Build a passive radar with software-defined radio
spectrum.ieee.org
spectrum.ieee.org
Modern SAM systems are said to have the capability to track targets passively, for example by using reflected DVB-T transmissions. This is very important because combat aircraft have radar warning receivers, and it's best to not tell the enemy you're engaging him so that he can use countermeasures or perform evasive manoeuvres. Also SEAD/DEAD (suppression/destruction of enemy air defenses) is near impossible unless you can first locate the enemy air defense radars, which becomes a lot harder if you cannot simply home in on strong RF emitters.
Haven't heard a lot of talk about this one yet, but the video at https://youtu.be/GZAbPsT3oRM?t=12 looks really promising.
Now imagine if you had a constellation of thousands of orbital satellites with precisely known positions...say Starlink. Will ground stations even be a thing as passive anslysis matures?
The next major war will probably see a destruction of most or all of those satellites, and consequently a multi-century pollution of the low earth orbit with extremely fast deadly debris. Multiple countries already have anti-sat weapons, and they're even getting deployed to "3-rd party" countries. For example American ballistic missile defence installations in Europe (Aegis-ashore).
Fair enough. I guess if you need to hit back you got to give yourself (or your trackers) away.
Scary what your saying about anti-sat though. That really would put the kibosh on space exploration.
Imaging Radar : https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imaging_radar
'WiFi radar/imaging' : <https://html.duckduckgo.com/html/?q='WiFi radar/imaging'>
From there, the next step is to hide the ones that seem to line up with ADS-B data, and show only what's left, and that would be all the "black" flights...
If a position has poor accuracy and is shown as "mlat" it' multilaterated based on when multiple receivers received the ADS-B packet. So while the plane is not transmitting it's location, the transmission can be used to identify and locating it.
An actual passive radar network with multiple receive sites is reportedly a commerical product from multiple vendors, but it's not easy nor cheap.
"You just turned a compass into a radar."
- Captain Christopher Pike
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NBxUqAHYTo&t=0m22sOr does reception of such signals have to be done near to where the transmitter is located.
Actual over-the-horizon radar systems have used transmitter and receivers at a significant distance from each other -- the Soviet Duga radar system in the 70s had its transmitter and receiver separated by ~50 kilometres or so. The receivers (and in active systems, also the transmitter) need to be in very precise time sync, and being physically close enough to run a direct cable makes that a lot easier.
But theoretically, assuming the system is sensitive enough and time-synced enough and you have enough computational oomph available, an arbitrary number of receivers, at any distance, can be used to synthesize an arbitrarily large aperture. It's actually a similar matter to the synthetic aperture radio telescopes used in space astronomy, where telescopes with an effective aperture ~100 million kilometres wide have been created, using space-based radio telescopes linked with ground-based radio observatories.
Such systems may not have the sensitivity of a 100 million kilometre wide telescope mirror (no matter to catch the photons since the "telescope" is mostly empty space) but it does have the equivalent angular resolution of such a 100 million km wide telescope mirror. It's mind-boggling when you consider the consequences of this as computation power improves. It will soon be possible to do this at such high speeds that it will allow frequencies into the far-infrared spectrum, not just microwave, for example.
I assume now you could probably use GPS/atomic clocks to keep them in sync rather than a cable.
You can get an idea of the precision of the timing required by considering how far a radio wave travels in a unit of time corresponding to the uncertainty in your time source and comparing that to the repetition period of the waveform. OTHRs typically have large ranges and use long period waveforms to minimise range ambiguity, so the timing requirements probably aren't too bad.
Summary: A passive OTHR should be doable, especially as a cheapish SDR+computer can digitise and process the entire HF band. Front end sensitivity might be a concern? Low phase noise is critical. Phase noise is where many SDRs fall down?
It's always been in the back of my mind that a distributed passive radar would be a cool project. Something like the existing network of hobbyist ADS-B receivers but pumping out timestamped HF samples which could be used for all manner of purposes. GPS could probably achieve a precision of single digit nanoseconds, which might be small enough to consider the receiver outputs as coherent, allowing synthesis to be done.
If a node's network connection couldn't support continuous transmission it would still work to do burst mode, whereby each node might capture the first second of each minute (for example) then have a minute to transmit that data over the network.
It would be cool to try again with caesium or hydrogen maser ...
So people have used them for locating transmitters, but the accuracy is not amazing.
Still very impressive capability available for free to everyone.
The docs mention that the clock is GPS disciplined, but is it the case that the samples are timestamped in a way that can be traced back to an absolute time. (If not, it would be a matter of programming?)
Soviet Duga-2 Radar Tower : https://abandonedplacesmap.com/huge-secret-soviet-duga-2-rad...
I joined the crowdsupply kraken funding and have been impressed with the hardware so far, but I only knew of them from their previous hardware. It's still a pretty niche topic relative to other things.
r/rtlsdr
##rtlsdr on libera.chat
The SDR++ discord
The RTL-SDR discord
The Great Scott Gadgets discord
The Signal Identification wiki's discord
The Signals Everywhere discord and many other places and niches.
it's even illegal to listen to UK air traffic control radio? what? how can they even be serious
How exactly would they know that you're listening?
It really manifests itself when you look online to see "listen to ATC" live streams and YouTube videos. There aren't any from the UK.
This is discussing passive radar, where you use another emitter, like a FM station or 20 to be transmitters, and your "radar" just sits and listens for the bounces off other objects.
I also think that in the UK it’s illegal to listen to ATC.
AFAIK this misguided law has never been repealed, despite being rendered obsolete by the demise of the old 800 MHz AMPS standard. No 800 MHz-capable SDRs I'm aware of make even the most casual attempt at blocking coverage of that range.
So, yes, it's legal to build a radar -- certainly a passive one -- but given that most SDRs cover the ECPA-prohibited frequency range, it would be hard to build a radar with off-the-shelf equipment without breaking other laws.
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_Communications_Priv...
2: https://forums.radioreference.com/threads/cellular-blocked-s...
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-106/pdf/STATUTE-...
SEC. 403. INTERCEPTION OF CELLULAR TELECOMMUNICATIONS.
[…]
“(d)(1) Within 180 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Commission shall prescribe and make effective regulations denying equipment authorization (under part 15 of title 47, Code of Federal Regulations, or any other part of that title) for any scanning receiver that is capable of—
"(A) receiving transmissions in the frequencies allocated to the domestic cellular radio telecommunications service,
"(B) readily being altered by the user to receive trans- missions in such frequencies, or
“(C) being equipped with decoders that convert digital cellular transmissions to analog voice audio.I have always wondered if people in the old days used the FM demodulation option to listen in on phone calls.
It's probably lucky that no one ever brought a case to court (or testified in Congress) regarding 'civilian' use of a spectrum analyzer for cellular eavesdropping. Otherwise we'd be unable to buy anything even remotely resembling today's SDRs. They'd be driven out of the market like pirate radio transmitters were. The law should be brought up to date, but who wants to open that can of Pandora's worms?