U.S. To Track Moving Air And Ground Targets Via Space By 2030, But Aircraft Will Still Play A Part

Hendarto

Full Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2024
Messages
841
Reaction score
519
Country of Origin
Country of Residence
I once posted and article about China satellite system tracking carrier And many former here are in disbelief saying it is impossible etc Now US is planning doing the same thing here it is

The U.S. Space Force second-in-command has provided updates on plans for the service’s introduction of space-based ground moving-target indicator and air moving-target indicator (GMTI/AMTI) capabilities. Also discussed was the U.S. military’s need for a layered surveillance network, including to deal with the expanding breadth of enemy ‘kill webs,’ something which TWZ has discussed in the depth in the past.

Speaking today at the annual Defense News Conference in Arlington, Virginia, Gen. Michael A. Guetlein, the Vice Chief of Space Operations, U.S. Space Force (USSF), said that the first parts of a satellite-based GMTI/AMTI capability should start coming online in “probably the early 2030s.”

230828-X-NY190-1131.jpg
Gen. Michael Guetlein, the Vice Chief of Space Operations, U.S. Space Force. U.S. Space Force photo by Senior Airman Samuel Becker
Importantly, however, Gen. Guetlein said that he expects the U.S. military’s future surveillance network to involve multiple assets, both in the atmosphere and in space. “I see it always being a layered set of capabilities to increase survivability, first and foremost,” he said.

While a layered surveillance network — one including space-based assets, alongside crewed aircraft, drones, and potentially other platforms — has been discussed for some time now, it was only last month that the design baseline for Space Force’s new satellite system was certified, meaning that it can now progress into the formal development phase.

In the past there have also been repeated suggestions that space-based surveillance assets would increasingly take over from the aircraft that have traditionally undertaken surveillance of targets on the ground, at sea, and in the air. In particular, satellite-based surveillance assets offer the advantages of greater persistence and — at least in the past — enhanced survivability. It is also worth noting that the U.S. National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) is reportedly acquiring a constellation of hundreds of intelligence-gathering satellites from SpaceX, with a specific focus on tracking targets down below in support of ground operations. Its relationship to the USSF program is unclear, but there is certainly some crossover regarding capabilities.
Gen. Guetlein, however, today pointed to what he considers the continuing relevance of non-space-based platforms for the GMTI/AMTI mission, especially.

The U.S. Space Force second-in-command has provided updates on plans for the service’s introduction of space-based ground moving-target indicator and air moving-target indicator (GMTI/AMTI) capabilities.
A highly stylized depiction of a network of surveillance satellites. Northrop Grumman
Northrop Grumman

“The closer I can come to the target, the more resolution I get on the target,” he said. “As I move to space, it becomes harder and harder to get that same level of resolution on a target that may be required.”

Another major theme of Gen. Guetlein’s briefing today was kill webs and the growing threat that they present, reinforcing the need for adequate surveillance, including in space.

“Today, the adversary has migrated to kill webs that fully integrate multiple sensors, multiple bullets, against multiple simultaneous targets, all fully networked together with multiple sensors and all talking together through multiple communication paths,” Gen. Guetlein explained. “The mesh network, if you will, of shooters, bullets, sensors, and communicators, is extremely difficult to defeat. Unfortunately, the adversary is capable of using these kill webs to hold our joint forces at risk across great distances, across multiple domains, and with persistence. This is a very sophisticated and challenging threat.”

Back in 2021, now-retired Gen. Jay Raymond, then head of USSF, disclosed that his service was “building GMTI from space” and was “actively working to be able to provide that capability” as part of a classified program. In fact, this same space-based GMTI capability dates back longer than that, at least to a 2018 project run by the Air Force Rapid Capabilities Office (RCO).

1024px-GMTI_JSTARS.webp
GMTI tracks overlaid on a SAR image. Public Domain
Fundamentally, GMTI refers to a radar mode that allows them to discriminate between moving targets on the ground and static ones, allowing it to track the activity of the moving targets over time. Typically, a GMTI radar can also gather synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imagery, conferring the ability to produce highly detailed image-like ground maps, day and night, and is able to penetrate cloud cover, smoke, and dust.

The plan to field a space-based GMTI and now also AMTI capability has been seen in the past as justification for the retirement of more traditional capabilities like the U.S. Air Force’s E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (JSTARS), key assets of which included its GMTI and SAR functions.
 
For comparatively slow moving ground target
Few satellites will be enough

but for tracking f fast flying objects


A large array of satellites would be needed as satellites themselves will be moving 1000s of km per hour in their own orbits

Especially for an interception


So huge satellite contracts
 
There is also the problem of positively identifying the moving objects. Not just potentially civilian vehicles but decoys could complicate targeting for long enough for the pop-up target to get away.
 
Tagging @j_hungary , FYI.

@Hendarto Moving target indication is not really tracking and fire control. It is a technique to enhance target detection against a backdrop of stationary or slow moving object/background. It does not help in guiding a missile to the target. For that you need continuously updating of position and velocity of the target.

Detecting ground targets from space is very much possible. Air target? Might be with some advances. Track and fire control? not really.
 
Tagging @j_hungary , FYI.

@Hendarto Moving target indication is not really tracking and fire control. It is a technique to enhance target detection against a backdrop of stationary or slow moving object/background. It does not help in guiding a missile to the target. For that you need continuously updating of position and velocity of the target.

Detecting ground targets from space is very much possible. Air target? Might be with some advances. Track and fire control? not really.
You can believe whatever you want but the fact is China and US have been working on it for some time You can believe in your delusion!

Synthetic aperture radar can track by taking pictures from different angles and derive speed and direction therefore finding the coordinate of the target

  1. Yes, synthetic aperture radar (SAR) can track moving targets. This capability is often referred to as Synthetic Aperture Radar-Moving Target Indication (SAR-MTI). SAR-MTI systems can detect and track moving targets by processing radar data to identify changes in the position of objects over time12.

    SAR systems are particularly effective because they can create high-resolution images of the ground, even in adverse weather conditions or through obstacles like foliage. When combined with moving target indication techniques, SAR can differentiate between stationary and moving objects, allowing for accurate tracking of vehicles, ships, and other targets23.

    This technology has significant applications in both military and civilian fields, such as surveillance, reconnaissance, and disaster response3.

    Is there a specific application or scenario you’re interested in regarding SAR and moving target tracking?

    Learn more
    1apps.dtic.mil2web.eecs.umich.edu3mdpi.com4mdpi.com5mdpi.com+3 more

    1of30
    • Answer from this page instead
    • How does SAR-MTI work?
    • What are some limitations of SAR tracking?
    • Can you provide an example of a real-world use case for SAR-MTI?

 
Last edited:
You can believe whatever you want but the fact is China and US have been working on it for some time You can believe in your delusion!

Synthetic aperture radar can track by taking pictures from different angles and derive speed and direction therefore finding the coordinate of the target

  1. Yes, synthetic aperture radar (SAR) can track moving targets. This capability is often referred to as Synthetic Aperture Radar-Moving Target Indication (SAR-MTI). SAR-MTI systems can detect and track moving targets by processing radar data to identify changes in the position of objects over time12.

    SAR systems are particularly effective because they can create high-resolution images of the ground, even in adverse weather conditions or through obstacles like foliage. When combined with moving target indication techniques, SAR can differentiate between stationary and moving objects, allowing for accurate tracking of vehicles, ships, and other targets23.

    This technology has significant applications in both military and civilian fields, such as surveillance, reconnaissance, and disaster response3.

    Is there a specific application or scenario you’re interested in regarding SAR and moving target tracking?

    Learn more
    1apps.dtic.mil2web.eecs.umich.edu3mdpi.com4mdpi.com5mdpi.com+3 more

    1of30
    • Answer from this page instead
    • How does SAR-MTI work?
    • What are some limitations of SAR tracking?
    • Can you provide an example of a real-world use case for SAR-MTI?
Try asking your large language model this question, "Can you use space assets as fire control radar to hit an plane or a fighter jet or a drone or a cruise missile?". you will get a great answer!

1727103899372.png

Like last time you are again making a clown of yourself.
 
Try asking your large language model this question, "Can you use space assets as fire control radar to hit an plane or a fighter jet or a drone or a cruise missile?". you will get a great answer!

View attachment 66555

Like last time you are again making a clown of yourself.
I don't see anything in there other than one man's opinion capici believe what you want! Anyone can put their opinion on the web

 
Tagging @j_hungary , FYI.

@Hendarto Moving target indication is not really tracking and fire control. It is a technique to enhance target detection against a backdrop of stationary or slow moving object/background. It does not help in guiding a missile to the target. For that you need continuously updating of position and velocity of the target.

Detecting ground targets from space is very much possible. Air target? Might be with some advances. Track and fire control? not really.

Tracking and Target Acquisition are two different parameters. You can track something from ground or space, Air Traffic Control did this everyday tracking flight to and from their station, but you need real time information to be able to put into target acquisition.

And there cannot be a Target Acquisition solution if you cannot perform a real time tracking. And at this point, it's a pipe dream, because to do that, you need it to be fully automated. Manual tracking means by the time you realise what you are tracking, that target would not be in the reported position, because people "think" and it take time for human to process information, It cannot have human input, and even so, you are talking about the lag time between point of information and the satellite might have made it impossible for any OTH attacks. I did a brief calculation in the old forum on similar topic for a 1 second (which is very quick) delay over 10-minute flight time for a hypersonic missile against a carrier on flank speed, the ERA is an area of 30 square kilometers.........have fun putting a missile on a target within 30 sq km

You are not talking about reasonable prediction on uniform movement, you are talking about prediction of movement for a human interfered course. That is why an Air Traffic Controller can track a flight on their radar when the flight is following what his flightpath does, but most of the time flight controller lose the track when the flight veer off course and crashed. Because that's unpredictable.

And since machine don't see a video as a video, they see it as a frame with a particular frame per second. Each frame is not continuous, so basically you are losing the track between each frame. Which mean it would be on a constant acquiring-reacquiring loop

and then we are talking about noise of the frame. Take this sat image as an example. If we were to say "Track the red car" the issue here is, there are more than 1 red card in the picture, one going east bound, one going south, which one? Which is what the acquiring-requiring loop is going to come to play, what if the 2 red car in this picture met in the intersection, then how are you going to keep tracking it?

1727187351148.png
The only logical sense for this to happen is with AI, but as we discussed before, the noise with the machine generation model is not good enough to predict path, as they will just be thinking of turning into other thing since this is based on the probability......going back to the cats with assault rifle AI Picture, they can well define what is a cat, but the description of a "Fighter Jet" or "Aircraft Carrier" is going to be too abstractive to come up with a realistic target acquisition model.

And that is before we talk about countermeasure......
 
Try asking your large language model this question, "Can you use space assets as fire control radar to hit an plane or a fighter jet or a drone or a cruise missile?". you will get a great answer!

View attachment 66555

Like last time you are again making a clown of yourself.
Please don't use LLMs for definitive proofs. They are good for finding links to read and verify by yourself. But don't take their words as truth. I have seen many times they speak BS convincingly.
 
Please don't use LLMs for definitive proofs. They are good for finding links to read and verify by yourself. But don't take their words as truth. I have seen many times they speak BS convincingly.
I agree but many times people here use that and even while using that they do not write the right prompt in the first place.

Anyways, fire control from space space based assets is not a thing right now at the very least.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top