pervect wrote:

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 08:45:07 GMT, (Derek
Lyons) wrote:

(George William Herbert) wrote:

This is all pretty easy to jam, since the frequencies are
all known beforehand, but that general *approach* is very
hard to penetrate with traffic analysis.

note: This is more-or-less how the SSBN comm system works in fact.

It's hard to penetrate with traffic analysis, yes. However a station
transmitting 24/7 is a station that's easily located, and a station
that will eat a gross of ordinance at H hour + .01 second.

So everyobody goes on red alert as soon as the primary station stops
broadcasting, and the targetting information has to be sent by the
second backup station.

And then the secondary system gets targeted PDQ...

To anticipate some objections, yes, if you get all the backup
stations, you will prevent the sending of the targeting information
(as well as any other sort of C&C activity).

You and Phil, and to a lesser extent George, who should know better,
don't seem to realize that killing the enemy C&C is how the US fights
wars today. The days of grinding towards the Capital worrying only
about the front line and hoping a golden bullet takes out the Leader
are dead and gone. This is 2003 not 1943.

D.
--
The STS-107 Columbia Loss FAQ can be found
at the following URLs:

Text-Only Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq.html

Enhanced HTML Version:
http://www.io.com/~o_m/columbia_loss_faq_x.html

Corrections, comments, and additions should be
e-mailed to , as well as posted to
sci.space.history and sci.space.shuttle for
discussion.