Lennokkien torjunta

[SJ]

Aiheesta lisää:

"U.S. forces are using modern counter drone system in Iraq

U.S. troops are using modern counter drone system in Iraq. The Anti-UAV Defence System developed by Blighter Surveillance Systems Ltd and mounted on U.S. FMTV truck was spotted outside Mosul in northern Iraq.

The AUDS (Anti-UAV Defence System) is a counter drone system that is designed to disrupt and neutralise unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), remotely piloted aircraft systems (RPAS) or unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) engaged in hostile airborne surveillance and potentially malicious activity. The AUDS system combines electronic-scanning radar target detection, electro-optical (EO) tracking/classification and directional RF inhibition capability.

According to the company, the AUDS is a smart-sensor and effector package capable of remotely detecting small UAVs and then tracking and classifying them before providing the option to disrupt their activity. The system may be used in remote or urban areas to prevent UAVs being used for terrorist attacks, espionage or other malicious activities against sites with critical infrastructure.

AUDS Anti-UAV Defence System
According to the group’s own media releases, ISIS carried out dozens of drone strikes already in the month of February.

ISIS has relied on a wide variety of drones to defend its stronghold in the Iraqi city of Mosul — largely “commercial off-the-shelf drones to observe and drop explosives on the Iraqi security force and civilian positions,” coalition spokesman Col. John Dorrian said in early February."

Linkki: http://defence-blog.com/army/u-s-forces-are-using-modern-counter-drone-system-in-iraq.html

vlad

Miten minusta tuntuu, että tuo systeemi vaikuttaa hieman "kevyeltä" meidän käyttöön? Siis tuosta saa vaikutelman, että tuo olisi tarkoitettu jonkin tukikohdan suojaksi, kun naapurin järjestelmät olisi enemmänkin pataljoonan tai prikaatin alueen kattamiseen suunniteltuja, enkä näe etteikö meilläkin tuollainen systeemi saisi kattaa isomman alueen johtuen siitä, että vihollinen voisi maalittaa tykistönsä yksinkertaisesti sillä perusteella, että kyseiselle alueelle ei saa lähetettyä lennokkeja...

 

[ctg]

Miten minusta tuntuu, että tuo systeemi vaikuttaa hieman "kevyeltä" meidän käyttöön?

Koska se on ensimmäisen sukupolven dronen torjuntaan kehitetty vehje. Mutta kuitenkin miten voidaan tehdä antennista ja elektroniikkapaketista sotilaallisesti seksikäs kokoonpano?

 

[John Hilly]

USA:n ilmavoimat hankkii droneja pudottavia haulikkojen verkkopatruunoita
Juha-Pekka Tikka
4 tuntia ja 6 minuuttia sitten (päivitetty 3 tuntia ja 46 minuuttia sitten)
Pentagon varustautuu pikapäätöksillä eri tavoin kauko-ohjattavien lennokkien torjumiseen.

• 
  
  Verkkojen ampuminen haulikolla ei ole suuremmin yleistynyttä teknologiaa.
  
  (Youtube)

The Drive kertoo USA:n ilmavoimien hankkivan kokeiluun erityisammuksia. Niissä haulikolla ammutaan verkkoja, joilla voi pudottaa mahdollisesti isompaa vahinkoa tuottamatta lähistöllä lentävät dronet eli sotilas- tai tiedustelukäytössä olevat lennokit.

Verkkoammuksilla on looginen ja tuttu nimi: SkyNet.

Pentagonin kerrotaan tehneen hankinnasta pikapäätöksen uhan vuoksi, jonka pienet lentävät koneet muodostavat "elintärkeille kansallisen turvallisuuden tekijöille". Yleensä vastaavaa fraasia on käytetty ydinaseiden yhteydessä.

 

[fulcrum]

Lennokien torjunta onnistuu tietysti käteviten riittävän tehokkaalla ilmatorjuntaohjuksella:


200 euron pikkulennokki ammuttiin alas 3 miljoonan euron Patriot-ohjuksella

 

[Sardaukar]

Lennokien torjunta onnistuu tietysti käteviten riittävän tehokkaalla ilmatorjuntaohjuksella:


200 euron pikkulennokki ammuttiin alas 3 miljoonan euron Patriot-ohjuksella

Israelilaiset ovat olleet aina Patriotin käytössä ahkeria, ammuskelevat vanhentuvia varastoja pois. Tässä yksi esimerkki, joka ei mennyt ihan putkeen:

http://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-we-tried-and-failed-3-times-to-bring-down-drone-over-golan/

 

[ctg]

A research team figured out that they could fool accelerometers using sound waves—in particular, a single tone played at an accelerometer’s resonant frequency. With it, they can cause two signal processing components within the phone to generate a false report of the accelerometer’s behavior. The group is led by Kevin Fu of the University of Michigan and includes collaborators from the University of South Carolina.

Patrick McDaniel, a security researcher at Pennsylvania State University, says the security risk of the particular scheme devised by Fu’s group is low. But the broader problem is a big one in the industry: Devices and software programs tend to blindly trust any data gathered from built-in sensors.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/tech-talk/...e-accelerometers-can-be-fooled-by-sound-waves

They found that 75 percent of the accelerometers could be fooled by an attack that allowed them to slightly alter the sensors’ signals for a brief moment, and 65 percent were vulnerable to a more severe attack that allowed the team to control their signals indefinitely.

Fu says he hopes the work—which he calls a proof of concept—will start a conversation in the industry: “We need to question, why do we trust our sensors?” he says.

Their trick was possible because sound waves impart a physical force to any object they encounter. The University of Michigan team essentially used the vibrations produced by sound waves to alter accelerometers’ records of what was happening to them.

An accelerometer contains a physical mass placed on springs. When a device moves, the mass does too. The movement causes the capacitance—the ability to store charge—to change in the springs, which can be interpreted as movement. By producing vibrations through sound waves that moved that mass in a particular way, the group launched a series of attacks on the unsuspecting sensors.

The group first had to identify the resonance, or preferred frequency, of each accelerometer. At the resonance frequency, each sound wave reinforces the action of the previous one on the mass—leading to a much larger signal than you’d get at other frequencies. To find the resonance of the accelerometers, the team played tones at progressive frequencies from 2 kilohertz to 30 kilohertz, until they found a frequency where the accelerometer produced an outsized reaction.

Next, the team subjected the sensors to two types of attacks using sound waves at the resonant frequency. The first, called output biasing, exploits a feature of the low pass filter, a signal processing component that filters out high frequency interference. This technique can be used to slightly alter readings produced by the accelerometer for several seconds.

 

[ctg]

 

[ctg]

One of the latest developments in small arms are anti-drone guns. With the increasing adoption and use of unmanned vehicles, the need for a portable handheld weapon system capable of destroying them becomes more and more important. I won’t be surprised if we see world’s major armies adopting such weapons in near future (at squad or platoon level).

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2017/04/11/russia-start-anti-drone-gun-trials/

http://antikopter.ru/perenosnoy-kom...apparatov-grazhdanskogo-naznacheniya-pkp-bpla

 

[John Hilly]

Jenkit testanneet Strykeriin asennettua 5kW laserasetta lennokkien torjuntaan.

With no bullets, MEHEL shoots drones from sky
By C. Todd LopezApril 13, 2017

1 / 4 Hide Caption – Spc. Brandon Sallaway, a fire support specialist and forward observer from Fort Carson, Colorado, points to a sticker on the side of the Mobile High-Energy Laser-equipped Stryker he helped evaluate, April 12, at the 2017 Maneuver Fires Integrated Experiment at Fort Sill, Oklahoma. The stickers represent the number of drones the MEHEL has shot out of the sky using a 5kW laser. Sallaway was the first Soldier to actually use the MEHEL to take down a target. (Photo Credit: C. Todd Lopez) VIEW ORIGINAL

2 / 4 Hide Caption – The Joint Tactical Autonomous Resupply System, or JTARS, is designed to move materials from the rear of the battlefield to the front line, without requiring a manned convoy operation. This JTARS vehicle flew two low-weight individual first aid kits a short distance, as part a demonstration of the system, April 12, during the 2017 Maneuver Fires Integrated Experiment at Fort Sill, Oklahoma. (Photo Credit: C. Todd Lopez) VIEW ORIGINAL

3 / 4 Hide Caption – This Mobile High-Energy Laser-equipped Stryker was evaluated April 12, during the 2017 Maneuver Fires Integrated Experiment at Fort Sill, Oklahoma. The MEHEL can shoot a drone out of the sky using a 5kW laser. (Photo Credit: C. Todd Lopez) VIEW ORIGINAL

4 / 4 Hide Caption – This unmanned aerial vehicle is one of many that were destroyed by the 5kW laser aboard the Mobile High-Energy Laser-equipped Stryker that was evaluated during the 2017 Maneuver Fires Integrated Experiment at Fort Sill, Oklahoma. The MFIX ran April 3 through 13. (Photo Credit: C. Todd Lopez) VIEW ORIGINAL
FORT SILL, Okla. (Army News Service) -- A Stryker combat vehicle equipped with a 5kW laser and an array of sensors spent several minutes scanning the horizon for a wayward "enemy" drone.

On a television screen in a nearby tent off Thompson Hill -- a range used during the 10-day Maneuver Fires Integrated Experiment here -- observers watched the black and white output of those sensors on two flat-screen televisions April 12. A crosshair was centered on the screen. When what appeared to be a drone entered the frame, the crosshairs locked on to it and followed it.

After a few attempts to destroy the drone with the laser, the drone fell from the sky -- crashing to the ground. Not a bullet was fired, and no sounds were made by the system that accomplished the kill -- an experimental project called the Mobile High-Energy Laser, or MEHEL.

The MEHEL is just one system the Army is looking at to deal with the growth of inexpensive off-the-shelf unmanned aerial systems that are being seen in places like Iraq and Afghanistan.

Loput linkissä https://www.army.mil/article/186025?g

 

[ctg]

 

[John Hilly]

Israel käytti järeää kalustoa, Patriot -ohjusta lennokin alasampumiseen torstai-iltana Golanilla.

IDF uses Patriot missile for the first time to down drone from Syria
The IDF shot a Patriot missile at a drone that entered Israeli airspace from Syria. This was the first time that the IDF has ever launched a Patriot missile.
Apr 27, 2017, 8:15PM Becca Noy

For the first time ever, the IDF shot a Patriot missile at a drone that entered Israeli airspace from Syria. The incident occurred this evening (Thursday) at around 8:00 PM. The drone was intercepted above northern Israel.

The IDF confirmed the report and instructed the residents of northern Israel to continue their normal routines. “The Patriot Aerial Defense System intercepted a target above the Golan Heights,” the IDF Spokesperson wrote on Twitter.

Photo Credit: Reuters/Channel 2 News
Initial report: The Patriot Aerial Defense System intercepted a target above the Golan Heights.

— IDF (@IDFSpokesperson) April 27, 2017
Earlier today, Syria and Hezbollah accused Israel of carrying out an airstrike in Damascus, which caused extensive damage to a Syrian Army airbase located near the Damascus International Airport.

http://www.jerusalemonline.com/news...s-drone-from-syria-with-patriot-missile-28133

 

[Mustaruuti]

Tämän voisi laittaa melkein hyviä uutisia Suomesta -ketjuun.

Pieni suomalaisfirma on saanut hyvän jalansijan osana jenkkien anti-UAV kehitystyötä.

Käytännössä kyseessä on setti automatisoituja ohjelmistoradioita, jotka havaitsevat UAV:n, paikallistavat sen, paikallistavat etä-operaattorin sijainnin ja ottavat myös UAV:n hallintaan.

http://www.defensenews.com/articles/counter-drone-firm-sensofusion-gains-strategic-foothold-in-us

Sensofusion Oy, the Finland-based counter-drone measures company, has gained an important foothold in the U.S. market for military defense systems against UAVs in the wake of a landmark contract reached with the U.S. Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory and the Defense Innovation Unit Experimental, or DIUx.

The deal will initiate continued development of Sensofusion’s Airfence proprietary technology, which is set to be integrated as the core of the lab’s counter-drone system.

Airfence has undergone three years of military testing with real-world tactical scenarios. The anti-drone system is equipped to automatically detect, locate, track and take over UAV controls. In addition, Airfence is able to locate the UAV operator with pinpoint accuracy in real time.

Sensofusion is hoping to utilize a large percentage of the revenues generated from the commercialization of the Airfence system to both establish a fixed research and development unit presence in the United States and expand its product development operations — serving global markets — in its home Finnish market
Airfence is currently protecting military bases and high security sites in Finland and across Europe ; these include senior government officials, according to Kaveh H. Mahdavi, Sensofusion’s chief operating director.

"It is our intent to position Airfence as the go-to hardware/software of choice for protecting U.S. troops, government officials and civilians," Mahdavi said.

The rapid expansion in use of commercially available unmanned aerial systems is driving Sensofusion’s revenues. Sales are being driven by elevated interest from armed forces, homeland security and civilian customers, including military sites, prisons, government buildings, airports and critical infrastructure such as power plants.

Airfence is positioned to become "a vital component" in integrated air defense systems, said Tuomas Rasila, Sensofusion’s CEO. The company plans to deepen its collaborative partnership with NATO, particularly in relation to the alliance’s anti-terrorist operations.

A next-generation Airfence is being developed to deliver a broader array of functions, including providing surveillance data and intelligence gathering for troops in combat theaters.

Rasila described the agreement reached with the Marine Corps lab and DIUx as having a "significant monetary value." Financial terms of the agreement were not disclosed.

"The deal with the Marine Corps means Sensofusion will start hiring more product developers in Finland ," Rasila said.

The Airfence anti-drone system can be customized for use in the ongoing fight against the Islamic State group in the Middle East and during potential attacks by ISIS using weaponized drones in rural urban areas in Europe and North America

https://www.sensofusion.com/

 

[ctg]

Mitä vittua? Takavarikoi aseet, miksi?

Hämeen poliisilaitos tutkii vaaran aiheuttamisena tapausta, jossa Asikkalassa kesämökillään ollut mies ampui kuvauskopterin alas haulikolla. Lähistöllä oli ollut käynnissä mainosvideon kuvaukset, jossa oli käytetty kopteria.

Kopterin käyttäjä oli menettänyt näköyhteyden koneeseen sen lennettyä puiden taakse. Koneen suunnasta oli kuulunut kaksi laukausta, ja yhteys kopteriin oli katkennut. Paikalle tullut poliisipartio meni tontille, jonka yläpuolella kopteri oli hävinnyt.

Tontilla oli mies, joka kertoi ampuneensa kopteria, koska se oli tullut hänen tonttinsa yläpuolelle. Mies kertoi kokeneensa kopterin häiritseväksi ja ampui sen omistamallaan haulikolla alas.

Poliisi takavarikoi haulikon sekä muut miehen omistamat aseet. Hämeen poliisilaitokselta kerrotaan, että poliisin tietoon ei aiemmin ole tullut Päijät-Hämeen alueelta tapausta, jossa kuvauskopteria olisi ammuttu.

https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-9673827

 

[SJ]

Mitä vittua? Takavarikoi aseet, miksi?

https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-9673827

Toisaalla oli maininta, että asiaa tutkitaan vahingontekona.

 

[Herman30]

Ei kai dronekopterin alasampuminen ole sallittua vaikka kuinka vituttaisi? Joten järkeenkäypää että aseet takavarikoidaan ainakin tutkimuksen ajaksi, voihan olla että ampuja saa ne takaisin. Tai sitten ei. Ampujalla ei ilmeisesti tullut mieleen että lennokin omistaja saattaa kutsua poliisit.
Liian kuumapäinen jolloin ehkä ei ole sopiva aseenomistajaksi?

 

[DM]

Miten itse reagoisitte, jos jokin drone alkaa pyörimään teidän tontilla/ikkunan takana häiritsevästi? Ihan vaan ajatusleikkinä.

 

[kimmo.j]

Miten itse reagoisitte, jos jokin drone alkaa pyörimään teidän tontilla/ikkunan takana häiritsevästi? Ihan vaan ajatusleikkinä.

En alkaisi ampumaan sitä, vaan soittaisin 112 ja tekisin ilmoituksen.
Kuten @Herman30 hyvin totesi, vitutus ei ole ole mikään syy paukauttaa aseella, oli sitten kohde mikä tahansa.

 

[SJ]

Miten itse reagoisitte, jos jokin drone alkaa pyörimään teidän tontilla/ikkunan takana häiritsevästi? Ihan vaan ajatusleikkinä.

Soitto poliisille on oikeastaan ainoa vaihtoehto.

Siis en näe mitään tilannetta jossa minkään "häiritsevän" jutun ampuminen spontaanisti olisi ainakaan tässä maassa sallittu.

 

[SJ]

En alkaisi ampumaan sitä, vaan soittaisin 112 ja tekisin ilmoituksen.
Kuten @Herman30 hyvin totesi, vitutus ei ole ole mikään syy paukauttaa aseella, oli sitten kohde mikä tahansa.

Tuosta tulee muuten mieleen, että tuolle kopteripilotille se soitto 112:een voi aiheuttaa ihan kohtuullisen määrän harmia virkamiestaholta. Ei ihan sitä määrää mitä kaikki aseisiin viittaava aiheuttaisi, mutta joutuupahan kuitenkin selittämään kaiken juuria jaksaen.

 

[Fremen]

Miten itse reagoisitte, jos jokin drone alkaa pyörimään teidän tontilla/ikkunan takana häiritsevästi? Ihan vaan ajatusleikkinä.

Ilmakivääri? Varsijousi? Ei selkeästi ollut käyttäjänsä kontrollissa enää, aiheutti vaaraa miehen perheelle mahdollisesti. Tonttiin tulis. V-mäinen liike lennättelijältä soittaa kytät paikalle ja eskaloida homma ihan tarpeettomiin mittasuhteisiin. Ei jatkoon.