Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Communications Wireless Networking Hardware

Military System Offers Worldwide Cell Access 78

Posted by Zonk from the why-can't-i-get-a-signal-on-the-other-side-of-town dept.
coondoggie writes to mention a technology in use by the U.S. military in remote regions of the world, which allows high-quality cell reception to reach troops. A portable box, called the Tactical Base Station Router, can serve as a gateway for cellular communications and VoIP network calls. Developed by Alcatel-Lucent, it allows deployment of reliable services in disasters, search and rescue operations, and (as has seen use in recent years) military encounters. "The TacBSR is available for U.S. government customers only ... Customers include the U.S. Army Reserve Command, which is using the TacBSR as a portable cellular system for forward-deployed operations and disaster recovery. The system allows U.S. Army Reserve Commands to take GSM-capable cellular systems anywhere they need to go ... Smaller than a laptop, the TacBSR can be used in a stand-alone configuration to enable communications for a small team or as part of a multibox mesh that supports a large geographical area."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Military System Offers Worldwide Cell Access More

Military System Offers Worldwide Cell Access

Comments Filter:
  • Isn't this what the first mobile phones were? My grandfather used to have a big black box in his lincoln that had a phone attached to it and he'd plug into the cigarette lighter. It looked like one of these [physorg.com]. Hard to say if he was doing a lot of global Special Focrces work though, that Lincoln never made it over 35mph.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by BadERA ( 107121 )
      Somehow I suspect the first cell phones probably didn't route to then non-existent VoIP service ...

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by hcdejong ( 561314 )
      Isn't this what the first mobile phones were?

      No. This is a mobile cell tower in a box, not just one phone.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by deanoaz ( 843940 )
      >>>My grandfather used to have a big black box in his lincoln that had a phone attached to it

      I remember a guy in the news a few years ago who had something like that. He used it to eavesdrop on Newt's cell phone calls and then peddled them to the New York Times.

      Wasn't the same guy I assume?

  • As usual TFA is light on technical details. Did anyone pick up on how this works? I'm also curious about the encryption- they mention that it can be used for encrypted cell calls, so does that mean that the data/VOIP side is sent unencrypted?

    One other thing just occured to me- if this is supposed to be for remote military operations, would it be of any use against an opponent who can track radio signals? I don't think cell phone protocols can do all of the fancy frequency hopping and other tricks that mos
    • My impression from the article is that it is about using commercial networks. This is fine for FEMA, but not something I see the military using. It looks like a solution chasing a problem to me.
      • It looks like a solution chasing a problem to me.

        Which is exactly how DoD Contracting usually works. Usually, it's not even a solution; it's just more crap that some General or SES wants. A few years later, they get a VP Job with the same Contractor.

      • My impression from the article is that it is about using commercial networks. This is fine for FEMA, but not something I see the military using. It looks like a solution chasing a problem to me.

        Not at all. A vast portion of the military isn't in the "spearhead," the people who are actually in contact with the enemy, it's in the shaft driving it: all the logistics / supply chain / transportation / etc.

        That's where something like this would be really good for. You don't need everyone back in the rear using ta
    • would it be of any use against an opponent who can track radio signals? I don't think cell phone protocols can do all of the fancy frequency hopping and other tricks that most military radios use

      No, but you may have noticed that the current opponent isn't that sophisticated in this regard. This is an opportunity to make comm gear more ubiquitous without having to spend major $$$ on military-grade radios. Also, IDK how good the UI on military-grade radios is, but when you want to talk to people outside your

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by duplo1 ( 719988 )
      I would venture to guess that the BSR, which is appears to be more or less of a mobile IP router + base station transceiver most likely employs something analagous to a standard Mobile IP setup. More than likely, wireless BSR to mobile terminal (e.g. phone or pda) communications employs some form of layer-1 encryption. For exteneral communications, it probably employs a series of IPsec tunnels (e.g. between the foreign and home agent routers) to offer confidentiality and data integrity security services.
    • This is modded insightful? RTFA, page 2. Crytp supported.
      • ::sigh::

        From TFA

        The TacBSR supports both regular GSM phones and encrypted GSM phones. ``We do support various levels of security to meet the government customer requirement" Stark says.

        All I get from this is that the system can encrypt the radio signal from the phone, and that it can do it with different keys that would correspond to the different levels of classification that the military uses. If all it encrypts is the message from the phone, while leaving all the IP side clear, then this is going to be

        • Well, I'm former military (before cell phones and the Internet), but the concept of supporting an encrypted cell call and then transmitting it UNencrypted either over VOIP or a data link is both elementary and obvious. Woops.

          I don't doubt you were asking this question because you consider our military marginally competent. But yer mistaken, I bet.

          I oughta RTFA 'cause I bet again that somewhere it mentions how this box ultimately connects to the real world. That's the link that needs to be encrypted, thou

    • Re:LoS or Satellite? Crypto? Trackable? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by KillerBob ( 217953 ) on Friday March 16, 2007 @09:41AM (#18374771)
      data from operational zones is usually set via secured sattelite communications. it's entirely possible to set up a link that's green and has enough bandwidth to carry several international VoIP calls. given that some cell phones can be used as data modems, it's also possible to hook up a cell phone as the transmitter for the transmission of encrypted data from a laptop computer.

      but cell phones are great, operationally speaking, because they allow a way to reach an individual person quite easily without going through the hassle of arranging a call. it's unlikely that cell phones will ever be used (in voice mode) for really sensitive material, but we do have ways of passing information in the red while masking the content. code words, to begin with. a few other methods I can't really talk about. fact is, though, that for unsecured communications in the domestic theatre, cell phones are now the primary means of communication, and it's only logical that we start rolling out ways to use them overseas. they're never going to replace things like inmarsat, frequency hopping, and encryption, because they're too easy to hack (not that those other methods are 100% secure either). but they are going to make the job a lot easier for signal operators, in reducing the amount of chatter on nets, keeping them open for more important traffic.

      obligatory disclaimer: I'm a signal operator in the Canadian Army. Yes, we do have guns....

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by PhxBlue ( 562201 )

        obligatory disclaimer: I'm a signal operator in the Canadian Army. Yes, we do have guns....

        Yes, but do you have radios, eh? :)

    • Info on the device from LGS:

      http://openphi.net/tenacious/?p=63 [openphi.net]
    • It looks like these things are GSM micro-cells. I wonder why the military went with a TDMA based system? CDMA (think Verizon) provides much better "encryption" by default (and you can jam more people on a cell). I put encryption in quotes because the actual transmitted signal just looks like noise. You have no way of knowing if someone is even transmitting let alone trying to demodulate the mangled mess of a CDMA signal.
      • I suspect they went with GSM because it's the system that the rest of the world uses, meaning that you could go out and buy handsets on the domestic market when you run short (assuming you have the SIM cards to plug into them). Also makes it easier to cooperate with locals, who probably already have GSM phones.

        It's the same reason the military switched to using 5.56 and 9mm ammunition; it makes sense to have everyone using equipment, at least, that speaks the same language, and not drag some national standa
  • Isn't this just like the consumer-grade picocells the telecoms have been talking about placing in customer homes? Boosts local signal, routes to VoIP?
    • Looks like a Picocell to me. The technology has been around for a long time and you can actually get one if you are a business. Not sure why they aren't making them more available to the public tho.
  • Well, at least something good came from Katrina.
  • You still can't get reliable, quality cell service in many populated areas in the U.S.A. yet the government is providing service so soldiers can chat on their RAZRs in Garblockistan?

    Should this be a "Good to see where our priorities are" rant, or a "Yaay, the private sector sure solves all problems!" rant?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by BadERA ( 107121 )
      See my post above on picocells ...
    • Should this be a "Good to see where our priorities are" rant, or a "Yaay, the private sector sure solves all problems!" rant?

      Naaaah, just let your head explode.

    • You still can't get reliable, quality cell service in many populated areas in the U.S.A. yet the government is providing service so soldiers can chat on their RAZRs in Garblockistan?

      Should this be a "Good to see where our priorities are" rant, or a "Yaay, the private sector sure solves all problems!" rant?

      Feel free to do both.

    • Consolation (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Soulfader ( 527299 )
      If it's any consolation, I just returned from Afghanistan in January and never even heard of this thing until now. Also, it's probably a hell of a lot easier to provide cell coverage to a few small areas with concentrations of US military personnel than to provide comprehensive coverage over North America. If you don't like your cell service, bitch to the company, not the military.

      Many people did sign up for cell service on the base we were staged from, paying $40 or $50 per month for 500 minutes, though

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Walt Dismal ( 534799 )
      (looking at my new military cell phone billing regulations) Excess roaming charges: $15,000/minute. Yup, it's Mil-Spec all right.

  • Not sure this is necessary (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I went to SWA twice while I was in the Air Force. Was never in combat, but those guys have radios between each other and the base that are more reliable than cell phones anyway.
    The first time I was there I used a sat. phone briefly and it worked, but there was a noticable delay, the primary means of communicating to the states was Cisco IP phones and DSN.
    The second time I was over there we bought regular gsm phones from a company call Mobal in England. Those had no noticable delay using commercial carriers

  • So how (Score:4, Interesting)

    by hcdejong ( 561314 ) <`hobbes' `at' `xmsnet.nl'> on Friday March 16, 2007 @09:10AM (#18374373)
    does the TacBSR interface with the rest of the world? The article suggests it uses a VOIP link, but is that link wireless or wired? Does it have an Ethernet port, can it interface with telephony equipment?

    Also, it'd be interesting to see what happens when you start a TacBSR in an area that already has cell phone coverage. Can you specify who can and who can't use the TacBSR network?
    Can it talk to the billing system of the local telco (not so interesting for military use, but may be a factor during disaster relief, when civilians will use the system)?
    • my guess is that you are not using this to allow local civilians in a disaster area to make calls, but rather for allowing the relief workers to use -their- cell phones to communicate with each other and coordinators
    • does the TacBSR interface with the rest of the world?

      I'd guess it's like a WanderPod [wanderport.com].

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jc42 ( 318812 )
        So the TacBSR and WanderPod are actual implementations of a lot of the early ARPAnet diagrams, which showed all sorts of equipment (including trucks, tanks, and jet fighters) talking wirelessly as they move across the landscape.

        And, as back in the 1960s and 70s, the government and military are actually implementing it, while the corporate world continues to drag its feet -- "locking" equipment so it can only talk to one vendor, blocking VoIP, etc.

        I wonder how many decades it'll take before we civilians will
        • I wonder how many decades it'll take before we civilians will be permitted access to a wireless network that our own equipment can use, no matter who we bought it from?

          This seems to be solved in other countries, Finland for instance. One simple rule: Folks who sell phones can't sell service plans and network providers can't sell phones. From there capitalism breaks out.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by __aailrp9629 ( 238178 )
      Presumably this would work just like any other GSM network, where authorized users are given a SIM and then those SIMs be in the network database as allowed. The obvious downside of this is that some (all?) of the major GSM providers in the US either lock their phones so that only their SIM chips will work, or don't use a SIM at all.

      I guess maybe they could just *read* the IMSI off of each user's existing SIM and then manually build the database, but that'd be a lot more work on the admin side.
  • Anyone have a guess on the range for one of these? I imagine it's gotta be farther than your run-o-the-mill router...
    • From the other article linked in the comments, sounds like it has a maximum range of 17mi (not sure if that is range or coverage area), and is designed to be mounted on the bottom of a helicopter. Sure it is also possible to mount it from a mast if available, but quick deployments, a helicopter or balloon would make sense.
  • And all of the cool toys they get to play with.

  • The first thing to go - everytime... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Cragen ( 697038 ) on Friday March 16, 2007 @10:02AM (#18375177)
    The "first thing to go out" in every emergency of any geographical size is the local cell phone system. (see Slashdot article just after Katrina) [slashdot.org] FEMA also carts around a mobile cell system in its fleet of emergency vehicles for post-emergency recovery and relief personnel. This article says it's referring to the Army Reserve, which generally shows up not too long after FEMA, as it has the largest inventory in-place. Also, the AR arrival is usually in the recover and relief phase, not the first responder phase. I think they are still having problems with the cell phone system down in south Louisiana.

  • Iridium? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by L. VeGas ( 580015 ) on Friday March 16, 2007 @10:47AM (#18375825) Homepage Journal
    My brother worked on the Iridium [wikipedia.org] satellite phone project back in the day. It seems to me that it's just as effective as ever and would be superior to this in almost every way.
    • We had one, and we used it quite a bit. However, they're pretty damned expensive--$1000 a pop, I think I was told--and are in supremely limited circulation for that reason. This sounds like something that could be in more widespread use and would probably be more practical for local point-to-point calling; using satellite phones to call the guy on the other side of the FOB is a bit much.

Slashdot Top Deals

Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man -- who has no gills. -- Ambrose Bierce

Close