Thread

UK military jamming other nations' satellites to defend itself, BBC told

171 points · 213 comments · thm

gorgoiler · 1790191708 · focus · HN ↗
Presumably when World War 3 kicks off the very first thing each adversary will do is knock out their opponents satellites? These are like flying lightbulbs that shine down usefulness from above, so step one is to cut the lights.
Presumably-squared there is some kind of military backup to survive once the lights (GPS) go dark? Whatever that technology is, why hasn’t it proliferated into civilian life so that we all benefit from a resilient, non-GPS backup?
Perhaps the answer is that every tank has a 10lb inertial navigation gyro or some other thingy in it as a backup, and the platoon around it uses the tank as a moving trig point? In that case I can see it being infeasible to deploy that for civilians.
Perhaps-squared it’s just economics — GPS is cool and cheap now, so why burn profit margin on developing an alternative?
1. para_parolu · 1790192194 · focus · HN ↗
  We may have enough satellite imagery to build visual place recognition system. Geoguesst but for tanks
  1. toast0 · 1790193314 · focus · HN ↗
    There's a bunch of stuff for using terrain to figure out where you are [1], generally used for missiles and planes though, not sure if works well from a ground perspective.
    On the ground, you might be able to use the broadcast positioning system: more or less GPS but instead of satellites, the broadcast signal comes from existing TV towers... TV towers may well be targetted at some point in a war, but there's likely more valuable targets at the beginning of a war.
    [1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TERCOM" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TERCOM
    [2] <a href="https://www.gps.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/CGSICMeetings_Diamond_Sept2023.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.gps.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/CGSICMeeting...
    JumpCrisscross · 1790193822 · focus · HN ↗
    I’d assume one of the things you’d do in anticipation of a war of space-denial scale it bomb your own landscapes a bit for this reason.
2. vrganj · 1790192718 · focus · HN ↗
  That and cut undersea cables. Russia has been messing around with them for a while now.
  1. chinathrow · 1790194303 · focus · HN ↗
    They are actively training for shit, it sure looks like. Same with other sabotage acts all over Europe in the last couple of years.
    huurtehoog · 1790194625 · focus · HN ↗
    Doesn't make any sense to have merchants dragging anchor in active war. These actions are meeting their goals, not serving as preparation.
    dchest · 1790194969 · focus · HN ↗
    <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/nato-allies-foil-russian-subsea-cable-sabotage-plot-2026-09-10/" rel="nofollow">https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/nato-allies-foil-russia...
    huurtehoog · 1790195140 · focus · HN ↗
    Yeah I know I'm talking about it being training for war time anchor dragging.
    It's entirely clear that they cut cables and intend to cut more. It's not training, it's current aggression.
    chinathrow · 1790248152 · focus · HN ↗
    > It's not training, it's current aggression.
    Or both.
    mschuster91 · 1790196042 · focus · HN ↗
    Plausible deniability, it's what Russia has done long before the little freen men invaded Ukraine in 2014.
    FlowingRiver · 1790213308 · focus · HN ↗
    Its like directly addressing a compulsive liar. They know, that we know what they are doing but they will never admit it to us.
3. louthy · 1790192820 · focus · HN ↗
  I’m sure we’ll go back to beacons [1] here in the UK
  ”Using fire to signify a message is thousands of years old. The earliest use of beacons in the UK dates back to the medieval period, primarily as a means of communication to warn of impending invasions or other dangers. Positioned on hilltops and along coastlines, these beacons were part of an early warning system signalling the presence of a threat, such as an approaching enemy fleet.
  One of the most famous early examples is the network of beacons used during the Spanish Armada in 1588. As around 150 Spanish battleships approached, beacons were lit along the southern coast of England, from Cornwall to London. As a result of this rudimentary but effective system Lord Francis Drake had the time to mobilise the country’s defences and defeat the Spanish fleet before they were able to reach the English shore.”
  [1] <a href="https://www.paintersforstal.co.uk/news/the-history-of-beacon-lighting" rel="nofollow">https://www.paintersforstal.co.uk/news/the-history-of-beacon...
  1. dmoy · 1790195570 · focus · HN ↗
    150 battleships?
    Pretty sure the Spanish Armada was <150 total ships, of which only a small subset would be the big galleon things. (And then my knowledge hits a wall, idk what the difference between a galleon and ship-of-the-line/battleship is)
    I'm not sure how much to trust the rest of that website.
    louthy · 1790196431 · focus · HN ↗
    I think it was around 130, but yeah, perhaps a better source was needed. The beacons were real though!
  2. FridayoLeary · 1790196149 · focus · HN ↗
    I think you mean Sir Francis Drake.
    louthy · 1790196264 · focus · HN ↗
    They’re not my words, but yes, you are correct.
4. PJDK · 1790193768 · focus · HN ↗
  I think the general assumption is GPS is denied in most combat zones, it's constantly being jammed in and around Ukraine.
  For most things the fallback is going to be everything we used to use. Maps, stellar navigation, inertial navigation that sort of thing.
  Guided weapons wise, terrain mapping is pretty common for cruise missiles. Storm Shadow, for example uses GPS, terrain and inertial guidance systems. Trident uses inertia and stellar navigation.
  As for why it hasn't proliferated into civilian use? Mostly it has its just the old things. You can perfectly well drive your car with a road map and sign posts. Pilots still train to use dead reckoning and beacons. Etc.
  1. xyzzy_plugh · 1790197763 · focus · HN ↗
    Actually it hasn't proliferated into civilian use because the military industrial complex has captured pretty much anything with real accuracy.
    I had an old colleague who in a previous life worked on an incredibly accurate positioning system that was effectively a brief case that knew where it was at all times. The story he told was the DoD made them an offer they couldn't refuse, and everything became secret. I'm pretty sure the company in question is still in business.
    I'm not trying to say it's not legal but it might not exactly be legal?
    buran77 · 1790201969 · focus · HN ↗
    > the military industrial complex has captured pretty much anything with real accuracy
    Real accuracy is a matter of application. For mainstream civilian use the 20-30cm offered by Galileo/GPS is beyond real accuracy. It gets even better for specialized civilian use or with the aid of differential GNSS (low single digit cm). You'd have to think real hard for a reason to need better precision on a global scale especially if that involves any extra cost.
    Can't say how much of a priority accurate positioning would be for civilians during an armed conflict.
  2. stult · 1790200333 · focus · HN ↗
    We also have visual navigation systems that can use satellite imagery to produce guidance packages. They will become increasingly less useful the longer the imagery goes without updates after a Kessler syndrome type event, though. Another strategy, which I believe the Ukrainians have been experimenting with, is scattering small radio beacons throughout the battlespace to provide a network of navigation aids.
    In a true Kessler scenario where LEO is denied for an extended period of time, I expect a variation of that strategy is how we would replace GPS for most civilian use cases. Likely by using cell towers to triangulate, possibly enhanced with additional transmitters to improve accuracy and coverage. Pure cell tower triangulation would have much worse coverage than GPS, obviously especially in rural areas where cell service is often already poor, but also anywhere that getting a signal from multiple towers isn't easy or possible. Cell towers are never distant enough to use the relativity-based timing tricks GPS relies on, so multiple signals would be required to triangulate. We'd likely end up with substantially less precise positioning, maybe something more on the order of the 10-20m of error we used to see with GPS before the US stopped limiting civilian access to the deaccuratized version. Cell tower triangulation also obviously doesn't work for aviation or oceanic shipping, where trident-like inertial+stellar nav would probably be the only workable option.
    wildzzz · 1790223178 · focus · HN ↗
    Luckily, GNSS satellites sit in MEO with sufficient altitude between the various systems. GPS would survive a Kessler Syndrome.
    stult · 1790355116 · focus · HN ↗
    I assume in that situation they would be targeted specifically with ASATs at the beginning of the conflict, with the denial of LEO then preventing us from launching replacement sats.
  3. 1e1a · 1790203698 · focus · HN ↗
    see <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TERCOM" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TERCOM for localization by matching altimeter measurements to a terrain map
  4. SJC_Hacker · 1790209778 · focus · HN ↗
    GPS is generally jammed close to the target, to varying degrees. For intermediate guidance out of range of jammers it works fairly well
5. huurtehoog · 1790194507 · focus · HN ↗
  Maps, compass, and celestial navigation.
6. fragmede · 1790194611 · focus · HN ↗
  > Presumably when World War 3 kicks off
  That presumes we're not already in it. When historians 100 years from now look back on this period, what's going to be the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand? What's going to be the Reichstag fire of 2027?
  1. nostrademons · 1790195693 · focus · HN ↗
    Russia/Ukraine and Israel/Iran/US are going to be looked at as the precursors to WW3, the same way that the Sino-Japanese War, Spanish Civil War, and Sudetenland Crisis were the precursors to WW2 and the Russo-Japanese War, Moroccan Crisis, and Balkan Wars were the precursors to WW1.
  2. dofm · 1790212365 · focus · HN ↗
    Fiona Hill has said some time back that she believes we are already fighting World War 3 with Russia.
    <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2025/may/10/are-we-heading-for-another-world-war-or-has-it-already-started" rel="nofollow">https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2025/may/10/...
  3. FlowingRiver · 1790213186 · focus · HN ↗
    We aren't there yet but one can definitely see the run up in action.
7. nradov · 1790195261 · focus · HN ↗
  Right, in future conflicts between major countries the satellites will be first casualties. The US military is aware of this and still trains personnel on analog navigation techniques. Inertial navigation works well for some missions and research is underway on alternative technologies. Civil airliners can still navigate without GPS, although this may reduce safety and increase workload.
  <a href="https://interestingengineering.com/military/us-military-nails-gps-free-navigation" rel="nofollow">https://interestingengineering.com/military/us-military-nail...
  We're also going to need a prompt launch capability to replace attrition losses. There should be warehouses full of spare navigation, reconnaissance, and communications satellites ready to mount on a reusable booster and launch within hours. Concerns have been raised over a "Kessler syndrome" due to orbital debris but in lower orbits with significant atmospheric drag this won't be a serious problem.
  1. conorcleary · 1790196602 · focus · HN ↗
    The truth was the first casualty.
  2. wahern · 1790198737 · focus · HN ↗
    IIRC, the Navy stopped teaching officers traditional ship navigation methods for awhile, until the series of incredibly stupid incidents drew attention to the lack of basic navigation and piloting skills, then curriculums were partly reverted. Not sure if things have improved much; probably too early to tell.
    I doubt officers or crew would ever have to resort to a sextant, but that's besides the point. It's the type of thing that's integral to learning navigation theory and building tacit knowledge that's fundamental to the job.
    EDIT: 2016 article discussing restoration of traditional navigation instruction: <a href="https://www.npr.org/2016/02/22/467210492/u-s-navy-brings-back-navigation-by-the-stars-for-officers" rel="nofollow">https://www.npr.org/2016/02/22/467210492/u-s-navy-brings-bac...
    dylan604 · 1790219158 · focus · HN ↗
    Are they still using iPads to control the ship?
  3. pchristensen · 1790199108 · focus · HN ↗
    Reminds me of in the Avengers - SHIELD couldn't navigate the helicarrier, and Nick Fury said "Is the sun setting? Then put it on our left!"
    FlowingRiver · 1790212449 · focus · HN ↗
    This is the easiest trick technique for figuring out vaguely north/south direction.
    Take an analog watch. Say it is 9am, point the 12pm/midday point of the watch at the horizon directly below the sun, the half way distance between the hour hand and 12pm is the fairly close direction of the pole. So in that case, the 10:30am point would be the pole.
    In the northern hemisphere it points South, in Southern hemisphere it points North.
    EDIT : The Wikihow article shows it better.
    <a href="https://www.wikihow.com/Use-an-Analog-Watch-as-a-Compass" rel="nofollow">https://www.wikihow.com/Use-an-Analog-Watch-as-a-Compass
    It is an old Army/SAS trick for keeping baring without a compass.
    jasomill · 1790224787 · focus · HN ↗
    This reminds me of this scene from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead when they're trying to figure out whether Hamlet knows a hawk from a handsaw by the direction of the wind.
    <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf0erXl4pwQ" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pf0erXl4pwQ
  4. hollerith · 1790376557 · focus · HN ↗
    George Friedman suggests that the reason Washington is going back to the moon is that it is easier to launch satellites into Earth orbit from the moon than from the Earth's surface.
8. pinkmuffinere · 1790195452 · focus · HN ↗
  > Whatever that technology is, why hasn’t it proliferated into civilian life so that we all benefit from a resilient, non-GPS backup?
  Once a stealth technology is integrated into civilian life, it's no longer stealth, and you lose the element of surprise if you have to use it in warfare. If somebody _does_ feel they have a clever secret work-around, the incentive is pretty high to keep it a secret.
  1. FlowingRiver · 1790212960 · focus · HN ↗
    Exactly, a notable time military tech has been deployed in public in full would be the TOR network. That was done to provide enough noise on the network to hide its purpose/make difficult to track.
9. mschuster91 · 1790195961 · focus · HN ↗
  GPS has relatively few satellites... but if in doubt, I think Starlink with its absurdly large fleet of satellites can be used as an alternative. Maybe not at a precision level good enough for precision farming, but good enough to roughly guide troops to where they need to go.
  Modern cruise missiles and stuff like Storm Shadow, Taurus etc. already rely on sensor fusion - GPS, inertial navigation, radar, optics and probably a ton more to always keep track of the position.
  Assuming Starlink is a no-show for whatever reason, airliners and ships will have to revert back to stationary navigation aids aka your good old light towers and radio beacons.
  1. andylynch · 1790198076 · focus · HN ↗
    I works assume if/when something really kicks off the starlink and starshield networks would be high priority targets.
    (I’m mildly curious what their ground stations in Central Europe look like from this perspective).
    mschuster91 · 1790203184 · focus · HN ↗
    That's the thing, to take down any of the megaconstellations you need thousands of antisat weapons and that's just one constellation. Not sure about the competitors but at least for Starlink their laser links should provide ample fallback for ground stations going out of service.
    sm0rad · 1790221839 · focus · HN ↗
    Just a few destroyed satellites would likely produce enough debris to take out everything else in orbit: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Chinese_anti-satellite_missile_test" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Chinese_anti-satellite_mi...
10. nostrademons · 1790196276 · focus · HN ↗
  There's technology now that matches local satellite/aerial images against the imagery that a drone or cruise missile sees to replace the GPS chip.
  For fairly obvious reasons, militaries that have it would rather it stay in their hands, for fear of creating a non-state peer competitor that can do cheap long-range strikes on strategic targets.
  It's fairly likely it'll fall into private hands anyway though, because anyone who can afford the prices for commercial satellite imagery could build such a thing.
  1. FlowingRiver · 1790212840 · focus · HN ↗
    So long as the targeted area is limited, you only need imagery data for set routes/areas and can keep local data pools reasonable.
    Can already see the poor headlines of "Snapdragon chips used to bomb schools!"
11. 8note · 1790196441 · focus · HN ↗
  you can see from russia's response to losing starlink, that the answer is sending people out to die bringing a radio repeater to put into a tree
12. esseph · 1790196539 · focus · HN ↗
  > Presumably-squared there is some kind of military backup to survive once the lights (GPS) go dark?
  ... Star navigation, INS, magnetic navigation...
  But nothing like we have today.
  1. saltcured · 1790204232 · focus · HN ↗
    And conventional recon folks on the ground with target-illuminating lasers..?
13. ryukoposting · 1790199658 · focus · HN ↗
  The US military has been funding plenty of projects related to what it calls Alt-PNT, or "alternative position, navigation, and timing" systems. I imagine other nations have invested in this as well.
  Which systems are actually getting deployed, and in what pieces of equipment? No idea, I imagine that's super duper classified.
14. scottyah · 1790202238 · focus · HN ↗
  Knock out? no, best option is to have them all pre-hacked and send out spoofed data at the most desired times, especially if you knew what weapon systems were relying on them. Knocking out the satellites is like flipping the table in chess, you'd only do it if you were pretty sure you had no chance of winning because everyone else in the tournament won't like it. The duopoly-based cold war is over and those winner-take-all tactics were what drove USA policymakers to try so hard to get China to play on the world stage.
  1. FlowingRiver · 1790212653 · focus · HN ↗
    You could have the GPS constantly changing in the same way as time sensitive rolling key authenticators work. Without the base private key, you wouldn't be able to decode it in time. So it remains functional for those that need it but becomes useless, actively works against those without it.
15. ErroneousBosh · 1790202701 · focus · HN ↗
  > why hasn’t it proliferated into civilian life so that we all benefit from a resilient, non-GPS backup?
  <a href="https://shop.osmaps.com/" rel="nofollow">https://shop.osmaps.com/
16. dotBen · 1790202974 · focus · HN ↗
  You may be right, but if that happens the resultant space debris will serve as an additional terrible outcome of any major conflict.
  We will have to kiss goodbye to any future space launches, existing satellites are likely to get knocked out and ultimately our frontier space era will grind to a hault.
  <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome
  1. [deleted] · 1790204873 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
  2. extraduder_ire · 1790208047 · focus · HN ↗
    You pretty much have to do this to knock out starlink (or similar constellations in future). There's so many currently deployed and they can be launched with such cadence that knocking them all out isn't feasible.
17. eddyfromtheblok · 1790205108 · focus · HN ↗
  we don't use the word WAR anymore. it's uncouth. it's CONFLICT now. they'll call this the era of the Great International Technology Conflict or Technology Hostilities.
  1. FlowingRiver · 1790213094 · focus · HN ↗
    We prefer the terms, spice diplomacy, proactive landscaping, aggressive cultural exchange or unplanned synergy meeting.
18. bethekidyouwant · 1790206148 · focus · HN ↗
  I mean if you have a phone you can just use the cell towers..
19. FlowingRiver · 1790212005 · focus · HN ↗
  A few months back Vertisium did a decent run down on how Russians are testing GPS blocking satellites over Europe.
  <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz23G_UXCGA" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz23G_UXCGA
20. PlunderBunny · 1790220738 · focus · HN ↗
  Didn’t Apple do something with triangulation of known WiFi hotspots in the days before the iPhone had GPS?
21. tim333 · 1790249152 · focus · HN ↗
  You see a lot of real world stuff going on in Ukraine. They haven't knocked out GPS satellites but have local jammers. The missiles and the like can use a variety of alternative systems like inertial navigation and terrain matching. There are a couple of startups that make a box that can navigate with a camera looking down at the scenery for ~$1 or 2k.
  There are also about half a dozen rival GPS like satellite systems <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System#Similar_systems" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Positioning_System#Simi...
  The location system in your phone often uses a resilient, non-GPS backup based on cataloguing the locations of WiFi routers. Not due to enemy action but your Starbucks having a building over it. There are two main systems, one from Google, one from Apple. It can make a noticable difference if you are playing something like Pokemon Go. The thingy can be in range with one system but not the other.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.