The Power Of Cell Phones In War...

[Spacescifi]

I do not want this thread to get political but it may end up being locked anyway.

Given the various capabilties cellphones have, I really do think invading any country where every Joe public has one will make the invasion difficult to succeed if not impossible.

Cell phones provide covert intelligence and as we know, combining intelligence with tactical ability is the means of winning battles.

It is considerably easier to pull off a successful invasion where average people neither have cell phones or good tactical abilities.

I am not saying successful invasion is impossible, but you at least need enough intelligence and sufficient tactical ability to counter the advantages of cell phones and tactical ability that the place you are invading has.

[SunlitZelkova]

35 minutes ago, Spacescifi said:

I do not want this thread to get political but it may end up being locked anyway.

Given the various capabilties cellphones have, I really do think invading any country where every Joe public has one will make the invasion difficult to succeed if not impossible.

Cell phones provide covert intelligence and as we know, combining intelligence with tactical ability is the means of winning battles.

It is considerably easier to pull off a successful invasion where average people neither have cell phones or good tactical abilities.

I am not saying successful invasion is impossible, but you at least need enough intelligence and sufficient tactical ability to counter the advantages of cell phones and tactical ability that the place you are invading has.

Military related questions seem to be allowed when they have to do with the engineering aspects of the equipment. Otherwise I would think they would belong on a military forum.

This doesn’t have anything to do with cell phone technology itself so it may not be on topic.

In the event it is…

Jamming is a possibility. Also, the locations of cell phone towers are well known. Hitting them should not be hard.

[K^2]

It apparently also makes an invading army's opsec absolute garbage, because making sure that at least some soldiers don't steal someone's phones to make a call home is nearly impossible, and as these thefts are reported frequently enough, these phones end up getting monitored by the defenders. And having a fix on a phone you are certain is in the hands of the enemy is as good as having the enemy disposition laser painted. Not to mention any leaks that can happen from the contents of the conversations themselves.

You can (and probably should) use jammers, of course. And we're seeing these being deployed too, but a jammer itself is a hot target for an anti-radiation missile, so you have to be very careful about where you place them. The jammer is cheap enough to lose this way, but anything near it might not be. And because they tend to be fairly broad spectrum at high power to guarantee that they jam the cell frequencies reliably, they greatly reduce availability of channels and equipment you can use for your own communication. So even if you address the security problem of the phones, you do that at creating new disadvantages for your own forces.

All in all, the prevalence of cell phones is a huge advantage to the defending side, and any major military that isn't currently thinking about efficient means of dealing with them in a larger scale conflict are likely to find themselves in a disadvantage should one happen.

[insert_name]

1 hour ago, SunlitZelkova said:

Military related questions seem to be allowed when they have to do with the engineering aspects of the equipment. Otherwise I would think they would belong on a military forum.

This doesn’t have anything to do with cell phone technology itself so it may not be on topic.

In the event it is…

Jamming is a possibility. Also, the locations of cell phone towers are well known. Hitting them should not be hard.

The issue with jamming is that it works both ways, and this could end up limiting drone use and internal communications

[Spacescifi]

1 hour ago, K^2 said:

It apparently also makes an invading army's opsec absolute garbage, because making sure that at least some soldiers don't steal someone's phones to make a call home is nearly impossible, and as these thefts are reported frequently enough, these phones end up getting monitored by the defenders. And having a fix on a phone you are certain is in the hands of the enemy is as good as having the enemy disposition laser painted. Not to mention any leaks that can happen from the contents of the conversations themselves.

You can (and probably should) use jammers, of course. And we're seeing these being deployed too, but a jammer itself is a hot target for an anti-radiation missile, so you have to be very careful about where you place them. The jammer is cheap enough to lose this way, but anything near it might not be. And because they tend to be fairly broad spectrum at high power to guarantee that they jam the cell frequencies reliably, they greatly reduce availability of channels and equipment you can use for your own communication. So even if you address the security problem of the phones, you do that at creating new disadvantages for your own forces.

All in all, the prevalence of cell phones is a huge advantage to the defending side, and any major military that isn't currently thinking about efficient means of dealing with them in a larger scale conflict are likely to find themselves in a disadvantage should one happen.

 

Other than bombing cellphone towers and stations or lasing up satelites from the ground? Lasing satelites I think would get attention of the power players with nukes so I have a feeling there is no efficient means of dealing with cell phones using modern techonolgy.

 

Even decoys would be problamatic because that would spend fighting resources on decoys and you cannot win merely with decoys.

One solution that could kind of work is AI robot soldiers but nobody has those and frankly it will be really messed up when and if we ever do.

 

 

Edited December 18, 2022 by Spacescifi

[kerbiloid]

The current events kinda take place on a territory full of cellphones, and this doesn't look like a major obstacle.

Both parties try to limit the cellphone reporting on their side, preferably to none.

Both sides use cellphones in absence of better tools, and at least one of them uses fake cellphone towers to locate the opponent abonents.

Smartphones equipped with video are prohibited at one side, and would be if could be at the other side.

[K^2]

7 minutes ago, Spacescifi said:

Other than bombing cellphone towers and stations or lasing up satelites from the ground?

Satellites aren't generally used in cellular communication. It's a surface or a subsurface wire connecting the towers, so destroying the towers is your only option. Trouble is, large number of towers and redundancy is a key design feature of cellular networks, meaning destroying cellular infrastructure can get prohibitively expensive.

[Spacescifi]

2 minutes ago, K^2 said:

Satellites aren't generally used in cellular communication. It's a surface or a subsurface wire connecting the towers, so destroying the towers is your only option. Trouble is, large number of towers and redundancy is a key design feature of cellular networks, meaning destroying cellular infrastructure can get prohibitively expensive.

I guess what I am saying is even you somehow waste all cellphone towers the defenders can still rely on satelites if need be.

 

The military already does this I think.

Edited December 18, 2022 by Spacescifi

[K^2]

1 hour ago, Spacescifi said:

I guess what I am saying is even you somehow waste all cellphone towers the defenders can still rely on satelites if need be.

Yes, absolutely. Military uses satellite communication a lot, and civilian use of satellite internet and phones is becoming more common, but civilian use isn't at a point yet where it makes a strategic difference, I don't think. The most common use case for civilian use of satellite phones is for emergencies while far away from civilization, so that's people who live far away from any cities and occasionally some adventurous types who bring them on trips to the wilderness. Most of these will also have very limited data capabilities - it's there to call someone and request help if you're in a bind. For any other use, satellite phones are just too expensive. And the satellite internet is just starting to pick up, and it only makes sense to pay for it if that's basically your only option. So again, mostly places far from any major cities, very scarcely populated.

The difference is pretty clear. If you are moving your forces through an area that has any sort of a population, the odds of somebody snapping a picture and posting it to Twitter, Telegram, Whatsapp, or whatever, is basically a certainty. Likewise, any sort of theft from civilian population by your military is going to result in some cell phones stolen and misused. Obviously, that latter bit will happen a lot less in a disciplined army, but I don't think you can get it to zero incidents with any military force. These are things that can still happen with satellite phones, but it's in the category of a limited risk. With cell phones, it's just going to happen, and you have to deal with it one way or another.

[tater]

It allows recon by literally anyone, with GPS accuracy. It can also be back traced to the user, resulting in a high explosive enema.

[farmerben]

I've seen a lot of soldiers wearing Baofeng radios.  These are made in China and cost $40.  Many of the features are illegal to use in the United States without a license, ham radio frequencies, etc.

There is no market yet for smart radios, with built in video etc.  But give it a few decades and somebody will make a cheap version.

Radio with frequency hopping is way more secure than cell phone connections.

[TheFlyingKerman]

Aside from above, for partisan / insurgency warfare, a phone can be used to control a bomb or a drone.

[kerbiloid]

If cellphones were a big thing, no Starlink would be needed in thousands.

[RCgothic]

Starlink is LOS so basically unjammable and hard to detect compared to conventional phone signals. That's why it's prized by front line units that operate cell phone discipline.

Some militaries are disciplined enough to understand that using cell-phones paints their location for strikes. Those that aren't get defeated in their objectives.

[steve9728]

Months ago, when I still study abroad and didn't back to China yet, I was bought a spy camera: the Minox C from one of the antique camera shops in London. I also bought a bit of film for it and the tools to cut from the standard 135 film to its special 8×11mm film. And I really try to use it to take some photo during my following museum trip. When I back to where I was living and looking at this little thing, and my iPhone mini, I suddenly realize what's the meaning about 'technological revolution'. 

Apart from taking photos or videos, and communication functions, its greatest power is its ability to bring information technology at an extremely low cost. But this "very low cost" is more a test of the user's industrial power and the ability to guarantee the supply of information in the place of use.

The advantage of having information, not to mention war or not, just few months ago, a terrorist attack was carried out against Chinese people in a hotel where a number of them were staying in a country with an unstable security situation. And by setting up a WeChat group and communicating in real time about the movement of the terrorists, these Chinese people were able to wait safely for the arrival of the security forces and there were no casualties.

At the other end of the spectrum, however, are some PLA exercises: the 'red side', which used to be 'invincible', is subjected to 'complex electromagnetic environment' by the exercise directorate - that is, they 'travel back' in time from the 2020s to the 1920s, which made them basically rely on messengers for communication. And, of course, there have been reports of high-tech exercises not far removed from the number of reports of such extreme manoeuvres. Details of the exercises are rarely made public, but the term "complex electromagnetic environment", which often appears in reports of PLA exercises, has basically become some kind meme among Chinese military enthusiasts: it describes the signal lag in phone calls, network lag in games, and lag in some webcasts. btw, the winning percentage of the 'blue side', with its high-tech, highly informative profession, is 32 wins and 1 loss in 33 battles.

[DDE]

I think something that hasn't been addressed is that cell towers don't just exist. Most places near the frontline will lack power, therefore, a few hours afterwards, they'll shut down unless someone brings a generator along. Causes civvies to bunch up atop every hill in an attempt to catch the signal.

That, and strategically timed short-term phone and internet blackouts can be used to regain a semblance of OPSEC. But other than that... you're down to repressive measures against uncooperative civilians. Not necessarily hostile ones - sadly, plenty of idiots post before they think.

 

Yet another interesting consideration on the topic is social media OSINT/phone-enabled HUMINT vs satellites. You get this, once or even several times per day, every time there's decent weather:

Spoiler

This makes the added value of "CELLINT" rather marginal... when you're not down to two and a half Persona satellites.

[RCgothic]

The new LEO earth observation constellations will soon mean there isn't any part of earth that isn't under continuous observation in clear sky conditions.

[magnemoe]

17 hours ago, K^2 said:

Satellites aren't generally used in cellular communication. It's a surface or a subsurface wire connecting the towers, so destroying the towers is your only option. Trouble is, large number of towers and redundancy is a key design feature of cellular networks, meaning destroying cellular infrastructure can get prohibitively expensive.

One use case of starlink is to act as an relay for remote off the grid cell towers, this was intended for places you needed towers for contract like covering roads trough wilderness, you also have mobile cell towers who is used as backup or increase capacity during tourist seasons. 

[K^2]

@magnemoeYup. Hence the 'generally'. Mobile towers aren't likely to be present in quantities to alter the strategic situation, though. So I'm focusing on the prevalent case.