<p>First, <a href="http://m.sciencemag.org/content/312/5782/1965.abstract">http://m.sciencemag.org/content/312/5782/1965.abstract</a></p>
<p>Second, I asked what people would do, not what wasn't done.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Dec 21, 2011 7:58 AM, "Joshua Carpoff" <<a href="mailto:joshua@carpoff.net">joshua@carpoff.net</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div><div style="font-family:Arial;font-size:medium" dir="ltr"><div>
<blockquote type="cite">
That is so weak! This is what we pay billions of dollars for?</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
I suspect they spent lots and lots of time working out "least-worst" responses to various failure modes all while trying to keep the final cost of production under some insanely small figure. First, assuming navigation information was still available via GPS (it wasn't) while comms were disabled in a military situation the very last thing you want is a non-communicative aircraft to navigate back to base. Nevermind the air traffic problem that could allow one mission failure to cascade into multiple delays for other missions unrelated other than being based from the same airfield, assuming IFF is non-communicative for the same reason (very reasonable) you have to allocate an expensive resource towards manual identification, preferably as far out as possible. This usually means a human life rushing to get into the air (or even more costly if loitering on standby on rotation) carried by a very fast jet that costs a lot of money per second of operation, carrying a pilot who may be flying into a trap.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Basically any cheap UAV is programmed to navigate back to base when comms are lost is cheap no more...if you still had previous Nav info, you wouldn't want it to be used.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Using autonomous terrain identification as a third source of navigation information would be very costly to add to a UAV (currently they're custom built for each aircraft system, they rely on sophisticated radar which UAV's do not possess, and the focus is more on terrain avoidance/low flying under a general heading than navigation). As Moore's law progresses I'm sure someday (a decade perhaps?) this will become an option even on aircraft as cheap as a UAV.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
---snip</div>
<div>
<blockquote type="cite">
A kid with a map, a clock, and a compass could figure out how to navigate with out GPS and an ant can do it all with dead reckoning. You mean to tell me a robot that can store gigs of spy data can't compare it's previous flight path with incoming GPS data?</blockquote>
</div>
<div>
---snip</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
None of the architecture involves "storing gigs of spy data" on the aircraft. The only storage is on the ground, where its both cheaper, review involves less latency/less points of failure and is therefore more useful.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Ant's don't use dead reckoning. They use chemical trails (the poor little guys don't even have direction or distance information, they just know if they're on the trail or not). I guess a UAV could be retrofitted to leave a smoke trail and follow that back to base if the other two sources of Nav data fail (that would totally be the coolest line following robot yet!) but using the navigation technique of the ant in the air probably won't transfer very well. And returning to base while lacking comms is of course undesirable, and chemical trails can be spoofed as well once you're jamming the primary Nav methods.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
Using celestial information (what time is it/where's the sun or where are a couple bright known radio sources) might be good enough (and cheap enough) way to add as a third source of Nav data, not precise like the two primary methods but good enough at least determine the general area that the emergency landing is attempted, and computationally doable right now. Although again, like GPS celestial data depends on very weak signals (at nighttime anyway), jammed using trivial wattage.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
Not saying that we couldn't come up with an innovative solution, just saying that the guys who spent time pounding away at these problems probably aren't "so weak" or particularly deserving of criticism.</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
The attack vector was on the Nav data. Making this more robust (or less critical) is where the improvement is needed. One out-of-the box idea might be to have some method of having the aircraft be able to self-destruct in the air with no heavy objects (engine block) remaining to fall to earth and hit something unintended?</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011, at 10:08, Corey McGuire wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
That is so weak! This is what we pay billions of dollars for? A kid with a map, a clock, and a compass could figure out how to navigate with out GPS and an ant can do it all with dead reckoning. You mean to tell me a robot that can store gigs of spy data can't compare it's previous flight path with incoming GPS data?<br>
<br>
Hey Swarmies! What would you have done to prevent such a simple take over of Military grade robotics?<br>
<br>
<div>
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 4:59 PM, Jake <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jake@spaz.org" target="_blank">jake@spaz.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
read the whole story:<br>
<a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2011/1215/Exclusive-Iran-hijacked-US-drone-says-Iranian-engineer-Video" target="_blank">http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2011/1215/Exclusive-Iran-hijacked-US-drone-says-Iranian-engineer-Video</a><br>
<br>
Using knowledge gleaned from previous downed American drones and a<br>
technique proudly claimed by Iranian commanders in September, the Iranian<br>
specialists then reconfigured the drone's GPS coordinates to make it land<br>
in Iran at what the drone thought was its actual home base in Afghanistan.<br>
<br>
"The GPS navigation is the weakest point," the Iranian engineer told the<br>
Monitor, giving the most detailed description yet published of Iran's<br>
"electronic ambush" of the highly classified US drone. "By putting noise<br>
[jamming] on the communications, you force the bird into autopilot. This<br>
is where the bird loses its brain."<br>
<br>
The "spoofing" technique that the Iranians used -- which took into account<br>
precise landing altitudes, as well as latitudinal and longitudinal data<br>
made the drone "land on its own where we wanted it to, without having to<br>
crack the remote-control signals and communications" from the US control<br>
center, says the engineer.<br>
<br>
...<br>
<br>
Prior to the disappearance of the stealth drone earlier this month, Irans<br>
electronic warfare capabilities were largely unknown and often dismissed.<br>
<br>
"We all feel drunk [with happiness] now," says the Iranian engineer. "Have<br>
you ever had a new laptop? Imagine that excitement multiplied many-fold."<br>
When the Revolutionary Guard first recovered the drone, they were aware it<br>
might be rigged to self-destruct, but they "were so excited they could not<br>
stay away."<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Noisebridge-discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net" target="_blank">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a><br>
<a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a></blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<br clear="all">
<br>
--<br>
Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler - <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein" title="Albert Einstein" target="_blank">Albert Einstein</a><br>
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_Da_Vinci" title="Leonardo Da Vinci" target="_blank">Leonardo Da Vinci</a><br>
Perfection is reached not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away - <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoine_de_Saint_Exup%C3%A9ry" title="Antoine de Saint Exupéry" target="_blank">Antoine de Saint Exupéry</a><br>
Keep It Simple Stupid - <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clarence_Johnson" title="Clarence Johnson" target="_blank">Kelly Johnson</a><br>
<pre>
_______________________________________________
Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
<a href="mailto:Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net" target="_blank">Noisebridge-discuss@lists.noisebridge.net</a>
<a href="https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss" target="_blank">https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
</div></div></blockquote></div>