Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military From: garyb@hcx1.ssd.csd.harris.com (Gary Barton) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: CNN & battelfield communications Message-ID: <1991Jan19.040859.4587@cbnews.att.com> Date: 19 Jan 91 04:08:59 GMT Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker) Organization: Harris Computers Systems Division, Fort Lauderdale,FL Lines: 88 Approved: military@att.att.com From: garyb@hcx1.ssd.csd.harris.com (Gary Barton) In article <1991Jan18.003548.8604@cbnews.att.com> you write: > > >From: att!druhi!fidder > > >Question on battelfield communications. > >I was under the impression that when we attacted Iraq that all forms of >electronic communication would be jammed. How is it that CNN was able >to do live broadcasts even during the actual raids ? I know that CBS >was asking the same question, and that CNN made the comment that either >side could shut them down at any time (which apparently the Iraq's have >done). >From listening to their descriptions, I think it's clear that they had some sort of battery powered transmitter, perhaps even a small satellite uplink of some sort. More realistically, I expect they used a lower power radio transmitter to get out of Iraq and into one of the neighboring countries (S.A.), where the signal was picked up and forwarded into an open phone line. I base this observation on the fact that while they had a two way capability, it was clear that when they were talking from Baghdad, they could not receive any inbound questions. They got around this by occasionally pausing and prompting the Atlanta based personnel for questions. I would guess, at that point they would release the mic, and listen for incoming messages. As for why they how they found a channel that was not being jammed, I am uncertain? However, I doubt if we have the technology to jam all frequencies over an area the size of Iraq. More realisticallly, we were probably jamming frequencies in small tactical areas, during bombing runs, etc. However, Baghdad is certainly one of the areas I would expect we would be jamming in and around... > >A related question is why was the supprise so apparently complete ? It >is not like we didn't advertise that we were going in soon after the 15th... >Is it possible that the first wave took out all the primary communication >channels (except CNN ofcourse), and that the field commands had no >authority to strike back on there own ? What weapon systems would have >been used on the communication links ? > According to various sources, the military commanders believe the Iraqi air force is hiding out. Speculation is that they will attempt to ride out the initial storm, and wait for time when they stand a chance of surviving long enough to cause some trouble. For example, given the choices below which would you choose? a) Throw everything at them during the initial attacks knowing that you will be at an extreme disadvantage in air-to-air combat, particulary at night. b) Preserve what you can with the intent of using your planes to harass attempts to support allied ground forces later. This might be able to prolong the conflict on the ground, which is certainly going to more costly to your enemy than a large air battle. Of course these are extreme strategies (with an obvious slant toward my position) and in reality they could just be holding back, waiting for a good time for a counter air attack. Regardless, most people believe that whatever their strategy, Iraqi air force will eventually be decimated. Given the choice of losing a quick and relatively painless air battle versus the possibility of increasing the cost of a ground war, I think they'll opt for the latter. Perhaps we are seeing the initial stages of the worlds first guerilla air war ;-) On a side note, after seeing the video of what was apparently a Patriot missle going after and stopping an incoming SCUD, I began to wonder if this was lucky shot, or if the system could really be effective against ballistic missles. SCUDs may not be the world fastest missiles, but this apparent success is still amazing to me. While I realize that this is a relatively new system, if anyone can point me to some unclassified references describing this system and its capabilities, I would be very appreciative. -- +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ | Gary Barton | System Software Development | | Lead Engineer | Harris Computer Systems Division | | garyb@hcx1.csd.ssd.harris.com | 2101 W. Cypress Creek Rd. | | gbarton@ssd.harris.com | Ft. Lauderdale. FL 33309 | | uunet!hcx1!garyb | (305) 974-1700 | +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++