Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations KootK on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

ChiComs may have exposed a tactical Sig-Int threat posed by Starlink [and similar] Constellations

Status
Not open for further replies.

WKTaylor

Active member
Sep 24, 2001
4,028
-----------
/NOTE1/ That this 'Chinese study' was even published makes me wary that this is real as opposed to being a decoy...
-----------

Could Satellite Signals ‘Un-Stealth’ Stealth Aircraft?

New research shows that satellite signals could be effective where radar fails.

According to a story on the Techno-Science website, a recent Chinese study shows that Starlink satellites could provide a means for detecting stealth aircraft. Stealth technology is devoted to developing aircraft shapes and surfaces that reduce the radar signature and deflect radar beams. But Chinese researchers have reportedly found that aircraft—including stealth aircraft—cause interference in regular satellite signals, such as those from the Starlink constellation, that can be analyzed to detect their presence, even when they are invisible to radar.

Chinese scientists tested the premise with a low-altitude DJI Phantom 4 Pro drone, which simulates the radar signature of a stealth aircraft such as the F-22. They were able to detect the drone based on the variations in electromagnetic signals emanating from the satellites.

This technology would have the added advantage over radar of not requiring easily detectable radar emissions. And as more Starlink satellites are placed in orbit, more opportunity exists for piggybacking on their transmissions for this purpose.

Though they noted that their research is still in the experimental stage, the Chinese scientists are already considering using other similar satellite constellations, including those from the Chinese Thousand Sails program.

----------

China plans to repurpose Starlink satellites to detect stealth aircraft, here's how...

By altering the satellite signal, these planes could influence the quality of transmissions. The scientists tested this hypothesis with a commercial drone, the DJI Phantom 4 Pro, which simulates the radar footprint of a stealth aircraft. The experiment took place in China using signals captured from Starlink satellites.

The approach is based on the fact that signal disruptions, caused by an object passing through the line between the satellite and the ground station, can reveal the presence of the object. The researchers were able to locate the drone by observing variations in the electromagnetic signals from the satellites.

Starlink, with its dense constellation, offers extensive and continuous coverage, ideal for this kind of detection. This passive method has an advantage over traditional radars, which require active emissions to find their targets.

While the tests focused on a low-altitude drone, the researchers anticipate potential improvements. The increasing number of Starlink satellites in the coming years could bolster this technique.

The Chinese scientists, while noting that their method is still in an experimental phase, foresee military applications. They are also considering the possibility of using similar constellations in the future, such as Thousand Sails (a Chinese project).

Detecting stealth aircraft remains a complex task, requiring thorough analysis of signal data. Preliminary results indicate that this technology may provide an interesting alternative to traditional radar systems.

Future developments could enhance this technique, making it more effective in military applications. The researchers are continuing to refine their approach to address the challenges posed by stealth aircraft.


Regards, Wil Taylor
o Trust - But Verify!
o For those who believe, no proof is required; for those who cannot believe, no proof is possible. [variation, Stuart Chase]
o Unfortunately, in science what You 'believe' is irrelevant. ["Orion", HBA forum]
o Only fools and charlatans know everything and understand everything." -Anton Chekhov
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Bistatic radar was always a threat to stelf planes. There was a rumour that the F117 shot down in Serbia was tracked by cell phone bar variation - I don't think that's as likely as the other story of them using the same route repeatedly.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
 
Then it will be equally effective for the USA to detect foreign stealth aircraft.
Just another stride in the arms race.

I have read similar things, about using the signals from a wi-fi router to map the contents and occupants of a room, from outside of that room.

First google hit using that sentence as my search terms:
 
I have heard that stealth 'features' are often so strong at absorbing reflective EM energy, that they tend to cause a 'black hole effect' that is moving.

The 'rain' of EM energy directed downward from moving satellites may create an EM shadow. So, maybe, the limiting factor may be the need for thousands of coordinated/high precision antennas/receivers... coordinated thru AI supercomputer(s) to detect moving 'black holes' that act like aircraft or missiles... assuming the computer speed can keep up with moving/changing stealth perspectives...?

Hmmm... wonder if this effect could also penetrate to sea and ground level for unnatural... man-made... objects?

Regards, Wil Taylor
o Trust - But Verify!
o For those who believe, no proof is required; for those who cannot believe, no proof is possible. [variation, Stuart Chase]
o Unfortunately, in science what You 'believe' is irrelevant. ["Orion", HBA forum]
o Only fools and charlatans know everything and understand everything." -Anton Chekhov
 
If stealth features were that strong at absorbing EM energy they would not need the special shapes. They still rely very much on ensuring little EM energy is reflected back at the transmitter. This is sufficient for most purposes as most tracking depends on an amount of retroreflection.

The question I cannot answer is how much refraction there is around a stealth aircraft vs a regular one.

What a stealth plane could do is to scatter the radio transmissions and add a Doppler component with the greatest component of the Doppler shifted signal coming from the interaction with the aircraft. If one could identify the original transmission then there would be a phase shift that would tell how much farther the signal had to travel to reach the receiver and therefore supply a potential range as well.
 
The RAM only works at certain (short) wavelengths. There's nothing much can be done about radars that have a wavelength in the metre plus range, the wingspan is just an aerial.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376
 
If stealth features were that strong at absorbing EM energy they would not need the special shapes.

Stealth is a system engineering solution; there's no single approach that solves the problem. While it's hypothetically possible to use only RAM, there are issues with thickness, durability, damage tolerance, and at least one other thing that I probably shouldn't mention, even though I'm not under any security classification guidance.

RAM durability and damage tolerance is probably a big deal; there are potential issues with rain and other particulate erosion on the material, and if getting a non-fatal bullet hole or scrape results in loss of stealth.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
 
IR... Good assessment.

/NOTE/ I know 'a bit' about what You are talking... and I can never discuss the subject of 'stealth'... cause I DO have a clearance.

Stealth is only one of many interlocking-design-puzzle-pieces that make modern combat aircraft hugely difficult to design, build, test, maintain and 'fund'... for over-all battle survivability and effectiveness. NOW I have to take a breath and shut-up... and baktuwurk.

Regards, Wil Taylor
o Trust - But Verify!
o For those who believe, no proof is required; for those who cannot believe, no proof is possible. [variation, Stuart Chase]
o Unfortunately, in science what You 'believe' is irrelevant. ["Orion", HBA forum]
o Only fools and charlatans know everything and understand everything." -Anton Chekhov
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor