment of the military-political situation from God knows who

Do you think that propagandists of this level are just talking nonsense and not prepared theses?

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote from realing

Do you think that propagandists of this level are just talking nonsense and not prepared theses?

Are you sure that this isn't a lie from Kitten?

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote from realing

Do you think that propagandists of this level are just talking nonsense and not prepared theses?

It's not a lie. However, it's not an exact quote either. Simonyan's speech is about a "hot war", obviously, with the Strange VO, there's little connection.

[Vitaly_pvo]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

anything that flies over Russia will have problems with functionality

Unfortunately, this cannot be done under the treaties and the convention on damage compensation. Therefore, the only option left is to destroy the ground-based communications infrastructure. It is clear that the antennas are located at a safe distance from the processing centers. But they can be detected, even with serious camouflage.

[Blackmokona]

Quote: Vitaly_pvo

It is clear that the antennas are located at a safe distance from the processing centers. But they can be detected, even with serious camouflage.

However, Starlink terminals are incredibly cheap and hitting them even with conventional artillery is simply irrational. Shells are more expensive than terminals. Also, unlike the shortage of shells, there is no shortage of terminals.

[Vita vko]

Quote: BlackMokona

Shells are more expensive than terminalo

Usually it is not the terminal itself that strikes me, but the command post that is nearby. Of course, it needs to be found, but there are methods.

[Blackmokona]

Quote: Vita VKO

Quote: BlackMokona

Shells are more expensive than terminalo

Usually it is not the terminal itself that strikes me, but the command post that is nearby. Of course, it needs to be found, but there are methods.

Therefore, the terminal can be easily moved to a large distance from the headquarters. It's just a matter of throwing a cable, it can be at least 100 meters, or even a kilometer. No technical difficulties

[solar]

There are many terminals in Ukraine, a working terminal is not necessarily a headquarters. This is, first of all, a civilian system, in Ukraine they are freely sold at an affordable price and are widely used, including by civilians.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Vitaly_pvo

Unfortunately, this cannot be done under contracts and the convention on compensation for damages.

They don't give a damn about treaties. And it's high time for us to do the same. Especially considering the military use of Starlink.

[Vitaly_pvo]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

military applications of Starlink

So our Gonets, GLONASS, Oko and many other things that have strategic importance fly there.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Vitaly_pvo

So our Gonets, GLONASS, Oko and many other things that have strategic importance fly there.

Eee? GLONASS are high-orbit satellites, you can't just get them. OKO are combat satellites and an attack on them means a nuclear strike on us, and accordingly a retaliatory strike on the US.
Starlink low-orbit commercial satellites that are not related to the early warning system for missile launches. Yes, they can be subject to sanctions in the form of damage.

[SovAr238A]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Quote: Vita VKO

Russia will have to increase its group of radio reconnaissance satellites aimed at detecting Starlink signals with the importance of promptly transmitting coordinates to the Kinzhal or Iskander missile systems.

This solution may work, but it’s from the series: “Either I die, or the donkey, or the padishah.”
In addition, the Starlink terminal can be located tens of meters away from the object.
In my opinion, without ground-based lasers and a secret ultimatum to Musk: "Either you stop shitting from orbit, or whatever flies over Russia will have problems with its functionality," Russia has nothing to gain.

Absolutely all satellites in the world (except geostationary ones) regularly fly over Russia, what will you do then?

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: SovAr238A

Absolutely all satellites in the world (except geostationary ones) regularly fly over Russia, what will you do then?

Which of them provide high-speed Internet for military operations against our army?

[SovAr238A]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Quote: SovAr238A

Absolutely all satellites in the world (except geostationary ones) regularly fly over Russia, what will you do then?

Which of them provide high-speed Internet for military operations against our army?

Currently, Starlink has 6500 satellites. VanWeb has 616 satellites.
And they all work against Russia.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: SovAr238A

Currently, Starlink has 6500 satellites. VanWeb has 616 satellites.
And they all work against Russia.

No, not all of them. They move along parallels, plus or minus, and accordingly no more than a third of them fly over Russia.
Well, here is the impact against them. And with a megawatt laser it is economically accessible and controllable.

[Alexey Lantukh]

Absolutely all satellites in the world (except geostationary ones) regularly fly over Russia, what will you do then?

Warn that if they fly by, their safety is not guaranteed. And if these satellites pin us down, then pour millions of milligram particles into the required orbit, which will gradually disable the enemy satellites.

[SovAr238A]

Quote: Alexey Lantukh

Absolutely all satellites in the world (except geostationary ones) regularly fly over Russia, what will you do then?

Warn that if they fly by, their safety is not guaranteed. And if these satellites pin us down, then pour millions of milligram particles into the required orbit, which will gradually disable the enemy satellites.

Do you really understand what the movement of masses in orbit is?
And what are orbits in space?
I don't think so...
The volume of the sector of the sphere of space between orbits of 500 and 550 kilometers is 180 million cubic kilometers, or 180 million billion cubic meters.
Now try to place at least one milligram particle evenly in this volume.

Just to school. For knowledge. To the 3rd grade.
So as not to look so ridiculous.

[Alexey Lantukh]

Just to school. For knowledge. To the 3rd grade.
So as not to look so ridiculous.

Maybe so, but why then are space powers concerned about the problem of space debris? It seems that space is big and no one deliberately litters. Besides, I propose to litter only the orbit that passes over Eastern Ukraine and part of Russia. That is, this reduces the volume of the necessary sector several times. Besides, this debris would rotate at a speed of several revolutions per day, and in a year this is thousands of revolutions. It is clear that all mini-satellites might not have been damaged, but a significant part suffered.

[realing]

the desired orbit millions of milligram particles

Even if your absolutely unrealistic and stupid plan is implemented, what next? Will these particles simply disappear? Along with the debris from destroyed satellites? Or will they continue to circle the earth and make everyone forget about any space programs

[Alexey Lantukh]

Will these particles simply disappear later?

Yes, they will disappear. At an altitude of about 500 km, all satellites and various junk gradually descend and over time burn up in the atmosphere.

[Alexey Lantukh]

"Either you stop shitting from orbit, or whatever flies over Russia will have problems with its functionality." Russia has nothing to catch.

Yes, that's right. What are the ways: it can launch its small satellites, which will transmit jamming signals specifically to the territory of Ukraine.

[Dedok]

oriented towards detecting Starlink signals with the importance of promptly transmitting coordinates to the Kinzhal or Iskander missile systems.

Are you suggesting to fight with "sparrows"? (shooting at sparrows)

[vertirex]

There are not enough ISKANDERS, ZIRCONS, and CALIBERS for every smartphone. Every 404 fighter will be given a smartphone and it will be in touch 24-7.

[Hole puncher]

Starlink Direct to cell is a data transmission system that will take combat and weapons control to a new level. Let me remind you that the Link-16 communication system is the cornerstone of network-centric warfare, which is advocated by the United States and NATO countries. The maximum throughput of the system is 268 kbps. Requirements: the object must be in direct radar visibility.
Starlink Direct to cell provides a communication channel with a speed of 10 Mbit/s! At the same time, the transmitter of information can be thousands of kilometers away from the recipient!
Example: currently a group of F-22s works in conjunction with an AWACS aircraft while being at a distance that allows maintaining communication. In the future, the same group receives guidance from a satellite or other source, regardless of where it is.
Or. Now it is already possible to provide display of each fighter, his parameters, location on a single tablet anywhere on the planet in real time. Maintain communication with each, provide him with information about the enemy's location, receive information from him.
That is, Starlink Direct to cell is a new word in the combat management system, the owner of this system gets a colossal advantage over the enemy, if, of course, he learns to use it.

[Dedok]

[quote]New threat: in 2025 year in Ukraine satellite communication for regular smartphones Starlink Direct to cell will work[/ Quote]
when will we have this?
when?

[Reporter]

Never
There are no technologies or specialists.
All gold medalists, winners of school Olympiads, already in their senior classes sign contracts to enter foreign universities. And after finishing school they go there. And they don't want to come back.
Well, there are no technologies. Musk is a billionaire, and he started developing SpaceX with his own money.
But where can you find a rich person who will invest his billions in the development of digital technologies in a country that is subject to sanctions from all sides?

[Blackmokona]

Quote: Reporter

Well, there are no technologies. Musk is a billionaire, and he started developing SpaceX with his own money.
Where can you find a rich person who will invest his billions in the development of digital technologies in a country that is subject to sanctions from all sides?

Yes, quite a few were found. Some businesses were raided, some were brazenly confiscated, some were ruined, etc.
For example, there was S7, Dauria, etc. Roscosmos eradicated all of them.

[parusnik]

But where can you find a rich person who will invest his billions in the development of digital technologies in a country that is subject to sanctions from all sides?

There weren't any like that even before the sanctions were introduced. There was Chubais, and he "developed" "Silicon Valley" with government money, and then he stole the money and ran off to Israel, got citizenship, how much did he take with him? And our president, he declares to the whole country, like, I don't understand why he left? Like, everything was so good...

[alexoff]

All gold medalists, winners of school Olympiads, already in their senior classes sign contracts for admission to foreign universities

As a person who once received a medal and who has worked with medalists and others for many years, I can confidently say that this is complete nonsense. Only children of important people can go abroad after school. No one is chasing our schoolchildren. Where do such fabrications come from?

And they don’t want to go back anymore.

It's funny, most of my friends who went there have already returned

[realing]

in a country that is under sanctions from all sides

The problem is not sanctions, the problem is illegal expropriation and there are plenty of examples from Magnit and Rolf to Yandex and Tinkoff

[single-n]

The Rogozin Khokhloma Rocket Painting Shop is recruiting employees for the following positions:
Painter plasterer
photo toad compiler
trampoline tensioning specialist.

[jdiver]

when the worms and rats are killed first.

[rocket757]

It would hardly be an exaggeration to say that the supply of Starlink terminals and ensuring their uninterrupted operation turned out to be more important for Ukraine than the supply of armored vehicles and combat aircraft.

.
It is worth recognizing that underestimating some “phenomena/developments” in the IT and communications sphere is not very useful, first and foremost, in military terms.
Unfortunately, we have nothing special to counter them with; our influence is limited, and our enemy, who is in the priority zone of Western champions, has an advantage over us.
To say that all is lost... that's not true, but we'll have to work hard to somehow make up for the lag.

[Reporter]

"underestimation of some "phenomena/developments" in the IT and communications sphere is very unhelpful..."
The underestimation occurred, first of all, of the enemy. And the consequences that will begin, in the event of the beginning of their own - that all of NATO will begin to harness itself for the enemy.
The lag specifically in IT is not so important here. We are inferior in high-precision weapons and in satellite reconnaissance. And in many other things.
"but we'll have to work hard to somehow compensate for the lag."
Well, that's just a dream. At the rank and file level, all our soldiers are walking around with Chinese Baofeng radios. There's no way to compensate for this lag. They won't produce digital communications at the steel plant. Unfortunately...

[rocket757]

"Never say never!"
Everything is known, although much is unclear... the illusions should have been dispelled long ago!
But, it must be done, it will have to be done, nothing will be fixed by itself, especially, it will not get better!
We'll have to do it, fix it, there's no other way.
By the way, regarding steel foundries... it is a necessary thing, an important thing, and most importantly, besides them, other industries and branches of industry are being restored... somehow, somewhere and in spite of all the ill-wishers!

[parusnik]

We'll have to do it, fix it, there's no other way.

Chubais, did Developed And then he stole the money and ran away to Israel. Prince, honest and smart people will come back from the front and they will fix everything.

[rocket757]

Besides the red devils, we also have sailor Zheleznyakov who might... come back from the war.
Anything can happen....
So... never say never!

[parusnik]

The red devil is reality, this reality, now a citizen of Israel. And the sailor Zheleznyakov, allegedly from the front, is a figment of the imagination. Why? The key word is - maybe..., and maybe he won't come. And corruption in the Ministry of Defense and theft and the escape of Chubais, reality, without any maybe.

[rocket757]

Alas, reality... it is what it is. Anyone who is truly interested in what is going on inside us knows this...
Now the question is... what needs to be DONE so that the situation changes for the better, for the right reason?
The only true, reliable recipe, now, not only no one offers, but it is extremely difficult to implement...
Something like this.

[parusnik]

Now the question is... what needs to be DONE

And what they wanted has already been done over the past 30 years. And no one really resisted, everyone liked it, and now what should be done to change the situation. There are thoughts, so about this, but you won’t bring me any parcels.

[rocket757]

A person can change his own life... change the lives of many/everyone, this is a matter for... for many, united by one goal, one matter...
To claim that not everyone will be imprisoned... the question/answer is not clear-cut, to say the least.

[Reporter]

"what needs to be DONE..?"
What do you usually do when you're getting into a fight and suddenly it turns out that your opponent is 10 times stronger and better trained? And you've been drinking beer and not training for the last few years, and you're not ready to fight at all. And now it looks like you'll be trampled into the asphalt!
There are two options: try to try it on, or run away!
Because it's too late to go to the gym and hit the punching bag now...

[rocket757]

A special case, but that's not what we're talking about...

[Lech from Android.]

The longer the SVO drags on, the worse the security situation in our rear becomes.

[Ghost1]

I don’t remember whose words, but when Musk started talking about Starlink, someone called him a showman and that he was almost a dreamer.

[Hole puncher]

Quote: Ghost1

Someone here called him a showman and that he was almost a dreamer.

Well, it wasn't only us who said that. Example. All the world's experts said that electric cars have no future. There are some who still think so, for example Akio Toyoda. A huge number of experts believed that reusable rockets were complete crap. And how much was written about Starlink, saying that it won't compete with wired Internet, it's a failed idea, and no one needs it... So our domestic prophets are not alone...

[alexoff]

Well, Starlink certainly won't replace wired internet. $120 a month is somehow radically more than what we pay.
In general, the accounting of Starlink is completely unknown to us. It is being built with investors' money, they have every opportunity to free up the clearing, plugging up all the iridiums through which the ships are provided with communication

[nordscout]

Andrey Mitrofanov outlined an important problem that Russia needs to work on... And the work must be comprehensive: from political to administrative-military, otherwise, we will "have" problems that will make current problems seem like "little flowers in a sunny meadow"....

[cmax]

Quote from nordscout

Andrey Mitrofanov identified an important problem that Russia needs to work on.

And who will work? The specialists have been wiped out as a class, they are inconvenient people, they have their own opinion, which is not very valued in our time. These are just thoughts out loud.

[Kuziming]

We'll have to call Chubais back. Let him build us a nano Starlink. Give him more money, unlimited time. There's no other way, he has no brain of his own, it turns out like this...

[Commissar Kitten]

In fact, agents of the Main Intelligence Directorate (GUR) of Ukraine and other special services will receive encrypted, untraceable communication channels with agents anywhere on the planet.

They still have this opportunity, VPN uses standard encryption systems that are impossible to crack in a reasonable amount of time, and tracking the use of VPN is useless, a huge number of people use it to watch YouTube.

[Victal]

The article should have provided ways to combat this disaster. So far, the following come to mind: using electronic warfare on 10 GHz range magnetrons, including space-based ones; conducting sabotage against the StarLink satellite group, throwing cubes of uranium oxide (depleted) into their orbit, invisible in any range.

[Hole puncher]

Quote: Victal

throwing into their orbit invisible in any range cubes of uranium oxide (depleted)

Your suggestions are stupid because you do not imagine the volume in which satellites fly. That is, with what density per 1 km000. In your imagination, there is a picture from the Internet in which the Earth's orbit is so dotted with satellites that the Earth is not visible. In reality, there is emptiness there.

[Zamkadysh]

Most likely, initially the Starlink Direct to cell connection will function only in the newly annexed regions of Russia, including Crimea, but it cannot be ruled out that procedures for connecting “selected” subscribers will be organized throughout Russia - if the special services of Western countries are interested in this, then SpaceX will comply.

Up to the word "however" everything corresponds to the state of affairs to some extent. Further - the author's speculations. Pure hype.
There is such an organization ITU - International Telecommunication Union (ITU). One of its functions is to regulate the use of radio frequency resources, i.e. distribution and control over the use of RF spectrum, including satellite. The organization is serious, so far it has not been noticed in any nonsense. One of the fundamental rules is the operator (owner) of global-scale networks must coordinate the frequencies allocated to it with the national administration. In our case, this is the State Commission on Radio Frequencies (SCRF). There is "RULES for conducting work in the Russian Federation on international legal protection of the assignment (designation) of radio frequencies or radio frequency channels". Eat "RULES for the use of satellite communication networks under the jurisdiction of foreign states on the territory of the Russian Federation". Without a positive decision by the State Commission on Radio Frequencies, no communication network will operate on the territory of the Russian Federation. The application from Starlink was rejected even before the start of the SVO under the pretext that an application for the same frequencies had already been received from a Russian operator company. Musk is a law-abiding boy. He understands everything perfectly well. The US leadership does not yet have the same influence in the ITU as in the IOC... Fortunately.

[Blackmokona]

Quote: Zamkadysh

Starlink's application was rejected even before the start of the SVO under the pretext that a Russian operator had already applied for the same frequencies. Musk is a law-abiding boy. He understands everything perfectly well. The US leadership does not yet have the same influence in the ITU as in the IOC... Fortunately.

Starlink didn't apply at all. It was its competitor Oniweb that tried.
Well, the US said that it is possible in Iran, he turned on Starlink in Iran despite the categorical ban and the ITU can do nothing. Because the body is advisory, like all these international

[Zamkadysh]

Starlink didn't apply at all. It was its competitor Oniweb that tried.

My fault. I should have refreshed the question. Indeed, OneWeb with Hughes was in power back then, and he thought it would work out, like with the supply of central stations for the RSCC networks in the Ka-band. And Musk was closely watching how this fuss would end. When he realized it, he went the other way. He "swore" with an official letter to the ITU, where Space X pledged to turn off its service on the territory of any country if the company did not have permission to use frequencies in that territory. So far, Musk has not broken this promise. I understand that the Americans can spit on this word and grind it down, but I think that here they will take a perfectionist position. Why do they need this headache if there are a bunch of other ways to communicate. And these satellites already conduct radio reconnaissance, monitoring the air, during their flight over our territory. After all, no one forbids turning off the receivers.

[Blackmokona]

Quote: Zamkadysh

Starlink didn't apply at all. It was its competitor Oniweb that tried.

My fault. I should have refreshed the question. Indeed, OneWeb with Hughes was in power back then, and he thought it would work out, like with the supply of central stations for the RSCC networks in the Ka-band. And Musk was closely watching how this fuss would end. When he realized it, he went the other way. He "swore" with an official letter to the ITU, where Space X pledged to turn off its service on the territory of any country if the company did not have permission to use frequencies in that territory. So far, Musk has not broken this promise. I understand that the Americans can spit on this word and grind it down, but I think that here they will take a perfectionist position. Why do they need this headache if there are a bunch of other ways to communicate. And these satellites already conduct radio reconnaissance, monitoring the air, during their flight over our territory. After all, no one forbids turning off the receivers.

He swore nothing to anyone. And Starlink is now working in Iran, where it is directly banned.

[Zamkadysh]

He never swore anything to anyone.

Okay, I didn't swear, I made a commitment. If you saw SpaceX's application to the ITU with your own eyes and operate with this information, then it is accepted. If not, then I stand by my opinion. Naturally understanding that my sources are not the ultimate truth.

And Starlink is now working in Iran, where it is directly banned.

I am not interested in the territory of Iran. Perhaps there is a precedent, but how everything was arranged is unknown. Whether this will work in the case of the Russian Federation is also not a fact.

[danka111]

Gentlemen, calm down. A problem has arisen - we are thinking about it.
I know for sure, I saw and heard the communication/negotiations of radio amateurs via an enemy satellite - they were able to find a working communication channel.
Now questions:
First - communication via phone. Anyone? Who and how gets the necessary firmware?
Second - how can you overload communication channels? Surely there are bottlenecks in channels and options.
It's probably possible to get there, it just takes time, of course.
I don’t think that everything is hopeless and only TNW will save us.

[Blackmokona]

Quote: danka111

First - communication via phone. Anyone? Who and how gets the necessary firmware?

Any at all. You don't even need to flash it.

Quote: danka111

Second - how can you overload communication channels? Surely there are bottlenecks in channels and options.

It is possible, but the mobile connection will not work.

[bear cub]

An article that the "turbopatriots" really don't like. Especially the part about the long-standing technological lag. It will probably spark a discussion about "what to do." Different ideas will emerge, and ultimately the conclusion will be one - "we must destroy everything." And since the Kremlin doesn't even want to destroy bridges in Ukraine, we can forget about destroying American satellites altogether. And we're back to square one. Much will be said, nothing will be done, someone will steal the money for technology development. And the 5-year technological gap will turn into 10 years.

[alexoff]

Well, there is also a method of placing various bugs in enemy servers through which the channels pass. Or introducing your agents so that they leak all sorts of encryption codes and Comrade Major could intercept the data. You can also set up a normal air defense system without a bunch of holes so that it is not a walk-through yard. It is best to catch agents with your agents. But this is difficult, it is easier to announce that all goals have been achieved, and who is against - that is what the special services know how to work against, this is not about providing a country with communications and not about killing Zelensky

[bk0010]

The next direction could be equipping kamikaze UAVs with Starlink Direct to cell communications to give them the ability to retarget in flight, conduct reconnaissance along the route, and also visually assess the results of a strike when used in a group.

What's stopping you from doing this with regular mobile phones? The GUR buys a bunch of Russian SIM cards (I just can't believe that this is impossible for intelligence) or copies existing ones, charges them for roaming - and there you go. In the European part of the country, we have towers densely packed, and small interruptions in communication are quite bearable.

[DO]

Quote: bk0010

The GUR buys a bunch of Russian SIM cards (I just can’t believe that this is impossible for intelligence) or copies existing ones, charges them for roaming – and there you go.

Yes, it is possible. It cannot be ruled out that the drones flying to Russia today are controlled in this way.
How to deal with this?
1) Obligate operators to cut off roaming to unfriendly countries from which drones fly.
2) If drones are controlled from Russian territory, a special operator service should track the approximate coordinates of smartphones (by the signal level from several towers, or by switching cell towers servicing the smartphone), and if they operate in each intersected cell and move with a suspicious trajectory and speed, turn them off.

[Svetlana]

I propose a means of combating satellites - a disk-shaped thermal airship with a Burevestnik-type nuclear reactor (NR) on board. The airship is equipped with: turbine-generator-compressor (TGC) units, heat exchangers for heat removal from the primary circuit of the NR, heating of gas in the airship shell, heating of air to create jet thrust. The proposed thermal airship, capable of lifting a payload of 200 tons to a height of over 8 km, has the following dimensions. The diameter of the lenticular shell at the equator is 150 meters. The thickness of the lenticular disk of the shell in the center is about 40 m.
The lenticular shell of the hot airship is made of titanium or Kevlar fabric and covered with thermal insulation on the inside. Inside the lenticular shell along its perimeter there is a power torus made of carbon fiber, assembled from individual segments. Outside the lenticular shell, blades in the form of wings 2 m wide, 5 m long, 5..10 cm thick are attached to the torus along the equator to generate lift. Up to 88 blades along the perimeter of the torus make up the blade crown. The blades can be installed in 2 rows according to the biplane scheme. The ends of the blades of the upper and lower rows can be connected in the form of a triangle in the profile to increase the rigidity of the structure. In order to regulate the lift, the blades can be equipped with deflecting flaps.
The helium-air heat exchanger is made similar to the gas-gas non-mixing heat exchanger (precooler), designed to cool the air compressed by the compressor in the mixed air-jet-rocket hypersonic engine Ltd-SABRE, made of Inconel 718 alloy (see Fig. below).
Technical characteristics of the thermal airship with a nuclear power plant: The air heating temperature in the shell is limited to 200..250C, so as not to damage the polyimide internal thermal insulation. The thermal power of the onboard nuclear reactor (necessary to compensate for heat losses through the shell in the amount of 16 MW by heating the air in the shell with a radius of 200 m to 250..75C) must be at least 16 MW. The electric power of the onboard nuclear power plant with a real efficiency of 25% is approximately 4 MW.
The airship uses a fast-neutron nuclear reactor of the Burevestnik type, but with a lead-lithium coolant in the first circuit and a coolant in the second circuit - helium compressed to 200 bar, with a temperature at the head of the air turbine of 555C, the efficiency will be ~20%.
The mass of the nuclear reactor with liquid metal coolant, lead+lithium-helium, helium-air heat exchangers, circulation pumps, recuperator and radiation shielding is 200 tons. The mass of the shell material is 100 tons. The mass of the internal heat shielding made of elastic aerogel on a polyimide base with a density of 0,14 g/cm³, 1 cm thick, glued to the inner side of the shell surface is 100 tons. The total mass of helium turboelectric generators with a closed circuit, air turbocompressors of turbopropfan engines, air electric fan engines of horizontal thrust is 100 tons. The mass of the shell frame structure with a power torus and radial blades fixed to it (to create lift) is 100 tons. In total, the total mass of the airship structure with equipment is 600 tons. The lifting force consists of: 150 t-force Archimedes force at 200C air temperature inside the shell, 650 t-force – lifting force from axial rotation of 88 pieces of wing-blades on the perimeter of the shell with a frequency of 14 revolutions per minute. 200 t-force remains for the useful load that one airship is capable of lifting. In the case of an airplane type of takeoff with a short run, the total lifting force increases by the value of the aerodynamic lifting force of 400 t-force during horizontal flight at a speed of 20 m/s due to the different curvature of the profiles of the top and bottom of the shells.
The duration of a flight of a thermal airship with an on-board nuclear reactor (NR) without reloading nuclear fuel should be at least six months. Cruising range is 360000 kilometers, cruising speed is 98 knots (180 km/h). The carrying capacity of the hot airship is 200 tons. The hot airship is capable of taking off and landing anywhere without ground infrastructure. Takeoff occurs as follows. The nuclear reactor is heated up and the circulation pumps for the liquid coolant of the first circuit of the nuclear reactor are turned on. An auxiliary electric motor spins an air turbine, an air turbocharger, and a propeller fan. The helium turbine unit with compressor and heat exchanger is switched on, and the nuclear reactor is brought to operating power. The shell is filled with hot air from the exhaust of an air turbine. Tangential air nozzles are opened at the equator of the shell to spin the shell. After the specified shell revolutions have been reached, the lifting force of the wings around the perimeter of the airship shell will exceed the weight of the airship, and the airship will take off like a helicopter. After vertical takeoff, the horizontal thrust electric fan propellers, attached above the shell to the upper gondola on pylons, are turned on. After vertical takeoff, the airship flies in autorotation like an autogyro on horizontal thrust engines. In order to increase the horizontal flight speed at an altitude of 8 km to 350..400 km/h, the drag of the shell is reduced by flattening the shell by reducing the length of the hydraulically telescopic rods of the central mast inside the shell, connecting the poles of the shell. The ends of the telescopic rods of the central mast are fixed to the inner surfaces of the shell around its north and south (lower) poles. The lower ends of the central mast are secured at a distance from the vertical axis of the shell greater than the distance from the vertical axis of the shell to the nacelles of the two internal turboprop-fan engines secured on pylons to the side walls of the nuclear reactor compartment inside the shell. To further reduce drag in horizontal flight, the chassis is retracted into the gondola and the wings (located along the perimeter of the equatorial plane of the airship shell) are retracted into the walls of the shell. The upper Peresvet laser unit with a side-looking radar is designed with the ability to be retracted into the upper gondola in an axial opening in the shell. To perform a vertical landing, the chassis and wings are extended along the perimeter of the shell, the shell rotation speed is increased, the thrust of the horizontal thrust propellers is reduced, and the horizontal thrust electric fans are turned on in reverse. After touching the ground, the gondola under the shell is moored to the ground, and by turning the tangential nozzles on the perimeter of the shell, the shell’s rotation is slowed down and stopped. When moored without a hangar, the hot airship can withstand hurricane-force winds of up to 148 km/h. For stronger winds, the separation of the compartment with the nuclear reactor from the shell is envisaged by detonating the pyrobolts securing the platform with the nuclear reactor to the shell. If there is a hangar, the airship is towed into the hangar. The hangar roof is closed after the airship lands in the hangar, and opened before takeoff.
The airship can be serviced without a hangar. The thermal airship is not at risk of icing of the shell, since its shell is warm, so the airship can be used to develop hard-to-reach areas of the Arctic and Antarctic. The volume of the horizontal sections of the gondola under the shell can be used to install weapons on the suspension points - two lower lasers and to store the payload, for example, containers with X-101 cruise missiles. Loading and unloading of launch containers is carried out through the lower opening hatches on the bottom of the gondola and the docking unit. The airship can be equipped with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) with mooring and gripping cable devices that provide docking, returning on board and refueling of the UAV returning from the mission. The airship can be equipped with means for searching for and destroying unmanned boats (UBC), submarines - anti-ship missile systems and vector-phase correlation hydroacoustic buoys lowered on cables, capable of detecting submarines by the atlas of their noise characteristics and phase portraits with the noise amplitude of underwater targets below the background level of sea noise. A solid-state laser on the upper pole of the airship shell with a nuclear missile in the cloud-flight mode is used when it is necessary to blind and eliminate satellites in near space. Unlike hovercraft and ekranoplans, the airship is not afraid of hummocks and hills on the ground. The airship is capable of effectively fighting fires, taking water on board and dumping it into the fire while hovering in the air. Compensation for the weight of the water taken on board is provided by increasing the lift, which grows with an increase in the rotation speed of the airship shell and the blade crown of the wings. Using hot air instead of expensive helium to create lift will reduce the cost of the airship. Compared to airships that use explosive hydrogen to create lift, the proposed thermal airship is safer, since hot air is non-flammable and non-explosive. When fragments hit the shell of a helium airship, helium is lost from the shell irreversibly. The proposed thermal airship uses a renewable resource - hot air, so if its shell is slightly damaged (for example, due to small fragments), unlike helium airships, it is able to reach the landing hangar by increasing the flow rate of hot air supplied to the shell. The duty personnel on board can be changed periodically by landing on a rope from a helicopter hovering above the airship.
A thermal airship with a nuclear reactor on board will not only ensure the delivery of large and heavy cargo from door to door without intermediate transshipments, but will also transport cargo at an unusually low cost per kilogram.

[Svetlana]

View of the lower gondola of the airship with a Burevestnik-type nuclear reactor:

[Svetlana]

Hangar for a disc-shaped airship -
Two rigid quarter-sphere shells are mounted on coaxial
ring railway tracks.
The diameter of the first quarter sphere is slightly smaller than the diameter of the second quarter sphere.
The quarter spheres are made of metal or thin reinforced concrete similar to cooling towers. When the hangar is opened, the quarter sphere of a smaller diameter moves along a ring track and ends up inside the quarter sphere of a larger diameter. The disk-shaped lens of the airship shell is pulled into the center of the circle of ring tracks and then the quarter sphere of a smaller diameter is moved again so that it ends up exactly opposite the quarter sphere of a larger diameter. Then the meridional gap between the quarters, passing through their north pole, is closed. When the hangar is opened, the second quarter sphere can also be moved along the ring track so that the open half of the hangar ends up on the leeward side.

[Andrey_5]

NATO satellites should have been turned off when the green light was given for smart missile strikes on Russia. And this new technology will worsen our situation, potentially dramatically - just like Himars or Starlink did for the BEK - each drone will have a phone and you won't be able to prove that it used Starlink, but it will use it and the effectiveness of strikes will increase significantly. Look at the Black Sea - we have a fleet, but it's no use, even without taking into account the BEK, our flagship feeds the fish, and now all the ships are sitting in the bays or else joining the flagship. Something needs to be done with this Starlink.

[Hole puncher]

Quote: Andrey_5

NATO satellites should have been shut down

With what? With caps?

[Turbuta Dave]

Not with caps... Russia has weapons against satellites.

[Hole puncher]

Quote from Turbuta Dave

Not with caps... Russia has weapons against satellites.

Against which satellites? Located in which orbits?

[Plowman]

Our officials, looking at Elon Musk's success, are not ashamed at all, and no one is going to leave. Money is dripping into both the right and left pockets. Yes, and Chubais is waiting abroad.

[Turbuta Dave]

Jam... Create interference. Knock down... Give false signals.
Russia has many ways to counteract

[SOLO55]

If you teach me how to jam a satellite, you'll get a Nobel Prize

[DO]

Unlike classic Starlink terminals with a directional antenna, which are difficult to jam because the jammer must be located inside the radio beam moving behind the satellite, smartphones of the new Starlink Direct to cell network with an omnidirectional antenna can be jammed with the same classic jammers as regular smartphones, taking into account the frequencies they use.
That is, the problems of jamming Starlink Direct to cell are only in the large number of classic ground-based jammers required to cover Russian regions.
Therefore, most likely, the solution of installing jammers on UAVs and aerostats, including tethered ones, will be suitable for this purpose, since the coverage area of ​​one jammer installed at a high altitude is larger than that of a ground jammer. And over the sea, there is no other adequate solution in sight.

[kig]

And what will the Supreme Council say about this? Are sanctions only good for us?

[SOLO55]

use of nuclear weapons on the territory Ukrainians,resets all starlink benefits

[Chief Officer Lom]

Due to the huge number of Starlink satellites and their relatively low cost, our old anti-satellite weapons are ineffective, it's like shooting down kamikaze drones with S-300 or Patriot missiles. If you can't fry them with a laser from the ground, then maybe it will be possible to do so from an unmanned reusable stratospheric platform equipped with such lasers.
Or declare that the US is violating neutrality in space, and therefore they are guilty of the fact that we are forced to indiscriminately clear low Earth orbits of all satellites (the notorious buckets of shot). Until all this shot falls (in low orbits this is probably at least 10 years), launches will become impossible, Starlink will be swept away, and more old-fashioned satellites in higher orbits will survive, but will not be able to receive replacements. The greatest blow will be received by the US and their European lackeys, who are already our enemies. The only significant victim whose opinion will be important to us is China, which is now seriously engaged in space and at the moment has long been ahead of us there, if you look out from behind the launches of old Soyuz spacecraft redesigned with new components that obscure the real picture.

[Maxim]

aaaa urgent collection? aren't you tired of swinging the audience on the swings?

[North watchmen]

Quote from nordscout

Andrey Mitrofanov outlined an important problem that Russia needs to work on... And the work must be comprehensive: from political to administrative-military, otherwise, we will "have" problems that will make current problems seem like "little flowers in a sunny meadow"....

The only question left is who will organize and lead this work?

[agond]

If a drone is guided by a satellite of another state and attacks objects on our territory, then this looks like an attack or military action, and this probably needs to be discussed at the very least in the UN Security Council.

[Svetlana]

Quote: Vladimir_2U

Quote: Svetlana

How does the modern means of communication - Starlink - work:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAOAbqRiN4A

There is more about how the phased array works. For example, not a word about how the satellite finds the terminal. By direction finding or by GPS coordinates. Plus an error in the assignment of the satellite antennas.
But basically nothing.

How does Sputnik find the terminal? Probably like this:
The terminal knows the trajectory parameters, and therefore the coordinates of each of the 5500 Starlink satellites in real time. This data is entered into the terminal during its manufacture, and then adjusted during each communication session with the satellites, or via a ground communication channel.
The terminal also knows its own coordinates.
The software of the ground terminal selects the closest satellite to the terminal from the entire array of Starlink satellites at a given moment in time, points its phased array at it and sends a message to this closest satellite containing the coordinates of the terminal.
The receiving antenna (PAR) of the satellite receives this message with the coordinates of the terminal, the satellite software points the satellite PAR at the terminal, and sends a beam to the terminal with a response message from the satellite to the terminal.