China missile hit highest suborbital level since 1976:

[gambit]

But now they do, and they rely on it heavily. I'm not underestimating anyone, the US is not the same as it once was in the past, without the high tech gadgets, US regular forces are at a major disadvantage.

Yes, you do underestimate US.

You do not even know the proper context of 'disadvantage'. In order to be at a 'disadvantage', the other side must have something that I do not have. So let us take away satellite assisted navigation which would include Glonass and Baidu, for now. Does anyone else have it?

Global Positioning System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Orbiting at an altitude of approximately 20,200 km (12,600 mi);...

This latest Chinese launch is at best half of the typical GPS orbit altitude. So what make you think that we cannot deny the Russians and the Chinese their satellite assisted navigation system, considering we are the pioneers of the concept and as well as the leader in ASAT weapons?

We have 100 times the combat experience of the PLA even without GPS. So what make you think that we are that dependent upon GPS to take out Chinese targets?

I really really do hope the entire PLA thinks like you do, after all, they did predicted that we would take terrible losses in Desert Storm to win over Iraq.

 

[Oldman1]

You mean like the Chinese victory over the US military in the Korean War?



You don't know the principles, that's why you are making personal attacks. You do this when you have no comeback. It's your escape clause.

Chinese victory? South Korea still exists.

This will be used to target GPS satellites in Medium Earth Orbit. No GPS means no more Tomahawks.

U.S. sees China launch as test of anti-satellite muscle: source | Reuters

Does that mean your DF 21 missiles are useless when Chinese satellites get blown out in space?

 

[j20blackdragon]

So what make you think that we cannot deny the Russians and the Chinese their satellite assisted navigation system

BeiDou-1 and BeiDou-2 have satellites in geostationary orbit.

When has the US demonstrated geostationary orbit ASAT capability?

Beidou Navigation Satellite System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

China's 2007 ASAT test at 537 miles (865 km) is higher than anything the US has done so far.

Anti-satellite weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Does that mean your DF 21 missiles are useless when Chinese satellites get blown out in space?

The answer is yes—if you can hit BeiDou-2 satellites in geostationary orbit.

 

[dbc]

BeiDou-1 and BeiDou-2 have satellites in geostationary orbit.

When has the US demonstrated geostationary orbit ASAT capability?

Beidou Navigation Satellite System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

China's 2007 ASAT test at 537 miles (865 km) is higher than anything the US has done so far.

Anti-satellite weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



The answer is yes—if you can hit BeiDou-2 satellites in geostationary orbit.

DARPA created a autonomous navigation system in a eight-cubic-millimeter chip. This tiny chip holds three gyroscopes, acclerometers and atomic clocks. I assume you know the meaning of the word autonomous? It means we don't need GPS satellites for navigation. The system has been tested and proven to be more accurate and reliable than GPS.

 

[j20blackdragon]

DARPA created a autonomous navigation system in a eight-cubic-millimeter chip. This tiny chip holds three gyroscopes, acclerometers and atomic clocks. I assume you know the meaning of the word autonomous? It means we don't need GPS satellites for navigation.

Sounds like INS in a small chip, nothing special.

The system has been tested and proven to be more accurate and reliable than GPS.

I would like to see a credible source that says it is more accurate and reliable than GPS.

 

[That Guy]

Yes, you do underestimate US.

You do not even know the proper context of 'disadvantage'. In order to be at a 'disadvantage', the other side must have something that I do not have. So let us take away satellite assisted navigation which would include Glonass and Baidu, for now. Does anyone else have it?

Global Positioning System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This latest Chinese launch is at best half of the typical GPS orbit altitude. So what make you think that we cannot deny the Russians and the Chinese their satellite assisted navigation system, considering we are the pioneers of the concept and as well as the leader in ASAT weapons?

We have 100 times the combat experience of the PLA even without GPS. So what make you think that we are that dependent upon GPS to take out Chinese targets?

I really really do hope the entire PLA thinks like you do, after all, they did predicted that we would take terrible losses in Desert Storm to win over Iraq.

I don't think you quite get it, Iraq has nothing to do with this situation and even then the US military in the 90s is not the same as today's military, the US military has changed drastically in the last 30 years or so.

If China is able to get rid of GPS, then the US military around the world will be blind, a lot of weapons systems would also become worthless because of the loss of GPS, such as long range drone tech, which is becoming increasingly embedded in US military doctrine.

China wouldn't have such a problem, because their military doesn't rely on such things and Chinese military doctrine recognizes that in a war between two powers that have ASAT technology, it will inevitably end up forcing both nations into fighting (relatively) low tech wars, that means no more long range drones and bombers, that means no more fighters that rely on sats to relay info from and two HQ, that means no more soldiers that have real time intel on the ground. China recognizes this and has built it's doctrine on high and low tech warfare, whereas the US only concentrates on high tech war thinking that a war between the two nations is improbable (and rightfully so, but we're talking about a hypothetical situation here).

The US would win, no one actually disputes that, but at what cost? China would be and is ready for any such event as a blind war, the question now is, is the US ready? In my opinion? No.

 

[dbc]

Sounds like INS in a small chip, nothing special.



I would like to see a credible source that says it is more accurate and reliable than GPS.

The autonomous navigation microchip I described earlier is called TIMU, TIMU works with larger system called PINS.When deployed the PINS system will be no larger than the radio back pack carried by a world war II soldier.While a TIMU microchip(see image) is intended to be no larger than an apple seed small enough to fit on a bullet. TIMU will receive drift correction updates from a larger more accurate ground based mobile PINS system. The PINS Precision Inertial Navigation System is demonstrated to be 280 times more accurate than GPS.

The most mature cold atom technology exists at a program run by the Defense Advanced Projects Agency (DARPA). The Precision Inertial Navigation System (PINS) had demonstrated a cold atom system measuring a rotation and acceleration on a single axis at TRL 5. The program has been successful in a laboratory demonstration system that has operated for over a year. This demonstration system measured a drift rate of less than 5 m/hr, and this rate is much less than the 1400 m/hr drift rate on current high-performance GPS/INS systems by a factor of 280.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/cst/bh2011_suriano.pdf


One more thing you should know. The US, Russia and Europe signed an interoperability agreement which means that a GPS receiver can be reconfigured via a software update to use all three signals GPS,GLONASS and Galileo. So does China plan to shoot down nearly 75 satellites belonging to the US, Russia and Europe?

Apple confirms GLONASS support for iPhone 4S

The reason the US is working on autonomous systems is the susceptibility of GNSS systems to denial of service by jamming and signal spoofing. It isn't the fear of China's ASAT missiles that is driving US interest in autonomous navigation technology.

 

[jnd3x0]

Not really underestimating anyone, the US would still win in any such war, as they would still have the biggest gun in the fight. I'm just saying that the US would suffer needless casualties.

how can US win? when their guns are made in china along with their big missiles hhahaha .... -jokes apart-

 

[That Guy]

how can US win? when their guns are made in china along with their big missiles hhahaha .... -jokes apart-

It doesn't matter where the gun is made, it just matters who can cause the most damage with the least amount of wounds, has the will to last longer and has the most experience.

The US wins in two of these catagories. China neither has the experience nor does it possess the same capability to cause as much damage as the US, at least not without major losses in life.

 

[j20blackdragon]

The PINS Precision Inertial Navigation System is demonstrated to be 280 times more accurate than GPS.

No it isn't.

The most mature cold atom technology exists at a program run by the Defense Advanced Projects Agency (DARPA). The Precision Inertial Navigation System (PINS) had demonstrated a cold atom system measuring a rotation and acceleration on a single axis at TRL 5. The program has been successful in a laboratory demonstration system that has operated for over a year. This demonstration system measured a drift rate of less than 5 m/hr, and this rate is much less than the 1400 m/hr drift rate on current high-performance GPS/INS systems by a factor of 280.

GPS doesn't drift.

GPS is used to update the INS system, which drifts.

The PINS system is nothing more than a highly accurate INS.

INS is worthless if you don't have a known starting location, which will be the case for a moving ship in the middle of the ocean once all GPS satellites have been destroyed.

Let me put it another way.

INS is designed to get you from point A to point B, and it does everything internally with no outside input.

But how do you accomplish this when you don't even know point A?

 

[gambit]

BeiDou-1 and BeiDou-2 have satellites in geostationary orbit.

When has the US demonstrated geostationary orbit ASAT capability?

Beidou Navigation Satellite System - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

China's 2007 ASAT test at 537 miles (865 km) is higher than anything the US has done so far.

Anti-satellite weapon - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



The answer is yes—if you can hit BeiDou-2 satellites in geostationary orbit.

Satellite assisted navigation systems: GPS, Glonass, and Baidu are ALL GEOSTATIONARY ORBITS'.

So according to you, only China can create an ASAT against a geostationary satellite but not the US. This shows that you do not understand even the basics of the subject in discussion.

People give me flak about the phrase 'Chinese physics'. But given the repeated violations of the real laws of physics, of logical thought process, and of common sense, I do not see any other way to describe what you guys post.

 

[gambit]

No it isn't.



GPS doesn't drift.

GPS is used to update the INS system, which drifts.

The PINS system is nothing more than a highly accurate INS.

INS is worthless if you don't have a known starting location, which will be the case for a moving ship in the middle of the ocean once all GPS satellites have been destroyed.

Let me put it another way.

INS is designed to get you from point A to point B, and it does everything internally with no outside input.

But how do you accomplish this when you don't even know point A?

What a foolish post...

If I know my starting point but not precisely my destination, I would use an age old technique called 'dead reckoning'...

Dead reckoning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In navigation, dead reckoning (also ded (for deduced) reckoning or DR) is the process of calculating one's current position by using a previously determined position, or fix, and advancing that position based upon known or estimated speeds over elapsed time, and course.

Each 'fix' is essentially a starting point. So if I know my speed, altitude, and heading, with time I can estimate where I will be, or where I am at when I calculate a new current position.

That is how flyers flew since the early days of aviation. Once a pilot arrived at where he believed/estimated to be New York City, for example, he would search for landmarks or any distinguishing features that would indicate NYC. If he is a sh1tty navigator, then instead of NYC he could be in Havana, Cuba.

Any wonder why I call you guys 'conscript rejects'?

I don't think you quite get it, Iraq has nothing to do with this situation and even then the US military in the 90s is not the same as today's military, the US military has changed drastically in the last 30 years or so.

And this reasonable assumption give you a logical conclusion that we did not explore alternate navigation techniques that does not rely so heavily on GPS?

I 'get it' better than you do. And yes, you still underestimate US. Keep on doing it...

 

[shuttler]

Yes, you do underestimate US.

This latest Chinese launch is at best half of the typical GPS orbit altitude. So what make you think that we cannot deny the Russians and the Chinese their satellite assisted navigation system, considering we are the pioneers of the concept and as well as the leader in ASAT weapons?

Do you know what the coverage of Baidou is for? we are not a world hegemony like usa.

We have 100 times the combat experience of the PLA even without GPS. So what make you think that we are that dependent upon GPS to take out Chinese targets?

and still losing wars, consistently

I really really do hope the entire PLA thinks like you do, after all, they did predicted that we would take terrible losses in Desert Storm to win over Iraq.

How much have you won in Iraq? We are thinking all dimensions.

People give me flak about the phrase 'Chinese physics'. But given the repeated violations of the real laws of physics, of logical thought process, and of common sense, I do not see any other way to describe what you guys post.

shall we call you "gambit technology"= usa technology ?

 

[gambit]

Do you know what the coverage of Baidou is for? we are not a world hegemony like usa.

Coverage is irrelevant. And hegemony have nothing to do with this.

and still losing wars, consistently



How much have you won in Iraq? We are thinking all dimensions.

Look at your PLA. If we really 'lost' your PLA would not copy just about everything we are and do as a military.

So take your 'the US lost Afghanistan and Iraq' insult elsewhere where other people are stupid and ignorant enough to believe it.

shall we call you "gambit technology"= usa technology ?

Wise to do so. Because so far no one have ever returned to this forum and proved me wrong on what I explained to them. Too bad for the Chinese members here, no one can say the same for you guys.

Am still waiting for one of you, who claimed to be a physics professor, to prove to the world that the 10-lambda rule violated Born Approximation. Now THAT would be 'Chinese physics'.

 

[shuttler]

Coverage is irrelevant. And hegemony have nothing to do with this.

you are ignorant to the core
coverage does matter and matters very importantly!
if coverage does not matter why usa does not save all the money to have its gps focus on usa?

gps is part of the us hegemeony scheme!

Look at your PLA. If we really 'lost' your PLA would not copy just about everything we are and do as a military.

So take your 'the US lost Afghanistan and Iraq' insult elsewhere where other people are stupid and ignorant enough to believe it.

Our PLA is doing okay
Sue us for your alledged "copying"

You have lost both wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Your vets are committing suicides and more of you are suffering from ptsds
the Talibans are re-grouping and you have no other choice but to retreat. All your "allies" have retreted or in process of retreatng

Wise to do so. Because so far no one have ever returned to this forum and proved me wrong on what I explained to them. Too bad for the Chinese members here, no one can say the same for you guys.

show us usa can shoot down a satellite at GEO then we talk

Am still waiting for one of you, who claimed to be a physics professor, to prove to the world that the 10-lambda rule violated Born Approximation. Now THAT would be 'Chinese physics'.

dont need to prove anything for "gambit technology" to cement our reputation of Physics in the realm of science!