A military tech channel, well narrated and without a robot voice. Mostly unbias, with technical and educated explanations and analysis. Thank you good Sir! You are hearby the first channel of youre type to have earned my sub.
@Donald J gosh wth u talking about it's just a joke although I got u but take it like a joke.... Or I think ur defense's hadn't stop incoming fart and u want take a revenge🙄😂😂😂😂
@@weirdscience8341 If used close enough, less than 30m, and play the Brown Note (420 Hz, Google it) then everybody simultaneously shites their trousers. VERY effective for crowd dispersal, they run, get it? If, after the crowd has wave after of diarrhea, you'd like to concentrate rather than them running you say? Problem solved - Deploy the Foxco 4000 Toilet Paper Gun (Google it) and launch them into the crowd after the Brown Note is played. Simultaneous affectation of diarrhea will lower inhibitory desire to use sanitation products in public view. Then? You make the choice, crowd control victory!
Back from 1971-75, I was in a Navy aviation squadron VAQ-33; an ECM mission squadron. Four of our planes. the ERA-3B Skywarrior, along with all kinds of ECM gear on-board, also had chaff dispensers in the tail. What the narrator of this video failed to mention was that the chaff was cut to specific lengths for specific wave-length purposes...in other words..being able to jam different types of radar signals depending upon certain wave-lengths that were being used. And what a mess that chaff could make if some got spilled...tens of thousands of little strips of foil blowing all over the ramp and inside the hangar...what fun..!!
Germans tested “chaff” in WW2 called “Duppel” in 1940. They found only 5 strips cut to the appropriate length matched the return of an Me 109 fighter. They did not use it initially since they realised a British copy was more favourable to the British than to them. Some of the German “baby blitz” raids of 1943/44 almost shutdown British radar with Duppel(chaff) due to specular scattering of Radar pulses from Duppel Strip to strip. There just weren’t quite enough bombers dropping chaff to quite achieve this.
The British version “Window” was used extensively. Paul Brickhill wrote that 617 squadron flew a specific mission on 6 June 1944 to fool the Germans an invasion fleet was heading for Calais. He wrote it was so effective that the squadron witnessed the heavy shore batteries opening up on the phantom invasion fleet.
One of the best EW overviews I've ever seen and I was an EW in the U.S. Navy... Here are a couple of hints for clarification: 1. ESM is the baseline for all ECM systems & capabilities. It really should have been the 1st chapter in sequence for this video, as it lays the ground-work for ECM. Without the ESM receivers being closely coupled the ECM "jammers" would not be able to select the correct frequency, or timing alignment to jam effectively; this also allows the jammer to properly track any changes in frequency, PRF or PW (in case the radar is shifting any of those parameters). The mother of all of these combined system components is the "Digital Radio Frequency Memory Unit" (DRFMU) 2. ELINT (ELectronic INTelligence) is a subset of ESM, in that it is the use of specialized ESM receivers to capture and record "radar" signals for use to analyze the radar's operating parameters and its different modes of operation (i.e. a radar will have different operating parameters based on whether it is in search, track, or targeting mode), this is by definition "intelligence gathering equipment". Typically, tactical ESM systems like the shipboard AN/SLQ-32 or the regular "Radar Warning Receivers" found on 4th Gen aircraft, don't have the capability to record signals and are not suitable for ELINT, but their threat libraries (built in lists of threat radar parameters, and specific jamming techniques to be used on each type of radar) are derived from ELINT sources. 3. Chaff has two primary and distinct uses: a) Denial of targeting information, where the chaff is deployed to confuse the radar operator as to which is the real target. b) Transfer Lock, wherein a radar guided weapon has already locked onto the target, then the chaff is deployed to try and seduce (i.e transfer the guidance lock on) the weapon toward to the chaff. In anti-ship missile defense this is done by creating the chaff cloud ahead of the ship & then driving through it while simultaneously turning and/or jamming... It is widely believed that: In the Falklands conflict an Argentine aircraft launched Exocet missiles at the HMS Hermes (may have been the Invincible...), the Hermes' EWs properly launch chaff and successfully executed a "Transfer Lock" and the Exocets flew straight through the chaff. After passing through the chaff the Exocets went into re-acquisition mode acquired a new target and sunk the Atlantic Conveyor... 4. The active decoy list should include the Nulka system... 5. ECM is the old name and use to be comprised of 2 distinctive sub-categories: DECM and JECM techniques, wherein the D stood for Deceptive (creates false target(s) in angle and/or range) and the J for Jamming (creates lots of noise, similar to shining a flashlight into your eyes so you can't see anything). Nowadays it has been renamed EA for Electronic Attack, this is largely due to the notion that modern radar jamming comprises a combination of multiple jamming & deception techniques either simultaneously or in sequence... For instance a simplified sequence might be comprised of the following: a) Unsynchronous Random Noise: very high strength "jamming" noise causes the radar receiver to reduce its gain (AKA capture AGC), thus making the real return radar signal is too weak to process. b) Pulse Amplitude Modulation: send the radar energy back with preprogrammed pulse signal strength variation (this is a type of technique described in the video that cause the radar to see targets at wrong angles) c) sorry I can't really comment on Range Gate Pull-Off, but as the name implies it has something to do with causing range errors... Note) A clear distinction should be made here about the 'capture AGC' effect! If this works properly, whereby the victim radar has reduced its receiver gain (turned down the volume) then you've achieved 2 important advantages: 1st of all the real radar return from the target is now at such a low volume in the radar (then think if the target is stealthy just how low the real signal must be!!!) that it is "in the noise floor" (AKA in the grass) and only the false targets your jammer sends will ever be processed until "burn-through", 2nd effect is ...wait for it.... by making the radar reduce its receiver gain you have also reduced the 'burn through' range and now you can approach even closer before burn through occurs!
Modern antiship missiles during it's terminal phase home on shipboard radars and since it won't use active radar seeker it'll avoid early detection and sea skimming would give additional stealth....... Active decoys like nulka wont work in tat case......
@@forfun5238 HOJ terminal guidance actually is not modern, it began in the 70's but you are a bit confused about how it works! 1st of all if the missile's radar isn't detected by the target ship's ESM then how will the target ship know to jam it (therefore your point on avoiding early detection is moot)?? 2ndly, the ESM portion of the jammer continuously monitors the missile radar while it is jamming so it can both 'tweak' the jammer signal, & to verify that the radar is still operating (it does this so as to not allow HOJ and also to free up jammer resources to engage other radars as required). Also a total reliance on HOJ is not a tactically sound concept what if you want to hit a specific target (say a carrier instead of a destroyer) well if you totally rely on HOJ then the destroyer will jam your missiles to seduce them away from the higher value target (the carrier), or nowadays a decoy will provide the jamming signal. Believe me when I say that the U.S. Navy will sacrifice a destroyer or even a cruiser to save a carrier, the old AN/ULQ-6B even had a jamming mode called "Blip Enhance" specifically designed to do this (it did not involve HOJ, but it was absolutely meant to seduce Soviet anti-ship missiles away from the carrier and toward the escort ship). There is a reason why the rest of the ship's crew always joked that you always follow the EW's if they start moving toward the life-boats!!!
@@CovertCabal My pleasure because I think you are presenting some of the best content on these subjects that I have ever seen! LMK when you want to hear the truth about what happened to the USS Stark in 1986, or when the Iraqi's fire a Silkworm at the USS Missouri during Desert Storm...
@@r.b.seiple5913 have patience and read my comment once again, it's not HoJ I was talkin about.......it's like anti radiation missile homing on shipboard radar emissions.......so you think a carrier can't be destroyed?? With out knowing enemy capabilities you're just guessing.......Russian subs could launch combination of hypersonic, supersonic and sub-sonic Kalibr.......also Russia has armed it's small 500tons Corvettes with antiship missiles........and what about container ships armed with antiship missiles?? You can't find out if such container vessels pass just 12 miles from a carrier strike group unless you sink all of the nearby shipping vessels
ECM is ANY interference, manipulation, or overcoming anything in the EM (and IR) spectrum, it is not, in any way, limited to jamming. It also extends to intelligence gathering and deciphering, monitoring, and identification. Former ECM troop here.
In the mid 80's I was an electronics tech in the Navy. One thing I learned was that for EVERY electronic measure there is another counter measure. The amount of different ways of doing this is astounding, from simple chaff as illustrated here to frequency hopping signals that need codes to unscramble. Some of it is extremely top secret but there is always new things coming along that will defeat them. Missile guidance is one that has several ways of confusing targets, and missiles have several ways of overcoming jamming devices. Also some missiles are harder than others to shoot down due to their flight path which varies from when launched, and the information it recieves prior to being launched to information both passive and active that it aquires during flight. My knowledge is old now but a lot of the stuff is the same only much improved and a lot faster. Ships also have several ways of trying to confuse submarines varying from simple towed decoys which mimic the sound of a ship, to sonars which frequency hop to make it harder to pinpoint the source. Propellers can be made to make different noises than what a submarine might expect to hear from a Naval vessel. I'm sure things have vastly improved in this area as well.
That's the only kind of jamming people should be doing. Wonder how much cancer is caused by all this electronic warfare nonsense. And all that aluminum chaf released into the environment can't be good. But there's big bucks to be made destroying the earth and humanity in the name of "saving" it.
Vietnam Veteran, US Navy, ECM (Electronic Counter Measures), Passive/Active. We knew exactly where they were, every day/every night, gave each unit nick-names. We all served as best we could. Thank you for this video!
Early version of the F4 Phantom carried an IRST to aid the radar, when Pulse-Doppler radars came along the IRST was deemed redundant. The Russians who always lagged behind in Radar technology kept using IRST. The Swedish J35F2 Draken used an IRST it was connected with the radar and tracked the targets movement in the horizontal and vertical with the radar only working as a range finder in that mode.
www.thalesgroup.com/en/global/presence/europe/united-kingdom/defence/air-group/infra-red-search-and-track-isrt/pirate Been used at Elite versions of Eurofighter.
I spent 20 years working ECM for the USAF. EW also includes RWR - Radar Warning Receivers - telling the aircrew what the threat is and about where the threat is located. Missiles need to miss only by a few hundred yards in order to keep the aircraft safe. The "kill zone" of the older SAMs, which I worked against, was just a hundred yards. Less than one second flight time for either the aircraft or missile.
I've been watching your video since day one and I must say the time and effort you put in researching for a video is mind blowing. Absolutely loved this video. Keep up with the quality content.
8:50 No they dont outright rely and never did outright rely on GPS, as all GPS guided weapons also have a INS backup system in the case GPS fails, that dates back to the earliest GPS guided weapon the AGM-84E SLAM a JDAM for example has a 35ft CEP using its INS system, vs a 25ft CEP with GPS all military jets also do have INS in them and they all still have methods to do a INS update with multiple methods (like using TACAN, Ground map radars etc...)
An offshoot of EW is Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD) whereby the mission is to DESTROY (not jam) enemy radars - with anti-radiation missiles or other lethal ordnance. FWIW, dedicated Air Force SEAD aircraft and aircrews are called Wild Weasels. But each US military branch has its own version.
How would I know? What do you mean how would I know? He explains both sides without providing us a conclusion. He leaves us to make conclusions. He just explain the topic's history and capability. Both offensive, defensive, and supportive electronic warfare. And in his SAM video, he explained how SAM and its associated systems can be deployed to counter planes but also how air forces try to work around it. Which ever system is superior is left entirely to the audience to decide. And could he lie about a weapon's capability? Maybe, but this isn't my only source of information. I do read and look at what armies around the world has to say. So far his information are on point.
I figured it's the best way to show some of the things I'm talking about. Not alot of real life video of some of these things, and even if there were, I might get demonetized for showing it. I think I'll start using DCS more often for clips
Been a few decades since I dabbled in hobby radios and such. The frequencies are only part of the variables available to radars - they also have privacy tones where the tones of the frequency can only be heard by the tone that is programed - all interference may be heard without tone calibration but only tones broadcast in that tone may be heard through the filter. Considering that an infinite number of privacy tones are available for any given frequency the options available for jamming are really quite low - with the advent of computers they can change the tone multiple times/second and still listen for reflected signals in the proper tone.
WW2 historian note about Operation Sealion: even if the Luftwaffe had achieved air superiority, an invasion was highly improbable due to the German lack of naval power. (They lost about half of the Kriegsmarine's surface power in the invasion of Norway.) Lots of other factors, too. Check out the video that Military History Visualized made on the subject for a pretty good breakdown.
Achieving air superiority was impossible. Even with drop tanks neither the Bf 109 or Bf 110 could reach barely 50% of the UK. At the time these aircraft lacked drop tanks.
This video was extremely informative. I’ve watched countless military documentaries and none of them went into detail about how Electronic warfare worked.
the radars can't measure time. the intervals are too short, and a few nanoseconds would mean a difference of meters. Instead they combine the outgoing signal with the returns and the interference pattern that creates has a much lower frequency. the frequency of that combined signal shows the speed, and the angular offset shows the range.
Those are the FMCW radars, but pulsed radars rather use cross-corelation of tx and rx waveform purely in time domain. Depending on how many samples the two waveforms shifted the range information can be obtained. (Sampling frequency is known of course)
The big deal with AESA is not that it changes frequency but that the search pattern (emission) can be pseudo randomly directed. The reception could be looking in all directions at the same time if the computing power is available.
Or it could be varying your jamming signal with the rotational speed of a conical scan radar that will cause it to move off target and loose lock. A conical scan moves in a circle around the target trying to keep the radar return at the same strength throughout the circle this way it knows the target is in the circle. If you send a jamming signal that's stronger than the natural ecco and then varies it the radar will easily be led astray. Today most pulse radars are mono pulse which means two radar pulses are sent out that are mirror opposites Which means you get the target position and direction with just one pulse and if you want to jam it you have to jam two pulses in exactly the same way.
All radars have sidelobes. The main lobe is where the radar sends its pulses and gets the return. The sidelobes and back lobes are facing different directions and are much worse at recieving signals (which is good you prefferably want no sidelobes only a main lobe) That means a jammer can measure the main lobe side lobes and rear lobes and emit jamming as the radar rotates 360 degrees, all it has to do is measure how strong pulses it needs to send in the rear and side lobes. If you can do that the radar screen will become unusable.
It's all about the radar receiving the jammer signals by its side lobes, modern radars have low sidelobes gain also their radiations angle in the horizental plan is less than a degree
John Liu.....covert cabal discussed mechanical jamming like flares, decoys but he didnt talk about electronic jamming like spot jamming, sweep jamming, barrage jamming and deceptive methods like DFRM.......DFRM can change the range the radar detects by changing the delay in transmission of pulses, the velocity the radar detects by changing the Doppler shift of the transmitted signal, or the angle to the plane by using AM techniques to transmit into the sidelobes of the radar.........but modern radars have reduced sidelobe gain.......it's not that you can't jam but you need huge amount of power or jammer should be very close to radar for jamming to work
This was the best on the subject of radar and signal jamming used by the military, practically answered all my questions with excellent diagrams and animations.
man for almost fourteen freaking minutes I sat there jaw dropped at my screen like "HE MENTIONED CHAFF, BUT IS HE EVER GOING TO MENTION FLARES?!?!??" I was very relieved at not just the content but the ORDER in which you present them and subsequently a great balanced perspective on where we're at in EW.
The method shown at 5:00 is also used for civil Search and Rescue purposes. A SART Radar Beacon creates a trail of points on the Radar in the direction of the emergency and the spacing between the points indicates distance.
5:36 since the advent of phased array radar, jamming will not show from multiple directions. It will know the direction of the aircraft but not the exact position. Multiple radar stations and simple trigonometry is used to calculate the position of the aircraft
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93U.S._RQ-170_incident was real. But that not was the only drone or technology the iranian receive from US some tomahawks missile land in iran without exploed
9:28 There is no proof the Iranians had anything to do with the drone crashing in their territory. In fact, the USAF made a public Press Release that they had lost control and drone had gone missing two days prior to Iran saying anything about having possession of it. The Iranians changed their story at least twice about how the drone was supposedly brought down with contradictatory methods. It seems most likely the drone suffered a malfunction and crashed.
The UK had plenty of aircraft during the Battle of Britain against the Luftwaffe, there was a massive shortage of trained experienced fighter pilots since flying was fairly new at the time.
For one of your future videos could you consider covering how a war in the sea would be conducted today? Since the days of the battleship are long gone I have no idea on what range would fleets engage, when planes are deployed, what weapons are used and in what phases of the engagement or in what capacities would submarines support.
He was right. The power that reaches that double distance is 4 times less. He wasn't saying how much power you need to emit so that the same power reaches that distance
Chaff is not for disguising the aircraft from enemy detection, but to confuse the seeker on the "intelligent" weapon. Provided it's a radar guided weapon. This is one reason Thermal detectors were used in a lot of seeker systems. Jet engines are very hot. So chaff may be made with flares included so they are the hottest things in "View". It's an ongoing struggle to stay on top.
An excellent educational piece. Seldom has so much scientific, engineering and historical info been crystallized into such a compact RUclips jewel! I loved so much how the show was started by a definition and summary of the EM spectrum! I could only admire how boldly numerous facts and stories not essential of the main narrative wew ignored! Thanks a lot.
Great shots of the base there on Whidbey Island and the E/A-18G in the very beginning of the video! I miss working on those birds sometimes. I was stationed there for 4 years, broken up by an overseas combat deployment of course since I wasn't shore duty, but I loved it there. Such a gorgeous part of the country and I kayaked and snowboarded every river and peak I could too while I was! As a Navy maintainer, we certainly had a Hell of a job cut out for us, and by the time I left the Navy and Whidbey I was night shift sup for 12 Chuck with over 1,500 hours of composite repair, aircraft paint and final finish work, and airframe discrepancy inspections and corrosion removal. It wasn't the best VAQ command I could have been assigned to, but the things I learned and the places I've seen because of the Navy have really changed my life and my perspective of it.
I like how u give an overview of how things are done and not like many national geographic program simply asserting my jammer is bigger than your jammer
Thanks. That's the kind of articles I like to read... a quick overview of a topic, maybe a brief history, description of how it works and maybe details on a few select systems, then methods of countering the system/weapon/platform, and finally a summary. So that's how I try to format my videos.
Overall this was a very nice, informative, and comprehensive presentation. You are correct this is an extremely broad subject. This makes it easy to see why you may have overlooked a few important categories. The two most important that I can see would be intrusion and meaconing (not to be confused with spoofing). Intrusion is fooling the enemy that you are one of his radio stations thus allowing you to insert false information into his network. This is taking place on the radiofrequency side of the network. Meaconing is similar, but you are fooling the enemy into thinking that you are a radio navigation system. For example, if you receive a GPS signal and then rebroadcast it slightly out of time, this would fool the GPS into thinking it was at some other location than where it was in reality. This is likely how the Iranians were able to send the stealth drone off course into their territory. All of this is happening on the electromagnetic (radio) side of the system. Spoofing happens inside the network. There are many ways to get inside of a network one of which is to intrusion from the radio side of the network. Referring to intrusion or meaconing as spoofing complicates the issue as you don’t know where to attack the problem. An example of spoofing in an IP-based network would be setting up a false user node or server. This can happen entirely from within the network. This false node could even be a GPS reporting node. This false GPS node could then report false timing or location data to other systems on the network. This is why it is important to distinguish if it is spoofing within the network or intrusion and meaconing from the radio side of the network. Lastly, you barely touched on the subject of ECCM (Electronic Counter-Countermeasures). There are many radio and radar systems that use various spread spectrum systems to counter jamming. But what is not sometimes understood that the systems will often also use encryption. Encryption is usually thought of just as a way to stop others from understanding what you are transmitting. It also is a way to provide authentication and thus is a countermeasure against intrusion. This is why encryption doesn’t necessarily help if all the enemy is doing is rebroadcasting as in GPS meaconing. The systems will need to use other methods to detect rebroadcasting.
During the Vietnam war the North Vietnamese were able to shoot down B-52s in spite of the very effective jamming gear on board. How? The B-52s would all approach the target from the same direction, speed, and altitude. When they had dropped their bomb loads they made a sharp turn away from the target (a standard Strategic Air Command maneuver) which suddenly tilted the jamming antenna, changing the signal. The North Vietnamese used the change to figure out where the aircraft would be, and fired their missiles to intercept the bombers. They were fairly successful until Tactical Air Command took over and used a completely different strategy. Source: Air and Space Smithsonian.
J: A problem the USAF has repeated for decades from WWII onwards. Their tactical doctrine is often rigid, is employed rote from the textbook, and lazy staff officers who plan the missions don't make work for themselves by creating new plans for every strike or patrol. I saw this a number of times in my career. (USNR retired).
FASCINATING! I love all things electro-magnetic. I got into high-end loudspeaker design as a hobby and did it for years. Compared to this a woofer is as simple as a bicycle. Look at what a hard drive does and how fast that pickup arm goes.
The electronic warfare is very scary due to its vast area of possibilities like ocean of possibility...there are two ways to prevent jamming is transmited signals in short pukse and echo the background noise with enscypt signal so hard to know we are there but keep the short signal mixed in echo background continous or use 3 phases 120 degrees separation and progression with times so they csn not detect or if they detect and jamcwith signal only reinfirce our 2 left signals so like nit jaming but repeat the other 2 signal
"Jamming alert the enemy that you are there, somewhere" That is exactly how Vietnamese shot down B-52, and other American aircraft. They had to manually calculate the axis that the real air craft and the jamming signal that it created, and just shoot the S-75 in that Axis and let the proximity fuse do the job.
@Billy Lauwda Yeah, there is no difference. S-75 is command guided from the ground (dumb missile), but the proximity fuse is classic active absolutely same principle and function as WWII "VT" fuse.
Some ECM troops came out to my bomber once and made some changes to the EWO's station. I asked them what they were doing. They said, "That's nice. Have a nice day." That about sums up anyone's knowledge of the ECM system on the B-52 outside of the EWO (EE-DUB) himself and the ECM shop.
When the EW Update came in for VTOL VR, we got an amazingly passionately crafted fictional NATOPS manual that beautifully explained Electronic Warfare and it's concepts
Defeating the S-300 and S-400 has never been an issue for the US. Both the F-35 and F-22 have proved over and over they are more than capable of defeating them.
@@mississippirebel1409 Then try that agsinst S-400 batteries operated by Russia, but have your affairs in order first. They are as of now, nearly unjammable and in fact seek out jammers and detonate within close proximity to them.
Taras Wertelecki - The S-400 can only detect the F-22, F-35 and B-2 at shorter ranges and will have a difficult time targeting them until they are at a fairly short distance. Also if the S-400's radar is active, the F-22 and F-35 will know eactly where it is from a very long distance and can either avoid it or get withing striking range for a anti-radar missile like the AGM-88 HARM. Sure the S-400 and even the S-300 to some extent will have success against 4th gen fighters, but if you really believe that the S-400 is going to shoot down a lot of F-35 and F-22's, well you aren't living in the real world. There is a reason why Russia and China have been trying to develop a true 5th gen fighter that is stealthy. But they just don't have neither the money, technology and know how to build a true 5th gen aircraft. Russia's integraded missile defense system would only last so long before they are all hunted down and destroyed. Plus it's not like Russia has a lot of these systems.
The transmit power of the outgoing signal varies with the inverse square law, but the return power varies as the cube of the distance because the illuminated object radiates the return as though it were a light bulb. I.E. black body radiator.
Reasons future warfare is scary af 1) Incredible offensive power, with massive stores of ammo 2)Speed of weapons 3)Distance of enemy 4)Economic power of superpowers
I'm very impressed. You've created an outstanding overview with a lot of details, illustrations, schematics, concepts, application of theory, photos; historical insights. I'm particularly impressed by your honesty regarding the German blimp spying on Englands radio towers & signals during World War II. Congratulations for a job done extremely well.
Nice, worked aboard USS Ranger CV-61 as an Electronics Warfare Technician. Electronics Warfare is the war no body talks about much. Yet it is often the difference between life and death in battle.
"LIGHT WARFARE": Everything in existence are 'gem' photons and interacting 'gem' photons. Revised TOE: 3/25/2017a. My Current TOE: THE SETUP: 1. Modern science currently recognizes four forces of nature: The strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, gravity, and electromagnetism. 2. In school we are taught that with magnetism, opposite polarities attract and like polarities repel. But inside the arc of a large horseshoe magnet it's the other way around, like polarities attract and opposite polarities repel. (I have proved this to myself with magnets and anybody with a large horseshoe magnet and two smaller bar magnets can easily prove this to yourself too. It occurs at the outer end of the inner arc of the horseshoe magnet.). 3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them. 4. Protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them. 5. Photons also have both an electric and a magnetic component to them. FOUR FORCES OF NATURE DOWN INTO TWO: 6. When an electron is in close proximity to the nucleus, it would basically generate a 360 degree spherical magnetic field. 7. Like charged protons would stick together inside of this magnetic field, while simultaneously repelling opposite charged electrons inside this magnetic field, while simultaneously attracting the opposite charged electrons across the inner portion of the electron's moving magnetic field. 8. There are probably no such thing as "gluons" in actual reality. 9. The strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are probably derivatives of the electro-magnetic field interactions between electrons and protons. 10. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary. 11. Quarks also supposedly have a charge to them and then would also most likely have electro-magnetic fields associated with them, possibly a different arrangement for each of the six different type of quarks. 12. The interactions between the quarks EM forces are how and why protons and neutrons formulate as well as how and why protons and neutrons stay inside of the nucleus and do not just pass through as neutrinos do. THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA: 13. Personally, I currently believe that the directional force in photons is "gravity". It's the force that makes the sine wave of EM energy go from a wide (maximum extension) to a point (minimum extension) of a moving photon and acts 90 degrees to the EM forces which act 90 degrees to each other. When the EM gets to maximum extension, "gravity" flips and EM goes to minimum, then "gravity" flips and goes back to maximum, etc, etc. A stationary photon would pulse from it's maximum extension to a point possibly even too small to detect, then back to maximum, etc, etc. 14. I also believe that a pulsating, swirling singularity (which is basically a pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon) is the energy unit in this universe. 15. When these pulsating, swirling energy units interact with other energy units, they tangle together and can interlock at times. Various shapes (strings, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe. 16. When the energy units unite and interlock together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate. 17. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure. 18. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons). THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY: 19. When the electron with it's associated magnetic field goes around the proton with it's associated magnetic field, internal and external energy oscillations are set up. 20. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency. 21. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies. NOTES: 22. The Earth can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic field, electrical surface field, and gravity, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other. 23. The flat spiral galaxy can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic fields on each side of the plane of matter, the electrical field along the plane of matter, and gravity being directed towards the galactic center's black hole where the gravitational forces would meet, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other. 24. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well. 25. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM with the energy unit, this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now. Of which with the current theory of understanding, how come the forces of nature haven't evolved by now since the original conditions acting upon the singularity aren't acting upon them like they originally were, billions of years have supposedly elapsed, in a universe that continues to expand and cool, with energy that could not be created nor destroyed would be getting less and less dense? My theory would seem to make more sense if in fact it is really true. I really wonder if it is in fact really true. 26. And the universe would be expanding due to these pulsating and interacting energy units and would also allow galaxies to collide, of which, how could galaxies ever collide if they are all speeding away from each other like is currently taught? DISCLAIMER: 27. As I as well as all of humanity truly do not know what we do not know, the above certainly could be wrong. It would have to be proved or disproved to know for more certainty. _________________________________________________________________________ Here is the test for the 'gravity' portion of my TOE idea. I do not have the necessary resources to do the test but maybe you or someone else reading this does, will do the test, then tell the world what is found out either way. a. Imagine a 12 hour clock. b. Put a magnetic field across from the 3 to 9 o'clock positions. c. Put an electric field across from the 6 to 12 o'clock positions. (The magnetic field and electric field would be 90 degrees to each other and should be polarized so as to complement each other.) d. Shoot a high powered laser through the center of the clock at 90 degrees to the em fields. e. Do this with the em fields on and off. (The em fields could be varied in size, strength, density and depth. The intent would be to energy frequency match the laser and em fields for optimal results.) f. Look for any gravitational / anti-gravitational effects. (Including the utilization of ferro cells so as to be able to actually see the energy field movements.) (An alternative to the above would be to shoot 3 high powered lasers, or a single high powered laser split into 3 beams, each adjustable to achieve the above set up, all focused upon a single point in space.) 'If' effects are noted, 'then' further research could be done. 'If' effects are not noted, 'then' my latest TOE idea is wrong. But still, we would know what 'gravity' was not, which is still something in the scientific world. Science still wins either way and moves forward.
The mathematics for the TOE doesn't even exist yet as far as I am currently aware. It goes beyond any quantum field theory formulas that I am currently aware of. The outline though is basically as follows: The formula has at least 3 levels to it: 1. The Internal Photon Level: The 3 interacting forces, (which might even be just a singular force with 3 different modalities), all interacting at basically 90 degrees to each other and all simultaneously pulsating and swirling. A complex part of the formula but I believe to be totally doable. 2. The External Photon Level: For each pulsating, swirling photon, all the pulsating, swirling photons interacting with it. An exponential part of the formula that I am not even sure modern day super computers could adequately handle. 3. The Inter-dimensional Photon Level: For each modality within each photon would have an energy frequency associated with it. The energy frequencies could be seen as being in their own space time dimension. (For me, 'space' is energy itself of which is the 'gem' photon and 'time' is the flow of energy; 'temperature' is the interaction of energy), so one would be dealing with way more than just 3 spatial dimensions and way more than just 1 time dimension (as there would many different energy frequencies with many different flows of energy). Whenever like resonate energy frequencies resonated with each other, they would affect each other, kind of like 'spooky action at a distance'. Anytime energy frequencies overlapped, there would be a temporary spike of some sort in each space time dimension. In addition, if in reality the 'gem' photon is just a singular force with 3 different modalities, it's possible that energy could 'slip' between modalities which would also affect the results. A very complex part of the formula on top of all the complexity that came before it. 4. Any time any energy moved in the system, the entire formula would have to be recalculated due to potential ripple effects. Like I said above, I don't even believe the mathematics exists yet for what I am trying to do, but at a minimum, the formula would contain the above levels the way I currently see it to be. ______________________________________________________________________________ 'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe, and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows: Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction; Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction. Then: 1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe. (And possibly '0', zero, for no flow of energy, hence the number system that we currently have).
@@charlesbrightman4237 But why on (singular massive spinning photon) Earth would you post your idea on a RUclips comment section about an only tangentially related subject, where not many (myself included) who read your idea can critically evaluate it? Are you afraid that it won't hold up under scrutiny?
@@KB4QAA Note: I never received a notification of your response. It was only due to L'FMR's response whereby I received a notification this time and am here. Yes, L'FMR is correct, TOE = Theory Of Everything.
7:53 You are forgetting to calculate in the earths curvature in their range, I suggest you pick up Command Modern Air Naval Operations, one of the best sims in the genre.
nice video but that bit at the end about Germany having a chance at winning the battle of Britain is far from accurate. whilst very weary and tired, britain produced more aircraft than were lost and within a year had almost doubled its fighter count from around 660 in july 1940 to 1250 in march 41. poor tactics on the germans part didn't help much but they had no way to effectively stop the RAFs fighter production. people like to think the BoB was a close affair but when you look behind the scenes it could only go one way. the above comments are not to belittle the huge effort the men and women of the RAF put in but rather to inform others that the RAF was set up do defend very well and the germans were unaware how well prepared they were. also germany could never have invaded britain because of its huge royal navy and germany never produced any meaningful landing craft
There are loads of reasons Sea Lion would have failed even if the battle of Britain was won which you have pointed out was also unlikely even without radar. The primary reason being that Germany underestimated Britains ability to replace losses by a large factor. military history visualized has a good video about the problems with Sea Lion ruclips.net/video/YnPo7V03nbY/видео.html&ab_channel=MilitaryHistoryVisualized
@eddie money there are loads of other reasons why Germany lost the battle of Britain check out this page militaryhistoryvisualized.com/why-the-luftwaffe-failed-in-world-war-2-failures-shortcomings-and-blunders/
@eddie money - They were smart enough and did bomb it multiple times, but the British were able to put bombed installations back into service within a very short time (a day or so.) Both sides were smart enough to know it was essential.
@eddie money you keep saying "your" but I am not British I am American. I think you might want to check your objectivity and go look at the link I posted on all the problems with Operation sea lion that have nothing to do with radar. TLDR Amphibious landings are super hard.
What you are describing in the beginning of the video is called Range Gate Pull off and Velocity Gate Pull off. One good way to negate the effects of both is to use Frequency Agility.
Can you do a video explaining your research methods for these vids? like holy titted jesus you seemingly found footage a general would have seen in a budgetary pitch for funding lolol
You are accredited with, explaining in short & showing depiction of the basis of The Radio Frequency Spectrum, the dept. of energy & head shrinking's job. On whole a quite benificiable content for developing youth.
I can't think of a single weapons system that uses GPS as it's the navigation system. Even GPS guided bombs are actually inertial navigated with a system to update with GPS for greater accuracy, but it doesn't need the GPS but once to know it's starting location and that could be hours back when it was first mounted to the airframe.
Loved the video, but may I make a small correction. The German airship patrol did detect the Chain Home signals but technical analysts couldn't distiguish them from radiation from UK's electricity transmission network. What they didn't know was the radars were all synchronised from that network. The German engineers also didn't believe that anything so crude could work as an effectve radar. Lucky for us!
1 factor in the Battle of Britain that is commonly overlooked is the differences in squadron size between the RAF and Luftwaffe units. British RAF squadrons had 12-18, and in a few cases, 24, aircraft assigned per squadron, while the standard Luftwaffe squadron normally only had 8-10 aircraft. Each side's squadron composition was unknown to the other. Therefore, the RAF was consistently over estimating Luftwaffe strength, while the Luftwaffe continuously underestimated RAF strength, all based on the number of confirmed kills reported by each side to their respective commanders. The result was Hitler, thru submitted reports that supposed RAF squadrons to be comprised of only 8-10 aircraft each, believed that the RAF was on the verge of collapse, when in fact they had much larger forces.
Russian Electronic Warfare equipment EW: Alurgit, Rtut B, Infauna, Krasuxa 4 300km radius of operation, Moskva 1 Radio technical intelligence gathering radius 400km, Paradist, Lorandit M, Layer 3, Lesochek, Magnirep, Pole 21, Chibiny the one used to bust Donald Cook , Vitepsk, Samarkand; Murmansk BM range up to 3000km , brakes communication with the airport or satellite communication
Have seen ECM of various sizes/weights on parachutes, some freely floated,, falling at different rates of speed, some were armed drones targeting enemy electronic signals which sends and seeks electronic info to offensive and defensive fire control. Edit: Some ECC used electronics to send false location information - incoming would follow false targets and appear to be destroyed. Thanks for an excellent video.
When you add several new techs together like frequency agile radar, phased array radar and signal processing, Electronic Warfare is getting very, very complex and powerful. It's why the Gulf War went so badly so fast for the Iraqis despite all of the men and the relatively modern equipment and experienced personnel they had.
I'd say biological is it the most terrifying. It has 0 control once used. You can call of cyber attacks and defend. Biological is in discriminate and even dangerous to the user
A military tech channel, well narrated and without a robot voice. Mostly unbias, with technical and educated explanations and analysis.
Thank you good Sir! You are hearby the first channel of youre type to have earned my sub.
Btw. Would be nice of you to link youre sources in the description ;)
Have you watched defence updates? I swear that's an auto-generated channel. The English is so broken and unnatural.
the TTS videos on YT are the worst trend yet
Check out "Matsimus" as well, no where near as technical, more of a boots on the ground military channel.
Military science is a art and science.
Like farting in a crowded cafeteria, my signal confuses the olfactory sensors of surrounding enemies, disrupting their mealtime operations.
you got the idea right lol
They should use the missile known as kick on the source of jamming to stop it!!!
@Donald J gosh wth u talking about it's just a joke although I got u but take it like a joke....
Or I think ur defense's hadn't stop incoming fart and u want take a revenge🙄😂😂😂😂
@Donald J pitterrrrrrrtr pit pit pit pit ponnn
HOS missile (home on smell)
☼ You missed EDM: "Electronic Dance Music". Used to disperse enemies via LRADs, or compel enemies to gather together in "raves".
the bass would be shite off a lrad
@@weirdscience8341 If used close enough, less than 30m, and play the Brown Note (420 Hz, Google it) then everybody simultaneously shites their trousers. VERY effective for crowd dispersal, they run, get it?
If, after the crowd has wave after of diarrhea, you'd like to concentrate rather than them running you say?
Problem solved - Deploy the Foxco 4000 Toilet Paper Gun (Google it) and launch them into the crowd after the Brown Note is played. Simultaneous affectation of diarrhea will lower inhibitory desire to use sanitation products in public view. Then? You make the choice, crowd control victory!
E-type
LMFAO
Aviccii was a PsyOp
I usually jam radars with raspberry
There's only one man who would DARE give me the raspberry. LONESTAR!!
I dont get it.
@@nimerga2163 oh God youve never seen space balls? You need to go watch that
@@nimerga2163 ruclips.net/video/FcArnepkhv0/видео.html
I eat raspberry jam with tea heated in microwaves. May I be considered as a jammer?
Back from 1971-75, I was in a Navy aviation squadron VAQ-33; an ECM mission squadron. Four of our planes. the ERA-3B Skywarrior, along with all kinds of ECM gear on-board, also had chaff dispensers in the tail. What the narrator of this video failed to mention was that the chaff was cut to specific lengths for specific wave-length purposes...in other words..being able to jam different types of radar signals depending upon certain wave-lengths that were being used. And what a mess that chaff could make if some got spilled...tens of thousands of little strips of foil blowing all over the ramp and inside the hangar...what fun..!!
He didn't say anything, but you can see the different length strips at 1:42.
HAPPY BIRTHDAY!! **deploys chaff**
Germans tested “chaff” in WW2 called “Duppel” in 1940. They found only 5 strips cut to the appropriate length matched the return of an Me 109 fighter. They did not use it initially since they realised a British copy was more favourable to the British than to them. Some of the German “baby blitz” raids of 1943/44 almost shutdown British radar with Duppel(chaff) due to specular scattering of Radar pulses from Duppel Strip to strip. There just weren’t quite enough bombers dropping chaff to quite achieve this.
Even worse if it ended up on the flight deck. Talk about a mess!
The British version “Window” was used extensively. Paul Brickhill wrote that 617 squadron flew a specific mission on 6 June 1944 to fool the Germans an invasion fleet was heading for Calais. He wrote it was so effective that the squadron witnessed the heavy shore batteries opening up on the phantom invasion fleet.
One of the best EW overviews I've ever seen and I was an EW in the U.S. Navy... Here are a couple of hints for clarification:
1. ESM is the baseline for all ECM systems & capabilities. It really should have been the 1st chapter in sequence for this video, as it lays the ground-work for ECM. Without the ESM receivers being closely coupled the ECM "jammers" would not be able to select the correct frequency, or timing alignment to jam effectively; this also allows the jammer to properly track any changes in frequency, PRF or PW (in case the radar is shifting any of those parameters). The mother of all of these combined system components is the "Digital Radio Frequency Memory Unit" (DRFMU)
2. ELINT (ELectronic INTelligence) is a subset of ESM, in that it is the use of specialized ESM receivers to capture and record "radar" signals for use to analyze the radar's operating parameters and its different modes of operation (i.e. a radar will have different operating parameters based on whether it is in search, track, or targeting mode), this is by definition "intelligence gathering equipment". Typically, tactical ESM systems like the shipboard AN/SLQ-32 or the regular "Radar Warning Receivers" found on 4th Gen aircraft, don't have the capability to record signals and are not suitable for ELINT, but their threat libraries (built in lists of threat radar parameters, and specific jamming techniques to be used on each type of radar) are derived from ELINT sources.
3. Chaff has two primary and distinct uses:
a) Denial of targeting information, where the chaff is deployed to confuse the radar operator as to which is the real target.
b) Transfer Lock, wherein a radar guided weapon has already locked onto the target, then the chaff is deployed to try and seduce (i.e transfer the guidance lock on) the weapon toward to the chaff. In anti-ship missile defense this is done by creating the chaff cloud ahead of the ship & then driving through it while simultaneously turning and/or jamming... It is widely believed that: In the Falklands conflict an Argentine aircraft launched Exocet missiles at the HMS Hermes (may have been the Invincible...), the Hermes' EWs properly launch chaff and successfully executed a "Transfer Lock" and the Exocets flew straight through the chaff. After passing through the chaff the Exocets went into re-acquisition mode acquired a new target and sunk the Atlantic Conveyor...
4. The active decoy list should include the Nulka system...
5. ECM is the old name and use to be comprised of 2 distinctive sub-categories: DECM and JECM techniques, wherein the D stood for Deceptive (creates false target(s) in angle and/or range) and the J for Jamming (creates lots of noise, similar to shining a flashlight into your eyes so you can't see anything). Nowadays it has been renamed EA for Electronic Attack, this is largely due to the notion that modern radar jamming comprises a combination of multiple jamming & deception techniques either simultaneously or in sequence... For instance a simplified sequence might be comprised of the following:
a) Unsynchronous Random Noise: very high strength "jamming" noise causes the radar receiver to reduce its gain (AKA capture AGC), thus making the real return radar signal is too weak to process.
b) Pulse Amplitude Modulation: send the radar energy back with preprogrammed pulse signal strength variation (this is a type of technique described in the video that cause the radar to see targets at wrong angles)
c) sorry I can't really comment on Range Gate Pull-Off, but as the name implies it has something to do with causing range errors...
Note) A clear distinction should be made here about the 'capture AGC' effect! If this works properly, whereby the victim radar has reduced its receiver gain (turned down the volume) then you've achieved 2 important advantages: 1st of all the real radar return from the target is now at such a low volume in the radar (then think if the target is stealthy just how low the real signal must be!!!) that it is "in the noise floor" (AKA in the grass) and only the false targets your jammer sends will ever be processed until "burn-through", 2nd effect is ...wait for it.... by making the radar reduce its receiver gain you have also reduced the 'burn through' range and now you can approach even closer before burn through occurs!
Modern antiship missiles during it's terminal phase home on shipboard radars and since it won't use active radar seeker it'll avoid early detection and sea skimming would give additional stealth....... Active decoys like nulka wont work in tat case......
Awesome! Thank you for the clarifications!
@@forfun5238 HOJ terminal guidance actually is not modern, it began in the 70's but you are a bit confused about how it works! 1st of all if the missile's radar isn't detected by the target ship's ESM then how will the target ship know to jam it (therefore your point on avoiding early detection is moot)?? 2ndly, the ESM portion of the jammer continuously monitors the missile radar while it is jamming so it can both 'tweak' the jammer signal, & to verify that the radar is still operating (it does this so as to not allow HOJ and also to free up jammer resources to engage other radars as required). Also a total reliance on HOJ is not a tactically sound concept what if you want to hit a specific target (say a carrier instead of a destroyer) well if you totally rely on HOJ then the destroyer will jam your missiles to seduce them away from the higher value target (the carrier), or nowadays a decoy will provide the jamming signal. Believe me when I say that the U.S. Navy will sacrifice a destroyer or even a cruiser to save a carrier, the old AN/ULQ-6B even had a jamming mode called "Blip Enhance" specifically designed to do this (it did not involve HOJ, but it was absolutely meant to seduce Soviet anti-ship missiles away from the carrier and toward the escort ship). There is a reason why the rest of the ship's crew always joked that you always follow the EW's if they start moving toward the life-boats!!!
@@CovertCabal My pleasure because I think you are presenting some of the best content on these subjects that I have ever seen! LMK when you want to hear the truth about what happened to the USS Stark in 1986, or when the Iraqi's fire a Silkworm at the USS Missouri during Desert Storm...
@@r.b.seiple5913 have patience and read my comment once again, it's not HoJ I was talkin about.......it's like anti radiation missile homing on shipboard radar emissions.......so you think a carrier can't be destroyed?? With out knowing enemy capabilities you're just guessing.......Russian subs could launch combination of hypersonic, supersonic and sub-sonic Kalibr.......also Russia has armed it's small 500tons Corvettes with antiship missiles........and what about container ships armed with antiship missiles?? You can't find out if such container vessels pass just 12 miles from a carrier strike group unless you sink all of the nearby shipping vessels
Very well done! Great video and love the channel!!!!
You know ter try
So thats why I got this in my recommended feed
Serbs downed the one
Thats my tank loving main man
Matt ......more videos please !
ECM is ANY interference, manipulation, or overcoming anything in the EM (and IR) spectrum, it is not, in any way, limited to jamming. It also extends to intelligence gathering and deciphering, monitoring, and identification.
Former ECM troop here.
In the mid 80's I was an electronics tech in the Navy. One thing I learned was that for EVERY electronic measure there is another counter measure. The amount of different ways of doing this is astounding, from simple chaff as illustrated here to frequency hopping signals that need codes to unscramble. Some of it is extremely top secret but there is always new things coming along that will defeat them. Missile guidance is one that has several ways of confusing targets, and missiles have several ways of overcoming jamming devices. Also some missiles are harder than others to shoot down due to their flight path which varies from when launched, and the information it recieves prior to being launched to information both passive and active that it aquires during flight. My knowledge is old now but a lot of the stuff is the same only much improved and a lot faster. Ships also have several ways of trying to confuse submarines varying from simple towed decoys which mimic the sound of a ship, to sonars which frequency hop to make it harder to pinpoint the source. Propellers can be made to make different noises than what a submarine might expect to hear from a Naval vessel. I'm sure things have vastly improved in this area as well.
Have you read about Russian and Chinese upgrades they've made? It'll be suicide for USA
Can I get a way to contact you please
What a fascinating, well done video. Thank you.
Very nice info in a nutshell
Really...that was fascinating? To each his own, i ran out of fascination at counter counter measure, lmfao. ✌
This channel is underrated. I love how you present your videos and how easy for us to understand.
You covered a massive subject in 18 mins, with lots of good visuals, and highlighting the pertinent points - great intro.
What about ECCCCCCCM?
Psh. Easily defeated with ECCCCCCCCM
Superseded by fy
Bro, high five!
Everybody is dead after ECCCM. The rest doesn’t matter.
The only way to ensure our safety is with mutually assured counter measures (MACM)
Bob Marley knew a lot about Jamming, he even made a song about it.
DJKoollord hahaha, solid bro!!!
We're jamming
That's the only kind of jamming people should be doing. Wonder how much cancer is caused by all this electronic warfare nonsense. And all that aluminum chaf released into the environment can't be good. But there's big bucks to be made destroying the earth and humanity in the name of "saving" it.
@@Grimenoughtomaketherobotcry ...Clink! 👍
Was that for the Buffalo pilot?
The sweeps, the creeps and the bleeps.
Regular maintenance is important for ECM equipment. You have to clean out the e-lint filters prior to use.
Electronic warfare puns! (pushes glasses up)
The funny thing about electronic warfare, is that you can't see the guys you're tracking.
**Crickets**
Don't troll the simps lol
LOL !
yooo i thought MI6 had finally got you. Good to see another video!
Unfortunately, he is replaced already.
9:50 Yes Niklas Madaro, President of Venezueilia
Finally, I missed your videos and rewatched some of your older videos.
Welcome back :)
Very comprehensive and informative! Well done
I love Covert Cabal
Vietnam Veteran, US Navy, ECM (Electronic Counter Measures), Passive/Active. We knew exactly where they were, every day/every night, gave each unit nick-names. We all served as best we could. Thank you for this video!
Early version of the F4 Phantom carried an IRST to aid the radar, when Pulse-Doppler radars came along the IRST was deemed redundant.
The Russians who always lagged behind in Radar technology kept using IRST.
The Swedish J35F2 Draken used an IRST it was connected with the radar and tracked the targets movement in the horizontal and vertical with the radar only working as a range finder in that mode.
IRST is still used as it is passive. Enemy doesn't know they're being tracked.
Early F4s used an OPTICAL 10X and 30X TV camera,not an IRST system.
www.thalesgroup.com/en/global/presence/europe/united-kingdom/defence/air-group/infra-red-search-and-track-isrt/pirate
Been used at Elite versions of Eurofighter.
And now the F-15EX and Block 3 Super Hornets are getting IRST
I spent 20 years working ECM for the USAF. EW also includes RWR - Radar Warning Receivers - telling the aircrew what the threat is and about where the threat is located. Missiles need to miss only by a few hundred yards in order to keep the aircraft safe. The "kill zone" of the older SAMs, which I worked against, was just a hundred yards. Less than one second flight time for either the aircraft or missile.
you work ECM pods?
Easy Chair Maintenance or Extra Clean-up Man? Hughes Hall?
I've been watching your video since day one and I must say the time and effort you put in researching for a video is mind blowing. Absolutely loved this video. Keep up with the quality content.
8:50 No they dont outright rely and never did outright rely on GPS, as all GPS guided weapons also have a INS backup system in the case GPS fails, that dates back to the earliest GPS guided weapon the AGM-84E SLAM
a JDAM for example has a 35ft CEP using its INS system, vs a 25ft CEP with GPS
all military jets also do have INS in them and they all still have methods to do a INS update with multiple methods (like using TACAN, Ground map radars etc...)
Back in the day I was an Electronic Warfare Operator. I loved it.
An offshoot of EW is Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD) whereby the mission is to DESTROY (not jam) enemy radars - with anti-radiation missiles or other lethal ordnance. FWIW, dedicated Air Force SEAD aircraft and aircrews are called Wild Weasels. But each US military branch has its own version.
That is actually what my next video is going to be about! SEAD/DEAD
4:26: *CAUTION: Open Door Slowly*
Proceeds to open door fast.
All the info presented here is incredibly
simplified and high level. Nothing we do is nearly as simple or straightforward as what’s presented.
Your videos are always amazing and unbiased. I can't stress this enough. Its so objective.
How would I know? What do you mean how would I know? He explains both sides without providing us a conclusion. He leaves us to make conclusions. He just explain the topic's history and capability. Both offensive, defensive, and supportive electronic warfare.
And in his SAM video, he explained how SAM and its associated systems can be deployed to counter planes but also how air forces try to work around it. Which ever system is superior is left entirely to the audience to decide.
And could he lie about a weapon's capability? Maybe, but this isn't my only source of information. I do read and look at what armies around the world has to say. So far his information are on point.
6:09 radio wave range
6:40 jaming at ranges
6:56 comunacat disruption
8:08 jaming gps
9:25 agants drones
10:53 counter counter messures
11:37 aesa radar
13:00 infa red protection system
Very interesting specialy like the DCS used for visual aid tool.
I figured it's the best way to show some of the things I'm talking about. Not alot of real life video of some of these things, and even if there were, I might get demonetized for showing it.
I think I'll start using DCS more often for clips
@@CovertCabal Use both
@@CovertCabalSo jamming is kind of a loophole to stealth?
Been a few decades since I dabbled in hobby radios and such. The frequencies are only part of the variables available to radars - they also have privacy tones where the tones of the frequency can only be heard by the tone that is programed - all interference may be heard without tone calibration but only tones broadcast in that tone may be heard through the filter. Considering that an infinite number of privacy tones are available for any given frequency the options available for jamming are really quite low - with the advent of computers they can change the tone multiple times/second and still listen for reflected signals in the proper tone.
WW2 historian note about Operation Sealion: even if the Luftwaffe had achieved air superiority, an invasion was highly improbable due to the German lack of naval power. (They lost about half of the Kriegsmarine's surface power in the invasion of Norway.) Lots of other factors, too. Check out the video that Military History Visualized made on the subject for a pretty good breakdown.
Achieving air superiority was impossible. Even with drop tanks neither the Bf 109 or Bf 110 could reach barely 50% of the UK. At the time these aircraft lacked drop tanks.
This video was extremely informative. I’ve watched countless military documentaries and none of them went into detail about how Electronic warfare worked.
the radars can't measure time. the intervals are too short, and a few nanoseconds would mean a difference of meters. Instead they combine the outgoing signal with the returns and the interference pattern that creates has a much lower frequency. the frequency of that combined signal shows the speed, and the angular offset shows the range.
Those are the FMCW radars, but pulsed radars rather use cross-corelation of tx and rx waveform purely in time domain. Depending on how many samples the two waveforms shifted the range information can be obtained. (Sampling frequency is known of course)
Nicely done. Am a USAF/ SAC vet. and used to work with ecm/eccm systems.
Wow, thanks! Much appreciated! Thank you for watching
you can have a 18 min video about something that is 99% classified
Lmao right this shit too easy
The big deal with AESA is not that it changes frequency but that the search pattern (emission) can be pseudo randomly directed. The reception could be looking in all directions at the same time if the computing power is available.
I imagine that the bearing jamming has something to do with varying the wavelength if the radar trying to locate you uses doppler shift.
Or it could be varying your jamming signal with the rotational speed of a conical scan radar that will cause it to move off target and loose lock.
A conical scan moves in a circle around the target trying to keep the radar return at the same strength throughout the circle this way it knows the target is in the circle.
If you send a jamming signal that's stronger than the natural ecco and then varies it the radar will easily be led astray.
Today most pulse radars are mono pulse which means two radar pulses are sent out that are mirror opposites Which means you get the target position and direction with just one pulse and if you want to jam it you have to jam two pulses in exactly the same way.
All radars have sidelobes. The main lobe is where the radar sends its pulses and gets the return. The sidelobes and back lobes are facing different directions and are much worse at recieving signals (which is good you prefferably want no sidelobes only a main lobe) That means a jammer can measure the main lobe side lobes and rear lobes and emit jamming as the radar rotates 360 degrees, all it has to do is measure how strong pulses it needs to send in the rear and side lobes.
If you can do that the radar screen will become unusable.
It's all about the radar receiving the jammer signals by its side lobes, modern radars have low sidelobes gain also their radiations angle in the horizental plan is less than a degree
Thank I learned a lot here and quick too. Thank You. I like Militaryt te
John Liu.....covert cabal discussed mechanical jamming like flares, decoys but he didnt talk about electronic jamming like spot jamming, sweep jamming, barrage jamming and deceptive methods like DFRM.......DFRM can change the range the radar detects by changing the delay in transmission of pulses, the velocity the radar detects by changing the Doppler shift of the transmitted signal, or the angle to the plane by using AM techniques to transmit into the sidelobes of the radar.........but modern radars have reduced sidelobe gain.......it's not that you can't jam but you need huge amount of power or jammer should be very close to radar for jamming to work
This was the best on the subject of radar and signal jamming used by the military, practically answered all my questions with excellent diagrams and animations.
man for almost fourteen freaking minutes I sat there jaw dropped at my screen like "HE MENTIONED CHAFF, BUT IS HE EVER GOING TO MENTION FLARES?!?!??"
I was very relieved at not just the content but the ORDER in which you present them and subsequently a great balanced perspective on where we're at in EW.
The method shown at 5:00 is also used for civil Search and Rescue purposes. A SART Radar Beacon creates a trail of points on the Radar in the direction of the emergency and the spacing between the points indicates distance.
2:30 - that moment when the "anti-shit missiles" confused me for a second.
aldis firwworks are litteraly shit missiles most dissapointing thing ive ever bought
5:36 since the advent of phased array radar, jamming will not show from multiple directions. It will know the direction of the aircraft but not the exact position. Multiple radar stations and simple trigonometry is used to calculate the position of the aircraft
Not sure but at 9:26 I believe the stock images are of Iran's copy/mockup of the RQ-170, not the Sentinel itself, but I could be wrong.
You are correct. The images are the propaganda of Iran, showcasing their (likely hollow) mock-up of the captured RQ-170
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93U.S._RQ-170_incident was real. But that not was the only drone or technology the iranian receive from US some tomahawks missile land in iran without exploed
9:28 There is no proof the Iranians had anything to do with the drone crashing in their territory. In fact, the USAF made a public Press Release that they had lost control and drone had gone missing two days prior to Iran saying anything about having possession of it. The Iranians changed their story at least twice about how the drone was supposedly brought down with contradictatory methods. It seems most likely the drone suffered a malfunction and crashed.
The UK had plenty of aircraft during the Battle of Britain against the Luftwaffe, there was a massive shortage of trained experienced fighter pilots since flying was fairly new at the time.
I love your videos! Love the great content and the background music 🎶 thanks for the videos
For one of your future videos could you consider covering how a war in the sea would be conducted today?
Since the days of the battleship are long gone I have no idea on what range would fleets engage, when planes are deployed, what weapons are used and in what phases of the engagement or in what capacities would submarines support.
6:09 correction: if you double the distance the power required is 4 times greater, not less.
He was right. The power that reaches that double distance is 4 times less. He wasn't saying how much power you need to emit so that the same power reaches that distance
Chaff is not for disguising the aircraft from enemy detection, but to confuse the seeker on the "intelligent" weapon. Provided it's a radar guided weapon. This is one reason Thermal detectors were used in a lot of seeker systems. Jet engines are very hot. So chaff may be made with flares included so they are the hottest things in "View". It's an ongoing struggle to stay on top.
DCS WORLD !!!! BEST GAME !
An excellent educational piece. Seldom has so much scientific, engineering and historical info been crystallized into such a compact RUclips jewel! I loved so much how the show was started by a definition and summary of the EM spectrum! I could only admire how boldly numerous facts and stories not essential of the main narrative wew ignored! Thanks a lot.
Call of Duty: Electronic Warfare
Would be the most boring game ever 😂
Call of Duty, being a video game, is literally electronic warfare!
@@oooo-sg2cs haha yeah so true
Great shots of the base there on Whidbey Island and the E/A-18G in the very beginning of the video! I miss working on those birds sometimes. I was stationed there for 4 years, broken up by an overseas combat deployment of course since I wasn't shore duty, but I loved it there. Such a gorgeous part of the country and I kayaked and snowboarded every river and peak I could too while I was! As a Navy maintainer, we certainly had a Hell of a job cut out for us, and by the time I left the Navy and Whidbey I was night shift sup for 12 Chuck with over 1,500 hours of composite repair, aircraft paint and final finish work, and airframe discrepancy inspections and corrosion removal. It wasn't the best VAQ command I could have been assigned to, but the things I learned and the places I've seen because of the Navy have really changed my life and my perspective of it.
2:28 Is that the Arrival Alien language I see there?
I like how u give an overview of how things are done and not like many national geographic program simply asserting my jammer is bigger than your jammer
Thanks. That's the kind of articles I like to read... a quick overview of a topic, maybe a brief history, description of how it works and maybe details on a few select systems, then methods of countering the system/weapon/platform, and finally a summary. So that's how I try to format my videos.
We have come quite the distance from crossbows and iron sights in such a short period of time. I wonder if it is progress.
Overall this was a very nice, informative, and comprehensive presentation. You are correct this is an extremely broad subject. This makes it easy to see why you may have overlooked a few important categories. The two most important that I can see would be intrusion and meaconing (not to be confused with spoofing). Intrusion is fooling the enemy that you are one of his radio stations thus allowing you to insert false information into his network. This is taking place on the radiofrequency side of the network. Meaconing is similar, but you are fooling the enemy into thinking that you are a radio navigation system. For example, if you receive a GPS signal and then rebroadcast it slightly out of time, this would fool the GPS into thinking it was at some other location than where it was in reality. This is likely how the Iranians were able to send the stealth drone off course into their territory. All of this is happening on the electromagnetic (radio) side of the system. Spoofing happens inside the network. There are many ways to get inside of a network one of which is to intrusion from the radio side of the network. Referring to intrusion or meaconing as spoofing complicates the issue as you don’t know where to attack the problem. An example of spoofing in an IP-based network would be setting up a false user node or server. This can happen entirely from within the network. This false node could even be a GPS reporting node. This false GPS node could then report false timing or location data to other systems on the network. This is why it is important to distinguish if it is spoofing within the network or intrusion and meaconing from the radio side of the network. Lastly, you barely touched on the subject of ECCM (Electronic Counter-Countermeasures). There are many radio and radar systems that use various spread spectrum systems to counter jamming. But what is not sometimes understood that the systems will often also use encryption. Encryption is usually thought of just as a way to stop others from understanding what you are transmitting. It also is a way to provide authentication and thus is a countermeasure against intrusion. This is why encryption doesn’t necessarily help if all the enemy is doing is rebroadcasting as in GPS meaconing. The systems will need to use other methods to detect rebroadcasting.
During the Vietnam war the North Vietnamese were able to shoot down B-52s in spite of the very effective jamming gear on board. How? The B-52s would all approach the target from the same direction, speed, and altitude. When they had dropped their bomb loads they made a sharp turn away from the target (a standard Strategic Air Command maneuver) which suddenly tilted the jamming antenna, changing the signal. The North Vietnamese used the change to figure out where the aircraft would be, and fired their missiles to intercept the bombers. They were fairly successful until Tactical Air Command took over and used a completely different strategy. Source: Air and Space Smithsonian.
J: A problem the USAF has repeated for decades from WWII onwards. Their tactical doctrine is often rigid, is employed rote from the textbook, and lazy staff officers who plan the missions don't make work for themselves by creating new plans for every strike or patrol. I saw this a number of times in my career. (USNR retired).
FASCINATING! I love all things electro-magnetic. I got into high-end loudspeaker design as a hobby and did it for years. Compared to this a woofer is as simple as a bicycle. Look at what a hard drive does and how fast that pickup arm goes.
I wonder sometimes if most of the modern weapons run on some complex C code
Mostly C/C++ and some Assembly too.
The electronic warfare is very scary due to its vast area of possibilities like ocean of possibility...there are two ways to prevent jamming is transmited signals in short pukse and echo the background noise with enscypt signal so hard to know we are there but keep the short signal mixed in echo background continous or use 3 phases 120 degrees separation and progression with times so they csn not detect or if they detect and jamcwith signal only reinfirce our 2 left signals so like nit jaming but repeat the other 2 signal
"Jamming alert the enemy that you are there, somewhere"
That is exactly how Vietnamese shot down B-52, and other American aircraft.
They had to manually calculate the axis that the real air craft and the jamming signal that it created, and just shoot the S-75 in that Axis and let the proximity fuse do the job.
@Billy Lauwda cold war one on the S-75
@Billy Lauwda Yeah, there is no difference. S-75 is command guided from the ground (dumb missile), but the proximity fuse is classic active absolutely same principle and function as WWII "VT" fuse.
Its called triangulation...
Some ECM troops came out to my bomber once and made some changes to the EWO's station. I asked them what they were doing. They said, "That's nice. Have a nice day." That about sums up anyone's knowledge of the ECM system on the B-52 outside of the EWO (EE-DUB) himself and the ECM shop.
When you're fighting a war on the frontlines but your salary is paid by a currency with no value.
*Laughs in hacking the digital economy*
thats why you should rob like fuck in a warzone take jewlery phones the lot fuck em and there fiat currency petrodollar vulva discharge
@@weirdscience8341 laughs in siberian soviets
Jamming radar is most effective when paired with peanut butter countermeasures
Absolutely amazing video, mate, is there any way you could show the sources you use? I'm very interested for personal academic usage
Google
@@OffTheBeatenPath_ I meant if he had very specific articles or links
Everything there is open source.
When the EW Update came in for VTOL VR, we got an amazingly passionately crafted fictional NATOPS manual that beautifully explained Electronic Warfare and it's concepts
Definitely more effective and would hurt more ppl than conventional, that's a fact.
When I was in the US Air Force I worked in ECM, ECCM. Pretty cool stuff.
So technically, the S300 and S400 can be defeated after all.
Defeating the S-300 and S-400 has never been an issue for the US. Both the F-35 and F-22 have proved over and over they are more than capable of defeating them.
@@mississippirebel1409 Hmm interesting. Can you point me to an article or something about this? I haven't heard of the over and over stuff.
@@mississippirebel1409 Then try that agsinst S-400 batteries operated by Russia, but have your affairs in order first. They are as of now, nearly unjammable and in fact seek out jammers and detonate within close proximity to them.
Taras Wertelecki - The S-400 can only detect the F-22, F-35 and B-2 at shorter ranges and will have a difficult time targeting them until they are at a fairly short distance. Also if the S-400's radar is active, the F-22 and F-35 will know eactly where it is from a very long distance and can either avoid it or get withing striking range for a anti-radar missile like the AGM-88 HARM.
Sure the S-400 and even the S-300 to some extent will have success against 4th gen fighters, but if you really believe that the S-400 is going to shoot down a lot of F-35 and F-22's, well you aren't living in the real world. There is a reason why Russia and China have been trying to develop a true 5th gen fighter that is stealthy. But they just don't have neither the money, technology and know how to build a true 5th gen aircraft. Russia's integraded missile defense system would only last so long before they are all hunted down and destroyed. Plus it's not like Russia has a lot of these systems.
SA radar 300 - 400 systems can see aircraft in international airspace . And they use other anti missle and aircraft system along with SA systems .
The transmit power of the outgoing signal varies with the inverse square law, but the return power varies as the cube of the distance because the illuminated object radiates the return as though it were a light bulb. I.E. black body radiator.
Reasons future warfare is scary af
1) Incredible offensive power, with massive stores of ammo
2)Speed of weapons
3)Distance of enemy
4)Economic power of superpowers
I'm very impressed. You've created an outstanding overview with a lot of details, illustrations, schematics, concepts, application of theory, photos; historical insights. I'm particularly impressed by your honesty regarding the German blimp spying on Englands radio towers & signals during World War II. Congratulations for a job done extremely well.
13:32 Trolling God Level LMAO 😂 😂
Nice, worked aboard USS Ranger CV-61 as an Electronics Warfare Technician. Electronics Warfare is the war no body talks about much. Yet it is often the difference between life and death in battle.
"LIGHT WARFARE": Everything in existence are 'gem' photons and interacting 'gem' photons.
Revised TOE: 3/25/2017a.
My Current TOE:
THE SETUP:
1. Modern science currently recognizes four forces of nature: The strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, gravity, and electromagnetism.
2. In school we are taught that with magnetism, opposite polarities attract and like polarities repel. But inside the arc of a large horseshoe magnet it's the other way around, like polarities attract and opposite polarities repel. (I have proved this to myself with magnets and anybody with a large horseshoe magnet and two smaller bar magnets can easily prove this to yourself too. It occurs at the outer end of the inner arc of the horseshoe magnet.).
3. Charged particles have an associated magnetic field with them.
4. Protons and electrons are charged particles and have their associated magnetic fields with them.
5. Photons also have both an electric and a magnetic component to them.
FOUR FORCES OF NATURE DOWN INTO TWO:
6. When an electron is in close proximity to the nucleus, it would basically generate a 360 degree spherical magnetic field.
7. Like charged protons would stick together inside of this magnetic field, while simultaneously repelling opposite charged electrons inside this magnetic field, while simultaneously attracting the opposite charged electrons across the inner portion of the electron's moving magnetic field.
8. There are probably no such thing as "gluons" in actual reality.
9. The strong nuclear force and the weak nuclear force are probably derivatives of the electro-magnetic field interactions between electrons and protons.
10. The nucleus is probably an electro-magnetic field boundary.
11. Quarks also supposedly have a charge to them and then would also most likely have electro-magnetic fields associated with them, possibly a different arrangement for each of the six different type of quarks.
12. The interactions between the quarks EM forces are how and why protons and neutrons formulate as well as how and why protons and neutrons stay inside of the nucleus and do not just pass through as neutrinos do.
THE GEM FORCE INTERACTIONS AND QUANTA:
13. Personally, I currently believe that the directional force in photons is "gravity". It's the force that makes the sine wave of EM energy go from a wide (maximum extension) to a point (minimum extension) of a moving photon and acts 90 degrees to the EM forces which act 90 degrees to each other. When the EM gets to maximum extension, "gravity" flips and EM goes to minimum, then "gravity" flips and goes back to maximum, etc, etc. A stationary photon would pulse from it's maximum extension to a point possibly even too small to detect, then back to maximum, etc, etc.
14. I also believe that a pulsating, swirling singularity (which is basically a pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon) is the energy unit in this universe.
15. When these pulsating, swirling energy units interact with other energy units, they tangle together and can interlock at times. Various shapes (strings, spheres, whatever) might be formed, which then create sub-atomic material, atoms, molecules, and everything in existence in this universe.
16. When the energy units unite and interlock together they would tend to stabilize and vibrate.
17. I believe there is probably a Photonic Theory Of The Atomic Structure.
18. Everything is basically "light" (photons) in a universe entirely filled with "light" (photons).
THE MAGNETIC FORCE SPECIFICALLY:
19. When the electron with it's associated magnetic field goes around the proton with it's associated magnetic field, internal and external energy oscillations are set up.
20. When more than one atom is involved, and these energy frequencies align, they add together, specifically the magnetic field frequency.
21. I currently believe that this is where a line of flux originates from, aligned magnetic field frequencies.
NOTES:
22. The Earth can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic field, electrical surface field, and gravity, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other.
23. The flat spiral galaxy can be looked at as being a massive singular interacting photon with it's magnetic fields on each side of the plane of matter, the electrical field along the plane of matter, and gravity being directed towards the galactic center's black hole where the gravitational forces would meet, all three photonic forces all being 90 degrees from each other.
24. As below in the singularity, as above in the galaxy and probably universe as well.
25. I believe there are only two forces of nature, Gravity and EM, (GEM). Due to the stability of the GEM with the energy unit, this is also why the forces of nature haven't evolved by now. Of which with the current theory of understanding, how come the forces of nature haven't evolved by now since the original conditions acting upon the singularity aren't acting upon them like they originally were, billions of years have supposedly elapsed, in a universe that continues to expand and cool, with energy that could not be created nor destroyed would be getting less and less dense? My theory would seem to make more sense if in fact it is really true. I really wonder if it is in fact really true.
26. And the universe would be expanding due to these pulsating and interacting energy units and would also allow galaxies to collide, of which, how could galaxies ever collide if they are all speeding away from each other like is currently taught?
DISCLAIMER:
27. As I as well as all of humanity truly do not know what we do not know, the above certainly could be wrong. It would have to be proved or disproved to know for more certainty.
_________________________________________________________________________
Here is the test for the 'gravity' portion of my TOE idea. I do not have the necessary resources to do the test but maybe you or someone else reading this does, will do the test, then tell the world what is found out either way.
a. Imagine a 12 hour clock.
b. Put a magnetic field across from the 3 to 9 o'clock positions.
c. Put an electric field across from the 6 to 12 o'clock positions.
(The magnetic field and electric field would be 90 degrees to each other and should be polarized so as to complement each other.)
d. Shoot a high powered laser through the center of the clock at 90 degrees to the em fields.
e. Do this with the em fields on and off.
(The em fields could be varied in size, strength, density and depth. The intent would be to energy frequency match the laser and em fields for optimal results.)
f. Look for any gravitational / anti-gravitational effects.
(Including the utilization of ferro cells so as to be able to actually see the energy field movements.)
(An alternative to the above would be to shoot 3 high powered lasers, or a single high powered laser split into 3 beams, each adjustable to achieve the above set up, all focused upon a single point in space.)
'If' effects are noted, 'then' further research could be done.
'If' effects are not noted, 'then' my latest TOE idea is wrong. But still, we would know what 'gravity' was not, which is still something in the scientific world. Science still wins either way and moves forward.
The mathematics for the TOE doesn't even exist yet as far as I am currently aware. It goes beyond any quantum field theory formulas that I am currently aware of. The outline though is basically as follows:
The formula has at least 3 levels to it:
1. The Internal Photon Level: The 3 interacting forces, (which might even be just a singular force with 3 different modalities), all interacting at basically 90 degrees to each other and all simultaneously pulsating and swirling. A complex part of the formula but I believe to be totally doable.
2. The External Photon Level: For each pulsating, swirling photon, all the pulsating, swirling photons interacting with it. An exponential part of the formula that I am not even sure modern day super computers could adequately handle.
3. The Inter-dimensional Photon Level: For each modality within each photon would have an energy frequency associated with it. The energy frequencies could be seen as being in their own space time dimension. (For me, 'space' is energy itself of which is the 'gem' photon and 'time' is the flow of energy; 'temperature' is the interaction of energy), so one would be dealing with way more than just 3 spatial dimensions and way more than just 1 time dimension (as there would many different energy frequencies with many different flows of energy). Whenever like resonate energy frequencies resonated with each other, they would affect each other, kind of like 'spooky action at a distance'. Anytime energy frequencies overlapped, there would be a temporary spike of some sort in each space time dimension. In addition, if in reality the 'gem' photon is just a singular force with 3 different modalities, it's possible that energy could 'slip' between modalities which would also affect the results. A very complex part of the formula on top of all the complexity that came before it.
4. Any time any energy moved in the system, the entire formula would have to be recalculated due to potential ripple effects.
Like I said above, I don't even believe the mathematics exists yet for what I am trying to do, but at a minimum, the formula would contain the above levels the way I currently see it to be.
______________________________________________________________________________
'IF' my latest TOE idea is really true, (and I fully acknowledge the 'if' at this time), that the pulsating, swirling 'gem' photon is the energy unit of this universe that makes up everything in existence in this universe, and what is called 'gravity' is a part of what is currently recognized as the 'em' photon, then the oscillation of these 3 interacting modalities of the energy unit would be as follows:
Gravity: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction;
Electrical: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction;
Magnetic: Maximum in one direction, Neutral, Maximum in the other direction.
Then:
1 singular energy unit, with 3 different modalities, with 6 maximum most reactive positions, with 9 total basic reactive positions (neutrals included). Hence 1, 3, 6, 9 being very prominent numbers in this universe and why mathematics even works in this universe.
(And possibly '0', zero, for no flow of energy, hence the number system that we currently have).
@@charlesbrightman4237 Well, first you must define TOE, since the normal acronym Table Of Equipment seems unrelated.
@@KB4QAA I'd venture to guess he means 'Theory of Everything'.
@@charlesbrightman4237 But why on (singular massive spinning photon) Earth would you post your idea on a RUclips comment section about an only tangentially related subject, where not many (myself included) who read your idea can critically evaluate it? Are you afraid that it won't hold up under scrutiny?
@@KB4QAA Note: I never received a notification of your response. It was only due to L'FMR's response whereby I received a notification this time and am here. Yes, L'FMR is correct, TOE = Theory Of Everything.
I watch a lot of military videos and I can tell you that your videos are very informative.
Great job. 👍
7:53 You are forgetting to calculate in the earths curvature in their range, I suggest you pick up Command Modern Air Naval Operations, one of the best sims in the genre.
well at least against high air targets
Nothing beats DCS for aerial operations
How dare you say "curve" 😂
the earth is flat
earth is flat mate, stop believe NASA propaganda
This here seems more like a tool to use when one has less weapons but can as a result act with a more effective plan in place.
nice video but that bit at the end about Germany having a chance at winning the battle of Britain is far from accurate. whilst very weary and tired, britain produced more aircraft than were lost and within a year had almost doubled its fighter count from around 660 in july 1940 to 1250 in march 41. poor tactics on the germans part didn't help much but they had no way to effectively stop the RAFs fighter production.
people like to think the BoB was a close affair but when you look behind the scenes it could only go one way.
the above comments are not to belittle the huge effort the men and women of the RAF put in but rather to inform others that the RAF was set up do defend very well and the germans were unaware how well prepared they were.
also germany could never have invaded britain because of its huge royal navy and germany never produced any meaningful landing craft
@eddie money too bad the Germans fell for the carrots make for better eyesight lies from the British.
There are loads of reasons Sea Lion would have failed even if the battle of Britain was won which you have pointed out was also unlikely even without radar. The primary reason being that Germany underestimated Britains ability to replace losses by a large factor. military history visualized has a good video about the problems with Sea Lion ruclips.net/video/YnPo7V03nbY/видео.html&ab_channel=MilitaryHistoryVisualized
@eddie money there are loads of other reasons why Germany lost the battle of Britain check out this page militaryhistoryvisualized.com/why-the-luftwaffe-failed-in-world-war-2-failures-shortcomings-and-blunders/
@eddie money - They were smart enough and did bomb it multiple times, but the British were able to put bombed installations back into service within a very short time (a day or so.) Both sides were smart enough to know it was essential.
@eddie money you keep saying "your" but I am not British I am American. I think you might want to check your objectivity and go look at the link I posted on all the problems with Operation sea lion that have nothing to do with radar. TLDR Amphibious landings are super hard.
What you are describing in the beginning of the video is called Range Gate Pull off and Velocity Gate Pull off. One good way to negate the effects of both is to use Frequency Agility.
Can you do a video explaining your research methods for these vids? like holy titted jesus you seemingly found footage a general would have seen in a budgetary pitch for funding lolol
You are accredited with, explaining in short & showing depiction of the basis of The Radio Frequency Spectrum, the dept. of energy & head shrinking's job. On whole a quite benificiable content for developing
youth.
When i heard "ECM" i immediately thought about Battlefield 4
BS: Well that shows your experience is purely amateurish, when you relate to the world based on video games. sigh. Try reading a book.
I can't think of a single weapons system that uses GPS as it's the navigation system. Even GPS guided bombs are actually inertial navigated with a system to update with GPS for greater accuracy, but it doesn't need the GPS but once to know it's starting location and that could be hours back when it was first mounted to the airframe.
ALL I'M SAYING, IS THAT AMERICA IS KING IN THIS GAME AND EVERY OTHER GAVE OUT THERE. GOD BLESS AMERICA.
Loved the video, but may I make a small correction. The German airship patrol did detect the Chain Home signals but technical analysts couldn't distiguish them from radiation from UK's electricity transmission network. What they didn't know was the radars were all synchronised from that network. The German engineers also didn't believe that anything so crude could work as an effectve radar. Lucky for us!
This video didn't age well
specialy the drone part lul
@@kenmeylender2234Ironically enough Russia activated a big ass jammer in the Baltic sea
1 factor in the Battle of Britain that is commonly overlooked is the differences in squadron size between the RAF and Luftwaffe units. British RAF squadrons had 12-18, and in a few cases, 24, aircraft assigned per squadron, while the standard Luftwaffe squadron normally only had 8-10 aircraft. Each side's squadron composition was unknown to the other. Therefore, the RAF was consistently over estimating Luftwaffe strength, while the Luftwaffe continuously underestimated RAF strength, all based on the number of confirmed kills reported by each side to their respective commanders. The result was Hitler, thru submitted reports that supposed RAF squadrons to be comprised of only 8-10 aircraft each, believed that the RAF was on the verge of collapse, when in fact they had much larger forces.
Maybe nezt gideo aboud hoew strung ugandan spiecasal foreceses is
Russian Electronic Warfare equipment EW:
Alurgit,
Rtut B,
Infauna,
Krasuxa 4 300km radius of operation,
Moskva 1 Radio technical intelligence gathering radius 400km,
Paradist,
Lorandit M,
Layer 3,
Lesochek,
Magnirep,
Pole 21,
Chibiny the one used to bust Donald Cook ,
Vitepsk,
Samarkand;
Murmansk BM range up to 3000km , brakes communication with the airport or satellite communication
You really should consider getting off Patreon. Run by scumbags that might cut you off at anytime if they don’t like your ideas.
No only if u were a racist, and say the N word left and right. You don't support racist, do you?
Oh waaa, they got rid of fucking Sargon. Who cares!
Have seen ECM of various sizes/weights on parachutes, some freely floated,, falling at different rates of speed, some were armed drones targeting enemy electronic signals which sends and seeks electronic info to offensive and defensive fire control.
Edit:
Some ECC used electronics to send false location information - incoming would follow false targets and appear to be destroyed.
Thanks for an excellent video.
No coments simply waste 🚯
When you add several new techs together like frequency agile radar, phased array radar and signal processing, Electronic Warfare is getting very, very complex and powerful. It's why the Gulf War went so badly so fast for the Iraqis despite all of the men and the relatively modern equipment and experienced personnel they had.
Electronic and cyber warfare is the most destructive and terrifying form of warfare there is.
Much more than nukes or biological weapons for sure!
I'd say biological is it the most terrifying. It has 0 control once used. You can call of cyber attacks and defend. Biological is in discriminate and even dangerous to the user
NBC is surely more terrifying, we just have forgotten just how terrifying it is.
@@FirstDagger Personally I could live the rest of my life without a harsh reminder.
@@imrekalman9044 ; Oh yes no question about it.
This was started back in WWII. In 1944 B-17 bombers in Europe were equipped with radar jammers to disrupt the German radar guided anti-aircraft guns.