All things GPS (recommendations, tips, etc.) - merged

[MOOXE]

There are many factors that can cause a GPS receiver to present the wrong information to the user, and spoofing is only one of the myriad ways. Environmental effects, atmospheric conditions, electrical/mechanical issues. Something as simple as having the antenna covered and not noticing the "MSF" warning ...

If you use a civilian GPS and it gets spoofed or jammed, you are responsible personally. If you brought your own personal rifle to battle and it jammed and became useless in the heat of combat, what then? If you use a DAGR or PLGR and its spoofed or jammed you are not so much at fault for leading your patrol (just for the sake of an example) off course because those devices have built in measures to guard against that. The limitiations of your own military kit is not totally your fault. By using civilian kit you are taking on full responsibility when you should not. By the way, almost every condition you noted that affects a GPS can also affect a compass.

To imply that they will replace the map and compass (as a primary means of navigation) is not also heretical, but downright foolish.

I am thinking in the future. To say the map and compass will still be our primary means of navigation in 2090 is kind of foolish. The GPS technology we use should be made good enough to replace the map and compass. The GPS system is far more accurate. It will not replace the map and compass though untill we are confident that they will never lose power, nor be jammed or spoofed.Take this example. Does a pilot of an 747 or a CF-18 cross reference his position with a physical map? I am pretty sure they dont, they have redundant systems to make sure the electronic systems are always accurate. This is what the military will eventually develop.

As an aside, a GPS without a map (whether it is old school paper or a hi-tech map embedded in a GPS) is pretty much useless, as it only tells you on earth where you are, based on radio signals.

Why is the map on a DAGR useless? Its an exact scan of our MGRS 1:50,000 maps, geoplotted. You can plot a route on the DAGR using the maps, and using the satellite guided compass you can find your way to a point without using a physical map. Like I said though myself, your limited on battery power, you do need a map to cross reference your position to.

is unsound: too many people think that, due to all the fancy gear that we have now, there is no requirement to use good voice procedure (using reference points or veiled speech rather than using plain speech to give friendly positions). That is based on the assumption that "they" don't have the technology to crack our technology (remember the Germans and their "impenetrable" codes???) or use captured equipment to monitor our comms. A civilian GPS that might be spoofed is no more or no less dangerous (and I would argue far less dangerous in most cases) than someone who insists on sending friendly information in clear under the misguided notion that our "secure" comms won't be monitored or  breeched by "them".

The dangerousness of it would all depend on the situation and what value you put into those you lead. A GPS can be spoofed, leading people into an ambush. Guided munitions can be spoofed sending 2000lb bunker busters on civilian targets. Unencoded radio traffic can lead the enemy to one of our patrols.

I think maybe you meant by far less dangerous, was its far less likely to happen? If so, you are still wrong. Its easier to jam a GPS signal since its so weak by the time it hits earth, and its not uncommon. Our TCCCS gear pumps out high wattage and is harder to jam.

 

[ZipperHead]

If you use a civilian GPS and it gets spoofed or jammed, you are responsible personally. If you brought your own personal rifle to battle and it jammed and became useless in the heat of combat, what then? If you use a DAGR or PLGR and its spoofed or jammed you are not so much at fault for leading your patrol (just for the sake of an example) off course because those devices have built in measures to guard against that. The limitiations of your own military kit is not totally your fault. By using civilian kit you are taking on full responsibility when you should not. By the way, almost every condition you noted that affects a GPS can also affect a compass.

I'm not really sure what the issue whether one brings a rifle into battle that was made by the lowest bidder (issued by the CF: you have far too much faith in the procurement process to think that everything that we purchase is the absolute best) or a rifle that one bought at the store (perhaps the best that was ever built) has to do with anything: the net result is you are likely dead. Are they going to put your corpse on trial?? The issue (in my mind) is that all equipment, from low tech: a paper map can get wet and soggy, and thereby useless, if it isn't protected; to high tech: a GPS can be spoofed, jammed or the power can run out, can be rendered useless and a contingency plan must be in place. We can go around and around in circles saying that one shouldn't use a civilian (read as: non-issued kit) GPS when there is an issued one available. I think what has driven this (and similar) posts is the issue of availability: people will buy (and use) unauthorized kit when they feel that issued kit is inadequate. I myself have bought 2 civilian GPS's (one I lost or had stolen.... not sure which) and have used both IN TRAINING. I have not deployed overseas since I have purchased a GPS, but I know for a fact I will bring one if/when I do. I am capable enough in my abilities (at map reading and utilizing a GPS) to know when I would use or discard the information presented to me. Maps can be (and have been) wrong, and so can the information presented on a GPS screen. The wise man knows when to decide what to do when the occasion arises.

I am thinking in the future. To say the map and compass will still be our primary means of navigation in 2090 is kind of foolish. The GPS technology we use should be made good enough to replace the map and compass. The GPS system is far more accurate. It will not replace the map and compass though untill we are confident that they will never lose power, nor be jammed or spoofed.Take this example. Does a pilot of an 747 or a CF-18 cross reference his position with a physical map? I am pretty sure they dont, they have redundant systems to make sure the electronic systems are always accurate. This is what the military will eventually develop.

I am pretty sure that pilots do indeed cross reference a physical map (the battery life on a paper map is pretty good, I hear  8) ) when they are in doubt. Relying on redundant systems exclusively is not unlike relying on a birth control pill to be 100%. When there are 100's of people's lives at stake (747) or the mission is critical (CF-18) I suspect that the good ol' paper map will likely trump an electronic system (or 2) that says you are over the North Pole, when you are actually looking at palm trees.

As for accuracy, trying to plot a 10 figure grid (with or without a GPS) on a 1:1000000 scale map is pretty much useless. A GPS can give you a 10 figure grid, and unless your map is to a scale that you can ensure that your pen stroke (plotting your position on said map) doesn't end up being 500m wide (due to the map scale) doesn't mean much. I have only had a cursory look at the map that comes up on a DAGR, but I have downloaded maps onto my Garmin, and I can tell you that the resolution on that device (the Garmin) leaves a lot to be desired. High resolution (enough to show outstanding detail, such as contour lines, terrain features like streams, swamps, tree lines) will require HUGE amounts of memory, to the point where you would likely only be able to fit a 1 or 2 KM square map into the DAGR. Again, I don't know the technical specs of the DAGR, and have only quickly seen the map output when my buddy was taking the course recently) but the resolution is no where near what a 1:50000 map will present, let alone higher quality maps would have. Prove me wrong, and I will admit it. Actually, I have the DAGR course package on my work computer, and can check Monday for technical specs, so don't try to pull the wool over my eyes. I'm old, but crafty.

The dangerousness of it would all depend on the situation and what value you put into those you lead. A GPS can be spoofed, leading people into an ambush. Guided munitions can be spoofed sending 2000lb bunker busters on civilian targets. Unencoded radio traffic can lead the enemy to one of our patrols.

I think that if I were to blame a GPS (issued or otherwise) on leading me into an ambush, I would expect to shot with a ball of my own shite. Blaming technology for something like that is like blaming McDonald's for making you fat: pretty friggin' pathetic.

The dangerousness of it would all depend on the situation and what value you put into those you lead. A GPS can be spoofed, leading people into an ambush. Guided munitions can be spoofed sending 2000lb bunker busters on civilian targets. Unencoded radio traffic can lead the enemy to one of our patrols.

And encoded radio traffic couldn't lead the enemy to one of our patrols?!?! If it transmits, it can be received, by anyone. The information might be encoded, but the signal is still detectable. You just have to have the right resources. And estimating that the enemy doesn't is dangerous.

I think maybe you meant by far less dangerous, was its far less likely to happen? If so, you are still wrong. Its easier to jam a GPS signal since its so weak by the time it hits earth, and its not uncommon. Our TCCCS gear pumps out high wattage and is harder to jam.

I think that the wattage of a satellite vehicle pumping out it's data is pretty high: it's just that it weakens as it reaches the earth. As it goes for our radios: the further out one gets from the transmitter, the weaker the signal gets, no? As an example, I could be 20-30 km (or further) from the transmitting station. Would it not be possible for an enemy jamming station nearer to my location overpower the original transmission and thereby jam me? It's all relative.

Anyway, we're two dogs going after a different bone (to paraphase an old homey saying): you will think that you are right, and do what you do, and I will do what I think is right. It's a matter of living with the consequences. Hang me from the highest yardarm if you catch me using unauthorized gear, and you can be hung from a yardarm of equal height for relying on technology that fails. I think that one needs to utilize the best available technology, whether it is low tech (an accurate map) or super high tech (a GPS that tells me where the nearest beer store is). Just read this story as a cautionary (and amusing) tale about relying on the fancy-dancy gear: http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/20/uk-drivers-trust-gps-more-than-their-own-eyes/

Al

P.S Before you consider me a Luddite, consider that I am considered somewhat of a SME at my job (Armour School) in regards to the technology that the Armour Corps employs (tell me that isn't disturbing, as I am on the wrong side of 30) and I am the Simulation NCO for the Armour School, and I work all day on computers and other technology. I just like to think that I have seen technology fail enough to realize that you have to be able to rely on more tried and true means when the poop hits the fan. I might not be getting smarter, but I hope I am getting wiser.

 

[MOOXE]

The dangerousness of it would all depend on the situation and what value you put into those you lead. A GPS can be spoofed, leading people into an ambush. Guided munitions can be spoofed sending 2000lb bunker busters on civilian targets. Unencoded radio traffic can lead the enemy to one of our patrols.

And encoded radio traffic couldn't lead the enemy to one of our patrols?!?! If it transmits, it can be received, by anyone. The information might be encoded, but the signal is still detectable. You just have to have the right resources. And estimating that the enemy doesn't is dangerous

I am comparing civilian GPS to unencoded radio traffic.

I think maybe you meant by far less dangerous, was its far less likely to happen? If so, you are still wrong. Its easier to jam a GPS signal since its so weak by the time it hits earth, and its not uncommon. Our TCCCS gear pumps out high wattage and is harder to jam.

I think that the wattage of a satellite vehicle pumping out it's data is pretty high: it's just that it weakens as it reaches the earth. As it goes for our radios: the further out one gets from the transmitter, the weaker the signal gets, no? As an example, I could be 20-30 km (or further) from the transmitting station. Would it not be possible for an enemy jamming station nearer to my location overpower the original transmission and thereby jam me? It's all relative.

Thats exactly the point I made.

I am pretty sure that pilots do indeed cross reference a physical map (the battery life on a paper map is pretty good, I hear  ) when they are in doubt. Relying on redundant systems exclusively is not unlike relying on a birth control pill to be 100%. When there are 100's of people's lives at stake (747) or the mission is critical (CF-18) I suspect that the good ol' paper map will likely trump an electronic system (or 2) that says you are over the North Pole, when you are actually looking at palm trees.

Consider using a paper map when travelling at 600km an hour. You'd need a huge scale map, which in the end, wouldnt give you an accurate grid. Does a CF-18 pilot have room to break out a 1:250,000+ scale map while flying? I am assuming not. They may have maps on them, but they are probably for when they bail out. In any case, maps in an aircraft would be backups, not your primary means of navigation. Not to mention, at 40,000ft it may be hard to determine exactly what grid your flying above by using a paper map.

A DAGR can hold a monochrome scanned image of any type of map. If these maps are geoplotted fully, placing your cursor over any map feature will give you details about it.

Like you said, if your willing to take the risks, and endure whatever punishment may result in that, they by all means.... however...

you can be hung from a yardarm of equal height for relying on technology that fails.

That is a pretty bold statement. The term technology goes beyond what this thread is about. For example, theres alot of tech in an M777 artillery piece, if I rely on that to get rounds on target, and it fails due to a breakdown thats not my fault. Technology is everything (like a rifle), not just electronics.

 

[GO!!!]

MOOXE,

I'm with Allan on this one.

Quite frankly, I call BS on your assertation that the Taliban will use GPS spoofing to lead us into an ambush. While on ptl, nearly all leaders of any stripe travel with a map in one hand, or a clearly defined reference point for navigation. I'd say 99% of infantry Privates could instantly tell you your location on a 1:50K map with less than 200m of error, just by the terrain and a good prior map recce (part of BP).

We would notice if all of a sudden, our GPS units stated we were on a different road or grid square than we were previously on. Nobody I know navigates with their nose buried in a GPS. They are unreliable, civvie and military alike.

Finally, we all know how adept our own CF EW has become at screwing us, in the CF around. Jamming, recreating voices, locating recce patrols, spoofing civvie GPS units - congratulations, you have justified your budget.

Now what are you doing to the enemy? When and where has it been confimed in an open source document from a reputible source that precision munitions were jammed by a target? When and where has a friendly patrol been led into an ambush by GPS spoofing? If it's so very easy and cheap to do, it should be happening all the time - right? But it's not - is it?

My intuition tells me that your answer will be "it's happened, but it's all a big secret". Your arguments are based nearly exclusively in the realm of theory, and the successes (spoofing a GPS) have happened under completely artificial conditions (CF Bases).

 

[MOOXE]

Quite frankly, I call BS on your assertation that the Taliban will use GPS spoofing to lead us into an ambush. While on ptl, nearly all leaders of any stripe travel with a map in one hand, or a clearly defined reference point for navigation. I'd say 99% of infantry Privates could instantly tell you your location on a 1:50K map with less than 200m of error, just by the terrain and a good prior map recce (part of BP).

I never said will. The fact is that using an unencrypted GPS will make you more vulnerable to spoofing and jamming. Not everyone buries thier head in a GPS, but definetly not everyone references a grid taken from a GPS on a map every time. By your theory, I would think everyone is.

They are unreliable, civvie and military alike.

Military GPSs are reliable. They are especially reliable when you cross reference thier grids on a map. Like I said before, a GPS can give you a 10 figure grid with an error of +/- 5meters. The most unreliable thing about a GPS is the operator. Weather and power come 2nd and 3rd.

When and where has it been confimed in an open source document from a reputible source that precision munitions were jammed by a target? When and where has a friendly patrol been led into an ambush by GPS spoofing? If it's so very easy and cheap to do, it should be happening all the time - right? But it's not - is it?

The DoD and News sites, cite examples of this (jamming) happening in combat, they also cite vulnerabilities of GPSs and reprucussions of using unencrypted recievers. Do a search for them, the ones quoted are not secrets. Spoofing is not easy and cheap to do to encrypted GPSs, I did not say this. Jamming is easy and cheap to do. Spoofing is easier on civilian GPSs. The Hezbollah broke into Israeli communications and exploited that very effectivley. It may not have been GPS but never the less, technology exists to break into radio communictions. Thats all GPS signals are, radio signals.

The very fact that we have anti-spoofing and encryption on our GPSs is testament to the fact that we've realized a threat and made provisions to stop it. We use encryption in our conventional radio traffic, so why wouldnt it be needed for GPS signals? If you believe that it will never happen (spoofing/jamming), or that it can even happen at all, then by that theory you should be transmitting in the clear on your radio. Remember, we are only talking about radio signals here. The only difference is a radio trasmits voice, a GPS satellite transmits data, if they are both in the clear, they are readable, spoofable and jammable. This is a fact that does not need documentation to back it up. You need documents and justification to back up your claim that it will never happen.

 

[GO!!!]

Military GPSs are reliable. They are especially reliable when you cross reference thier grids on a map. Like I said before, a GPS can give you a 10 figure grid with an error of +/- 5meters. The most unreliable thing about a GPS is the operator. Weather and power come 2nd and 3rd.

If my PLGR was a reliable piece of kit, I would not, like thousands of other CF soldiers, have purchased my own. The DAGR is significantly better, but my e-trex still tracks more quickly and accurately, even when the DAGR has y-band enabled.

The DoD and News sites, cite examples of this (jamming) happening in combat, they also cite vulnerabilities of GPSs and reprucussions of using unencrypted recievers. Do a search for them, the ones quoted are not secrets. Spoofing is not easy and cheap to do to encrypted GPSs, I did not say this. Jamming is easy and cheap to do. Spoofing is easier on civilian GPSs. The Hezbollah broke into Israeli communications and exploited that very effectivley. It may not have been GPS but never the less, technology exists to break into radio communictions. Thats all GPS signals are, radio signals.

You stated it - substantiate it!
We all know jamming can be done, and we all know when we are being jammed - VHF/HF/GPS etc. Encryption does'nt prevent jamming on any system.

The Hezbollah/Israeli comparison sounds useful, but is'nt. Keep in mind that Israel is only 21 miles wide - that means a amplified, vehicle mounted 522 could cover half of Israel and Lebanon at the same time if centrally located. There are also significant civilian centers covering both of those states, making it harder to find the perpetrators. Afghanistan, being a tad bigger, would require thousands, if not hundreds of thousands jammers to be effective. Once again - what works in theory does'nt always work in real life. Additionally, Lebanon has the infrastructure and circumstances to support this (a reliable power grid, educated population, small landmass, short conflict etc.) Apples and Oranges.

The very fact that we have anti-spoofing and encryption on our GPSs is testament to the fact that we've realized a threat and made provisions to stop it.

No, we bought it because it is the NATO standard, GPS encryption is so that the civvie side GPS signals can be "turned off" while the military ones are not, to prevent the enemy from gaining an advantage from a friendly system.

We use encryption in our conventional radio traffic, so why wouldnt it be needed for GPS signals? If you believe that it will never happen (spoofing/jamming), or that it can even happen at all, then by that theory you should be transmitting in the clear on your radio.

Negative. VHF/HF transmissions from friendly sources actually contain information that can be used proactively by the enemy to harm us. Locations, compositions etc. GPS transmissions come from a satellite, and are recieved by us on the ground, and require application to reality on the ground to be useful. Hence the name "GPS reciever" That's why radio traffic transmissions are encrypted but GPS reception is not. You understand the difference between a transmission and reception - right?

To simplify further - satellite GPS transmissions contain nothing secret - the ones we get in Wx are the same ones we get in Afghanistan - and even my e-trex has the deliberate error patch that the transmissions have downloaded and installed.

 

[MOOXE]

If my PLGR was a reliable piece of kit, I would not, like thousands of other CF soldiers, have purchased my own. The DAGR is significantly better, but my e-trex still tracks more quickly and accurately, even when the DAGR has y-band enabled.

A PLGR is as accurate as any other GPS. We buy our own because the PLGR is big, not readily available to all troops and barely anyone in the CF has been trained to use them.

The Hezbollah/Israeli comparison sounds useful, but is'nt. Keep in mind that Israel is only 21 miles wide - that means a amplified, vehicle mounted 522 could cover half of Israel and Lebanon at the same time if centrally located. There are also significant civilian centers covering both of those states, making it harder to find the perpetrators. Afghanistan, being a tad bigger, would require thousands, if not hundreds of thousands jammers to be effective. Once again - what works in theory does'nt always work in real life. Additionally, Lebanon has the infrastructure and circumstances to support this (a reliable power grid, educated population, small landmass, short conflict etc.) Apples and Oranges.

You assuming way to much. You dont have to jam an entire country. You just have to jam the area someone is operating in. You only need some batteries and a transmitter to make a jammer thats effective for miles. The references below will show you how easy it is to buy and emply either a jammer or spoofer.

Encryption does'nt prevent jamming on any system.

You are right, and so was I. There are systems on the DAGR that help you through jamming. It helps prevent you from losing your current grid.

and we all know when we are being jammed - VHF/HF/GPS etc

No you dont. Jamming just isnt a flood of white noise. It can be selectivly jamming 1 callsign, it can be jamming your net for 1 second out of every 5. Jamming can mimic atmospheric conditions

Negative. VHF/HF transmissions from friendly sources actually contain information that can be used proactively by the enemy to harm us. Locations, compositions etc. GPS transmissions come from a satellite, and are recieved by us on the ground, and require application to reality on the ground to be useful. Hence the name "GPS reciever" That's why radio traffic transmissions are encrypted but GPS reception is not. You understand the difference between a transmission and reception - right?

Reception in this case, is the act of recieving a signal. Its not something you encrypt. The signal is encrypted but not the recepionn. What exactly are you trying to say? The GPS does recieve an encrypted signal. I am very aware and knowledgable of radio theory, since its ingrained in my trade (SigOp). I am also a GPS instructor, and I do know these GPSs vulnerabilities inside and out.

GPS signals can be "turned off" while the military ones are not

Its called selective availability.

Anyways, there is an unlimited number of references on the internet to the vulnerabilities.

http://www.navcen.uscg.gov/gps/geninfo/Volpe%20Slides.ppt#257,1,Slide 1
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/pana/draft-anjum-pana-location-requirements-00.txt
http://www.homelandsecurity.org/bulletin/Dual%20Benefit/warner_gps_spoofing.html
https://www.afspc.af.mil/news/story.asp?storyID=123017018
http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/global_security/space_weapons_Section_11.pdf

 

[GO!!!]

Uh huh.

Still waiting for even one documented instance of GPS spoofing that resulted in anything bad happening. We all know the vulnerabilities and possibilities - my point is that it has'nt happened yet, and probably won't. We could also point out that the bad guys could triangulate our positions with intensity measuring equipment bought at radio shack and launch model airplanes equipped with video feeds and nerve agent to kill us all live on Al Jazeera - but it's highly unlikely.

Try to make the distinction between vulnerable and probable the difference is huge.

The closest reference there is states something to the effect of Use of GPS jamming equipment by the Iraqi military during Op Desert Storm was readily identified and neutralised by US forces...

 

[MOOXE]

Uh huh.

Still waiting for even one documented instance of GPS spoofing that resulted in anything bad happening. We all know the vulnerabilities and possibilities - my point is that it has'nt happened yet, and probably won't. We could also point out that the bad guys could triangulate our positions with intensity measuring equipment bought at radio shack and launch model airplanes equipped with video feeds and nerve agent to kill us all live on Al Jazeera - but it's highly unlikely.

The closest reference there is states something to the effect of Use of GPS jamming equipment by the Iraqi military during Op Desert Storm was readily identified and neutralised by US forces...

If you read back, I never said specifically that a GPS was spoofed and something bad resulted. (Its not theoretically possible. It is possible, its been done - I did not mean in battle vs Taliban..) I am saying thats its possible, and civilian GPSs are vulnerable to it. To open this up a bit, think about ankle bracelets for people on parole. The bracelet can be left in the home, with a spoofer sending a false signal, can something bad happen?  I'll make you a bet. With the millions of GPSs out there, I'm sure theres been spoofing, and I bet something bad did happen.

Try to make the distinction between vulnerable and probable the difference is huge.

You can learn from your mistakes, or you can act on intuition and avoid them.

 

[GO!!!]

So, you've gone from this;

You should NEVER, EVER use a civilian GPS in theatre for any operational goals. Not ever! A civilian GPS is very suseptible (sp?) to jamming and spoofing. Would you take the risk that your GPS can be spoofed? The result being that your leading a patrol into an ambush. If you were lucky enough to survive you'd no doubt be punted from the military since you willfully placed men and women in danger because you ignored what is right. At the very least that should be your driving factor, if the men and women behind you are not. This is pure negligence towards your duty and brethren. Think about it another way. Are you using your cellphone to call in grids of friendly positions? Well if you think that is bad, then by this same reasoning a civilian GPS is bad.

To this;

If you read back, I never said specifically that a GPS was spoofed and something bad resulted. (Its not theoretically possible. It is possible, its been done - I did not mean in battle vs Taliban..) I am saying thats its possible, and civilian GPSs are vulnerable to it.   I'll make you a bet. With the millions of GPSs out there, I'm sure theres been spoofing, and I bet something bad did happen.

I'm sure your dire warnings impress recruits in Borden/Kingston/Pet wherever you are, but you were just reduced from stating the first paragraph to "betting" that something bad happened "out there" somewhere.

If we're ordered to use a certain piece of kit, we'll do it, but you have yet to give a good reason why.

 

[MOOXE]

I did not reduce to anything. I have proved that you are vulnerable and stated the worst kind of repercussions possible. You have to take that knowledge, weigh the risks you have to take to accomplish a mission, and go from there. If you need to learn from someone elses mistakes, or by your own mistakes that you are vulnerable, then so be it.

I can read between the lines and I do get your tone, it is adding nothing to the debate and will only serve as a warning to the mods to lock this thread.

 

[ZipperHead]

At risk of making this us a GO!!! and Al vs MOOXE dogpile (which one would argue it already is), I think that the point that GO!!! and I are trying to make is this: users of all GPS receivers (whether it is a Garmin or a PLGR/DAGR) need to realize the strengths and limitations of the equipment. As GO!!!! (and I in the past on this and other equipment) has pointed out, there are MANY people who have bought their own civvy GPS receivers, for any number of reasons: lack of kit issued, shortcomings in the issued kit (the PLGR is far from user friendly) and the relative low cost of the civilian equivalent. This just doesn't touch on the GPS issue, it spans almost all the kit at the personal level: gloves, sunglasses, slings, pouches, knives, you name it.

I would also argue that GO!!! and I are at the pointy end when it comes to the use of this gear, so we know what we need, and no amount of ranting by a GarriTrooper or other assorted PONTI's telling us what we should be using will sway us. I am not directing these slurs at you specifically MOOXE, but you are starting to stray into that territory with your blind devotion to the mantra of "Thou will not use unauthorized kit , because it is BAD!!!!!". As an example, as a CRV (combat recce vehicle) or tank commander, I would take a trace on a 1:50000 map, with all the requisite information required for my mission plotted or written on it. IF I had the time during BP, I would input critical information (WP's, alerts, RV's, etc) into my PLGR/DAGR. And then I would use the PLGR/DAGR as a "You are here" device as a BACKUP, to confirm my location. As GO!!!! mentioned, one can't have one's face jammed into a PLGR screen reading off data, because I have to be focussed on fighting my vehicle, sending information higher, looking for bad guys, trying not to get led into an ambush  : etc. The level of accuracy that you harp about (+/- 5 meters) is irrelevant when I only need to be in the 100-200m ballpark for my own position, as we are moving so quickly that wasting time plotting anything more than a 6 figure grid is pointless. When we set up an OP (with or without our surveillance gear), yes, accuracy is more important, and the PLGR is invaluable, but a skilled crew commander or patrol commander would easily be able to get a 6 (or even 8) figure grid by reading terrain features. And even at that, the difference between a 6 and 8 figure grid is only 100 meters, which is meaningless in the work that we do. Arty, yes. Geomatics, yes.

Until somebody in your camp (the NO unauthorized kit) camp can come up with documented concrete proof that these things (spoofing, jamming, etc) have happened, ease off on the rhetoric. It is very reminiscent of when I joined (late 80's) and everyone talked about the SIU (Special Investigations Unit, the secret squirrel branch of the MP world) and how they were everywhere, just waiting to bust people for drugs, theft, spying, etc. It was all very Big Brother-ish, and I suspect a deliberate ploy by The Man to make everybody paranoid so everybody would be good little boys. I think that GO!!! and I (and the countless other people who have used unauthorized kit) are big enough boys to know that we are liable for our own actions, and given the choice, we would prefer that the system provided us with the tools that we require to do our jobs effectively. I suspect people like yourself (MOOXE) would have gone to your deathbed stating how great the Ross rifle was (http://www.firstworldwar.com/atoz/rossrifle.htm) even when soldiers on the ground went after the Lee-Enfield (horrors!!! an unauthorized weapon) however they could.

Once I get trained on the DAGR, I may very well change my tune, and leave my Garmin in my follow on kit, but I will likely bring it with me anyway, as I don't have to hump my gear, and the Garmin will serve as a very good Plan B backup if my DAGR gets eaten by the Turret Monster, dropped and lost while dismounted, or even as a backup for the backup. Putting too much faith in any equipment is a dangerous thing, particularly when it is life or death.

As an aside, MOOXE, I'm not taking your arguments personally, nor should you take mine personally: I know that you are just stating the risks involved (with using civilian GPS units), but shrill proclamations without concrete proof are wasted on anybody who knows better. Yes, state the facts and the THEORETICAL risks, but don't be so naive as to think that trained, mature soldiers wouldn't call bunk on these airy-fairy concepts without proof. I wouldn't want to be the first death caused by (or the one that causes soldiers under me to die)  using a civvy GPS unit willy-nilly, but nor would I want to be in the same position using a DAGR/PLGR and not knowing that they also have limitations (they aren't any good to you if you don't have one, or aren't trained in their use).

Al

 

[MOOXE]

but shrill proclamations without concrete proof are wasted on anybody who knows better.

The references prove anything that needs proving. The refs also state that the equipment to spoof or jam GPSs is readily available and easy to use. EW vs GPS has been used in the Middle East and theres no reason to say it wont continue to happen. Why a concrete example is needed is confusing to me when I have provided concrete proof that the risk exists. When I say you must weigh the risks involved, the risks may be so minute that using a civilian GPS is ok. The rule of thumb is, dont use them.

I can see by the underlaying tone that our goals are different. I am simply trying to make you aware of the risks invloved. Using insults to make your point, even though you make make the point they are not directed at me is a failure on your part to substantiate your message. A good debate would have none of those undertones. But thanks anyway.

 

[MedCorps]

Interesting reading...

The civilian GPS, God only knows that I have used it, both in and outside of Canada.

This thread got me thinking (oh, oh).  How easy would it be for someone to jam / spoof us.  Not being nearly the EW geek that some of my friends are, I e-mailed one of them...

Re-printed with his full knowledge. 

---

F* yeah, it could be a problem. 

This bad boy is one of the problems:  http://www.qsl.net/n9zia/wireless/gps_jam-pics.html

The Russians have lots of these things, and they don't seem to have very good kit control on them, so they keep poping up all over the place.  I suspect some Russian coy commander is selling them in exchange for money to feed his people.  The ranges in the TECHINT report are a little off, but not THAT for off (guess, never tested one). 

Because I don't read Ruskie (all that well) I would go COTS if I was going to do this..

http://www.grove-ent.com/rac02.html

This is as good as any product.  Or if I could find my toolbox in this crap hole I could build one.  Anyone with a little bit of electronics / electical eng training could.  Anyone who can wire up a RF det for a IED could build one.  I am not going to mail you the plans ;-) but here is where people have mentioned the issue before.  If you really care, you surf the web, I am sure you can find the plans.  Range might be an issue, and dependent on a bunch of factors it might be easier to detect than other COTS / Aviaconversia ones I mentioned.

http://computerworld.com/securitytopics/security/story/0,10801,77702,00.html

You mentioned that it was easy to find a GPS jamming single.  Again, without getting into details of current capabilities in the EW world, I would mention this article, which shows that it is a pain in the rear:

http://www.gpsworld.com/gpsworld/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=43404

Write more often!  I miss these e-mails

---

Cheers,

MC

 

[ZipperHead]

but shrill proclamations without concrete proof are wasted on anybody who knows better.

The references prove anything that needs proving. The refs also state that the equipment to spoof or jam GPSs is readily available and easy to use. EW vs GPS has been used in the Middle East and theres no reason to say it wont continue to happen. Why a concrete example is needed is confusing to me when I have provided concrete proof that the risk exists. When I say you must weigh the risks involved, the risks may be so minute that using a civilian GPS is ok. The rule of thumb is, dont use them.

I can see by the underlaying tone that our goals are different. I am simply trying to make you aware of the risks invloved. Using insults to make your point, even though you make make the point they are not directed at me is a failure on your part to substantiate your message. A good debate would have none of those undertones. But thanks anyway.

Where are these examples that you speak of?? Better than half of the references you gave talk about civilian use of GPS (in cars, for advertising, etc). An example of this happening to Allied forces (or the Israelis) would be a nice rebuttal. Again, I don't doubt that it is possible: I fact, I know that it is very easy to do, since anybody with access to the Internet has the plans at their fingertips. But show me one case of where it has happened. When (if) we start going up against the Chinese, I might be more concerned, particularly with them messing with satellites, but I think that using our current frame of reference, A'stan, will prove that it is very unlikely. Don't underestimate your opponent, but don't turn them into 7 foot tall, invincible giants, either.

Since the risk is "so minute, the use of civvy GPS is OK". But don't, because it's a rule of thumb. OK. I sense a career in politics for someone after their military service. 

And here is a thought: wouldn't someone who is spoofing and/or jamming GPS signals be transmitting (on a widely known frequency, no less) and thereby susceptible to our side taking action? I agree, again, that it is possible (jamming/spoofing), but again, has it ever been used against any Allied forces, or is it only in theory possible?

I think that we can agree on one point: education is critical. Too many people are unaware of exactly how their PLGR/DAGR works (a good chunk don't even realize it works via simple radio waves), and are far more likely to be lead astray, whether by a simple loss of signal (due to not having antenna in good position/location) or inability to tell when the damn thing is acting up. I'm sure that there have been people lost on operations, and then proceed to blame their GPS/PLGR/DAGR for getting them lost, because they spent more time reading the display, and less time referring to terrain, landmarks, and their map. Which brings me back to: a sound knowledge of map and compass is critical to using equipment such as this, as an over reliance on technology without the low tech skills is a recipe for disaster. People have fallen so much in love with the PLGR (and soon the DAGR) that there is (was?) only a cursory knowledge of map and compass taught to recruits, and then a dump truck load of PLGR trg. A PLGR without a map is near useless (I have done training using only waypoints input into the PLGR, and then navigating from WP to WP without a map, but that was on a more advanced course (Armour Recce Specialist Course)). Again, the DAGR, from what I have heard, read and seen, is a step forward, but I don't think that we'll be getting rid of paper maps for some time (call me a dinosaur.....).

Al

 

[Garett]

Yes I did a search.

So, I'm looking to jump into modern times by buying a GPS.  I've read all the posts on a few websites about makes and models but can't find anything definitive on rechargeable vs. good old AA's.  I'm thinking a rechargeable GPS would be ideal but probably too hard to recharge on a long exercise or extended operation, especially if dismounted.  Any advice from those in the know?

 

[old man neri]

How bout a GPS with rechargeable AAs, it would seem to be the best of both worlds. Just make sure if you do this to get the Ni-MH batteries.

 

[HERC]

Definitely go with something that uses normal batteries and not a specialty battery proprietary to that particular unit.  All the general purpose Garmins use AA.  That way if you're in a pinch you can buy batteries.

Like mentioned above get some rechargeable NiMH batteries 2500 milli-amp hour or higher.  These don't develop a memory but should be cycled at least three times to get their maximum capacity out of them.  Drain completely, charge and repeat.  The cold will affect these batteries and give you less operating time but generally you'll be okay, especially if you turn the unit off and keep it in your pocket.  Or, get a unit with an external antenna and hang it off your pack or mount it if used with a quad or sled.

I use my GPS units a lot in the winter and I just stick it in my pocket when not in use.  The acquire satellites quite quickly when powered up.  This works okay for position checking but won't work too well if you're trying to track your exact route.

Cheers,  Shayne

 

[gaspasser]

Not meaning to be old school and all but I'm sure some of the Inf School fellers will back me up.
Learn how to read a map and compass.  Become an expert to the point where you don't need the compass.
No need for batteries.

 

 

[GO!!!]

Always get the disposable batteries option.

Others may differ, but I find it easier to carry a bunch of double As in my gear than a generator and extension cords.  ;D

On some exes I've been on, we have been without power for more than a week in a patrol base etc.

And yes, being a flawless navigator is always the best method, but I find most of the "human GPS" guys I know really just know the training areas really well. You can never have too many backups, this is just another tool with a time and place to use it.