The Issue Of Military Radar? (archival thread reposting #2)

[serak_the_preparer]

Below follows a thread from before Uplink's second, latest and most drastic purge of old material yet:<br /><br />The Issue Of Military Radar?<br /><br />As I locate such items, I intend to continue to post them to the forums, as my own time allows.<br /><br />If you have any links - now no longer working, of course - to old threads, please feel free to forward them (along with any other relevant information) to me through a Private Message. If I can resurrect a decent thread, then I will. Since the administrators of this site will not take responsibility for looking after older threads, it looks like it is up to us, the members.<br /><br />So here's a blast from the past!<br /><br />(Well, actually, it's from only five months ago - not that far in the past, really.)<br /><br />~Serak the Preparer (Interstellar Culinary Specialist, Retired Pong Champion, Mad Archivist)

 

[serak_the_preparer]

decius<br />(<font color="red">asteroid</font><br />02/10/04 07:27 PM<br /><br />Ever so often, the rancorous topic of active SETI comes up in this forum; I shan't rehash the arguments for either side. However, I think opponents should consider the fact that our military radars are indeed powerful enough to be picked up over great distances, unlike our leaked FM transmissions:<br /><br />Excerpt:<br />"A rather easier task would be to detect our military radars. The bigger ones typically boast a megawatt of power, and are focused into beams that are a degree or two across. There are enough such radars that, at any given time, they cover a percent of the sky or so. The signal from the most powerful of these could be found at 50 light-years’ distance in a few minutes time with a receiving antenna 1,000 feet in diameter. Indeed, these military radars are the only signals routinely transmitted from Earth that are intense enough to be detectable at interstellar distances with setups equivalent to our own SETI experiments."<br /><br />link:<br />http://www.space.com/searchforlife/seti_shostak_aliens_031023.html<br /><br />So, thoughts?

 

[serak_the_preparer]

a_lost_packet_<br />(<font color="yellow">comet</font><br />02/11/04 01:05 AM<br /><br />That's a very interesting point. I'd like to hear from our resident commo guys. After reading some posts on other threads, I am quite sure they are familar with the subject.<br /><br />a_lost_packet_

 

[serak_the_preparer]

ccpoodle<br />(<font color="blue">planet</font><br />02/11/04 09:20 PM<br /><br /> I got some RADAR experience about 50 years ago. The RADARS of that time are the signals that are arriving at points about 50 light years from Earth. I agree a very advanced SETI will detect these pulses. At that time most RADARS used magnatrons which produced a burst of noise a few hundred nano seconds long which repeated at exact intervals of a few milliseconds. Since the RADAR dish rarely panned faster than two degrees per second, there is a fair chance that ET's SETI will receive a burst of these pulses lasting a few seconds. A repeat from an identical RADAR will be very rare the same week and could occur any time in the next century, so confimation by a distant SETI station is improbable unless they are looking in exactly the same direction (on the same frequency) at the second the burst arrives. Sentience is surmised because the spacing of these pulses is very precise, the width of each pulse is quite precise, but the the amplitude of the pulses will vary considerably because circular polarization was used almost exclusively. Detecting circular polarization is a bit more difficult, but the precise progression of the rotation between the pulses is another indication of sentience. I think some of the new RADARS use this same setup, but an unknown (to me)percentage use Kysitrons and traveling wave tubes (Klsitrons produce coherent signals rather than noise bursts) and a quite different setup which may not be public knowledge as it is typically classified Secret. These typically have not traveled more than 10 or 20 light years, but they may be detectable by advanced ET up to 100 light years away near the end of this century. I suggest slaving several Seti searches a few thousand miles

 

[serak_the_preparer]

ccpoodle<br />(<font color="blue">planet</font><br />02/11/04 09:51 PM<br /><br />I read the link. The only surprise was the 1000 foot dish antenna needed to receive our strongest radars of 1954. Other things I had read made me think a few hundred feet would surfice.<br />One additional thought is Earth's atmosphere and ionized layers and magneto sphere rarely prevent RADAR signals from reaching space (or ET signals fror reaching our surface receivers), but they do scatter the RADAR beam a bit and on rare occasions focus it into a tighter beam. Also they tend to add a jitter, due in part to multi path reception. Neil

 

[serak_the_preparer]

decius<br />(<font color="red">asteroid</font><br />02/12/04 10:21 PM<br /><br />I used to live near an AFB, and all I know is that the beam was so strong that you could hear a short hiss on the car stereo when the beam swept across you.<br /><br />I'm surprised there aren't more people interested in this...

 

[serak_the_preparer]

pizzaguy<br />(<font color="orange">solar system</font><br />02/12/04 10:46 PM<br /><br /><font color="yellow">I'm surprised there aren't more people interested in this...</font><br /><br />Oh, we are. But the past 10 days have been 10 or more hours and a LOT of physical work - so I, for one, just havent' been around for more than the now-and-then snappy remark to assorted UFO / Flying Dragons fans!<br /><br />Here's a link for you: Oh, no!<br /><br />As I have implied, you won't like what you read if you want to believe E.T. is listening to us.

 

[serak_the_preparer]

ccpoodle<br />(<font color="blue">planet</font><br />02/13/04 01:44 PM<br /><br />I looked at the Oh no link. It appears to be good science even though most everyone is a more optimistic about the success of near term SETI. I find only a few minor areas to nit pick. 1 leakage is not issotopic = omni directional with equality, I think. 2 worse the directivity is typically in the direction of the customer who is typically on or below the horizon of Earth, so five million watts typically looks like 1/2 million watts or less (Due in part to partial absorbsion in the atmosphere and ionized layers) in most directions off planet. This is mostly corrected in one direction in which Earth's atmosphere and ionized layers (does the magnetosphere also focus to some extent?) focus the leakage into a moderately tight beam that could have an effective radiatived power as high as five million watts. This beam however, jitters, fades and flutters as it rotates though 360 degrees per day as the Earth rotates. This means that ET may receive Earth only a few seconds even if ET can detect one picowatt per square KM = 1E-18 watts per square meter. This further justifies my suggestion for several slave SETI receivers spaced a few thousand miles apart to allow instant confirmation of very brief sentient signals.<br />100,000 watts in the moderately tight beam, illuminating an average of 1/10 th picowatt over an area of 1E18 square kilometers is equal to a square one billion kilometers on each side, hardly more than the area of our inner solar system. The signal strength will not be equal through out the illuminated area, so ET's SETI may only be able to detect during fast moving hot spots. Neil

 

[serak_the_preparer]

doitnow<br />(<font color="red">asteroid</font><br />02/14/04 12:17 AM<br /><br />In the old days, radar was sent and received using one wavelenght or half wave length systems. Now days they are down to one fourth wave length. or smaller.<br /><br />During the cold war, the USAf would fly up anddown the coast of Russia. They would sample the radar signals of the Russians. The Russians did maintenance in rotation the same team did them all. The Americans could tell where the team was at by the quality of the signal.<br />The Air Force crews would find a poor system that needed to be repaired. They would head toward the radar sight at top speed. Whe the radar lock on to them, they headed back out to sea.<br />MIgs would chase them, but the rule was that if they were out to sea you could only give them the finger and take each others pictures.<br />Yes the Russians did the same thing. We had to move our super sonic jets up to Alaska. They would come 100 miles inland as they could easlily out run our slow F102s<br />We had one in sight with the F106 in chase, and he was easy prey but he was almost out of our air space. He was safe<br />Radar has changed now, doppler and then the space radar.

 

[serak_the_preparer]

pizzaguy<br />(<font color="orange">solar system</font><br />02/14/04 07:18 PM<br /><br /><font color="yellow">In the old days, radar was sent and received using one wavelenght or half wave length systems. Now days they are down to one fourth wave length. or smaller.</font><br /><br />Have you been drinking?

 

[serak_the_preparer]

serak_the_preparer<br />(<font color="orange">solar system</font><br />02/18/04 11:23 AM<br /><br /><i>"A rather easier task would be to detect our military radars.... The signal from the most powerful of these could be found at 50 light-years’ distance in a few minutes time with a receiving antenna 1,000 feet in diameter...."<br /><br />So, thoughts?</i><br /><br />Very good point about military radars being our most detectable EM signals.<br /><br />Posted a long time ago to the WOW Signals thread: Explanation for WOW signals? Contains a link to Brian von Konsky's excellent page on signal detection. From that web-page:<br /><br /><i>With present instruments, it would only be possible to detect the occasional stray radar beam, or similar high power, narrow beam transmissions....</i><br /><br />[Leaked signals]<i> would be intercepted signals produced by high power military or range finding radar. We would have to be extraordinarily lucky to detect, recognize and confirm a high power radar signal of extraterrestrial origin....</i><br /><br />So perhaps back in 1977 Ohio State University’s 'Big Ear' radio telescope picked up a military radar signal? One of ours, reflected from some distant body, or someone else's from much farther away?<br /><br />Since such detections are bound to be one-off events, accidental in nature, their lack of repetition ensures they will not be confirmed.<br /><br />Here's something to ponder. What if our later attempts to detect a repeat of the WOW! signal in Sagittarius had been successful? How would we respond? By signaling back as soon as possible? Or by studying the source as thoroughly as possible, t

 

[serak_the_preparer]

Another thread archived and rescued from oblivion!<br /><br />That is, at least until the next purge. But now that the forums have been completely wiped, there shouldn't be a need for another big purge for a couple of years. Which at least gives members here some breathing space.<br /><br />Meanwhile, if you run across a thread with interesting discussion and information, or if you help to create one, it might not be a bad idea to save it either on some alternative site out on the Web or on your own computer.<br /><br />And, as of now, this thread is open for business. Ready for either perusal or participation, if anyone is so inclined.<br />: )<br /><br />Best wishes,<br />~Serak the Preparer (Interstellar Culinary Specialist, Retired Pong Champion, Mad Archivist)

 

[a_lost_packet_]

WoW!<br /><br />Thanks Serak! If I get you a black tophat, can you pull a rabit out of it too? <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br /><cheers /><br /><br />Any chance you archived the whole board? <looks up hopefully /><br /><br /><br />a_lost_packet_<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[serak_the_preparer]

<i>Were you aware that the military of the US classified the civilian radar images of the crash of TWA flight 800?<br /><br />...<br /><br />Second, when Air Egypt flight 999 crashed off Long Island, both the BBC and Al Ahram asked why the US military classified all civilian radar records that night? Didn't know that did YOU?</i><br /><br />Yes. It was done to prevent persons suspicious of the government from conducting their own - it was feared - amateurish and misleading unofficial investigations. Were the records ever released and made public?<br /><br /><i>Military covers up their accidents and misadventures all the time....</i><br /><br />But not just the military. Wouldn't you say that's true for almost everyone?<br /><br /><i>Look at the 1950's atomic weapons tests on soldiers....</i><br /><br />Shameful, true. As well as other low-points, such as the infamous Tuskegee experimental trials, conducted without the benefit of informed consent. Still, no matter where you go, unblemished records are hard to come by, don't you agree?<br /><br /><i>The "Humanist " published several years ago on its Freedom of Information request on Lee H. Oswald, that they got a W-4 from 1964 showing he was a federal government employee. They might have forgotten to pull the document. Esp. if the the INS can issue Mr. Atta, who crashed the first plane in the WTC tower, a legal visa for travel to the US in 4/2002.</i><br /><br />Okay, okay, I get it! Actually, I don't place blind faith in giant corporations, governments, military and intelligence organizations, religious institutions, cults, etc., either. I'm familiar with Lord Acton's warning that the greater the power, the greater potential there is for corruption.<br /><br />But what has any of this to do with military radar pulses being picked up by SETI receiving equipment?

 

[serak_the_preparer]

The sight of A_Lost_Packet_ does me good, and I'm glad the sight of an old thread does you some good, as well.<br />: )<br /><br />Well, unfortunately, the answer to your question is no. But I'm doing the best I can. My strong suit ain't computers, sad to say. : (<br /><br />Still, if you've got an old dead URL or two to former Uplink threads sitting in your browser, please ship whatever you've got to me via Private Message. Or post it to Old Posts Archive. Along with any information about the threads once linked to by those URLs. And I'll give it my best shot.<br /><br />I know there are real IT people somewhere around here who could do a better job bringing back bits of the old Uplink. If you're out there, reading this, and are willing to part with a little of your free time, your help would come in real handy. [hint, hint]<br /><br />Now don't forget about that black tophat - I'm willing to try anything!

 

[a_lost_packet_]

<font color="yellow">Still, if you've got an old dead URL or two to former Uplink threads sitting in your browser, </font><br /><br />Brainstorm!<br /><br /><winces as his brain flexes weakly /><br /><br />Google archives data! It may be possible to get a few thread pages by doing simple Googles. Sure, we'd not be able to interact, but we could get something out of it.<br /><br />I guess I'm just "reaching" a little too much. I haven't had any coffee today.. that must be it. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /><br /><br />I'll see what I can dig up. Tks again Serak.<br /><br /><br />a_lost_packet_ <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>

 

[skyeagle409]

Steve wrote:<br /><br /> />>>Actually it wasn't. It was done to cover up the fact in TWA flight 800 that the military had shot down an American passenger airliner during an election year.<<<<br /><br />Steve,<br /><br /><br />The incident concerning TWA flight 800 was centered inside its center fuel tank. The tank was basically empty and I've seen up close as to what had happened to a C-141 when a circuit breaker of a malfunctioning booster pump to one of the right wing fuel tanks was pushed. The right wing exploded and it was later found that the affected wing was drained to 25% capacity thus exposing exposed wires inside a corroded conduit to JP-4 fumes. I had mentioned before that it was lucky for the crew the explosion did not take place in flight since the plane was due to fly a local training mission that evening. As it was, the incident took place on the flightline and no one was killed nor injured. The insulation on the wires leading to the boost pump was stripped due to vibration acting on the conduit at the point where corrosion created a jagged hole. The B-747 was not shot down nether was the Egyptian B-767. BTW, have you ever heard of NOTAMS? What were the NOTAMS on the day of the incidents in the general location of the crash sites? <br /><br />A former member of my unit was also involved in the investigation of TWA flight 800 and he mentioned nothing to me about any missile strikes upon the aircraft.<br /><br />

 

[serak_the_preparer]

Stevehw33 -<br /><br /><i>The problem is with such electronic warfare the military uses, and the EMP weapons they are now testing (Air Egypt flight 999?), it'd be hard to be sure . . . that it was not some kind of weapons test, or anti-missile test.</i><br /><br />Advances in weapons technology are interesting enough. But this material might get more action over on the Space Business & Technology, Missions & Launches, or Free Space forums.<br /><br /><i>For all we know it's Tesla's signals which will be detected first by ETI's.</i><br /><br />My own opinion is that this is unlikely. The chances of random signals from our planet passing through the civilization of aliens on another planet are not very high. That the civilization also has the technology for picking up such signals, is using it for that purpose, and is looking right at our signal as it arrives - those are even worse odds. If they do spot the signal, will they actually recognize it for what it is? If they suspect they've picked up an artificial transmission and continue to observe that point in the sky to await confirmation via further signals, they will be disappointed. Neither Tesla nor anyone else has repeatedly sent signals toward the same point in space. They will receive a Wow! Signal of their own - from us! And that's only if they're extremely lucky.<br /><br /><i>I'll see what I can dig up. Tks again Serak.<br /><br />a_lost_packet_</i><br /><br />A_Lost_Packet_<br /><br />Excellent! Another recruit for the army of the mad archivists. Now we're getting somewhere!<br />: )

 

[nexium]

If a beam weapon delivers a million watts to one square meter (= 100 watts per square cm) on an aircraft, the surface will warm a few hundred degrees the first second and vaporize in perhaps 20 seconds, but can the illuminated spot be held steady for 20 seconds? If the beam scatters half the energy outside the one meter spot, and the spot reflects 80% of the energy, then the beam weapon needs to transmit ten megawatts to deliver one megawatt. That might achevable for a low speed craft at very high altitude where the air is very thin or at very close range where the beam path is short enough to scatter only half the energy output of the beam weapon. 1000 megawatts in a very narrow beam, makes the beam weapon very effective, but a beam that tight tends to scatter according to some experts, and is extremely costly to produce. Neil

 

[a_lost_packet_]

<font color="yellow">I'll see what I can dig up. Tks again Serak. <br /><br />a_lost_packet_ </font><br /><br />DOH! I found some stuff but didn't post it! LOL. I'll see if I can find it again. I think I saved it but not on this 'puter. :/<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1">I put on my robe and wizard hat...</font> </div>