ここでは、独自のジャマーを見つけることができます

Two men from China resorted to the use of remote-controlled signal jammers to orchestrate clever thefts at rest stops along highways. The police apprehended them immediately and discovered a scheme to illicitly withdraw funds from credit cards tied to a call center syndicate.

Multiple theft reports have been received by the police in Chachoengsao regarding incidents at the Bang Pakong highway rest area, where vehicles have been damaged and valuables, notably credit cards, have been pilfered. This has caused considerable distress for motorists on this route.

The Bang Pakong police force in Chachoengsao joined efforts with the Central Investigation Police to urgently locate the criminals. They identified important clues from the CCTV surveillance at each of the crime sites.

The individuals identified as suspects appear to be of Chinese descent, often demonstrating a consistent modus operandi. They function as an organized criminal group with a clear delineation of roles, specifically between Zhang, 38, and Zheng, 31.

On September 15, following the completion of their investigations at the crime scene, law enforcement officials jointly detained two Chinese suspects at a highway service area in Khao Din Town, situated in Bang Pakong District, Chachoengsao Province.

Understanding that the criminals’ method was unmistakable, the officers strategically spread out to keep an eye on the surroundings. As the two men made their appearance, the police chose to wait until they attempted to break into two vehicles before stepping in to arrest them.

The authorities then proceeded to search their room, where they found several items related to the crime, including a remote control signal cell phone blockers, three mobile phones, a shoulder bag, and they took possession of a car key, a vehicle, and other relevant evidence.

The two were indicted for “jointly attempting to perpetrate theft with a vehicle” and “illegally entering and residing in Saudi Arabia as foreigners.” Zhang contested the charges, while Zheng confessed to them. Following this, they were handed over to the Crime Suppression Department for further investigation.

The examination uncovered that the gang would position themselves near parking locations at highway rest areas. As they spotted victims parked and preparing to exit their cars, the initial group of thieves would activate signal jammers to obstruct the remote control signal, which hindered the locking of the vehicle.

Thereafter, another set of criminals would approach the victims and initiate phone calls nearby to create a distraction, allowing the victims to overlook the fact that their cars were not secured. Once the victims had vacated their vehicles, a different group of criminals would then open the car doors and steal the items of value within.

Moreover, the police ascertained that a Thai woman, who was later identified as Zheng’s girlfriend, Ms. Ketfa Theeranat, aged 20, had been in the same automobile with the suspect before being conveyed to the highway rest area.

During a police search of Ms. Ketfa Theeranat’s apartment situated in the Rama 9 District, authorities found ketamine. She was arrested on the grounds of “unauthorized possession of psychotropic drugs (ketamine)” and was thereafter taken to Makkasan Police Station.

At the same time, investigators revealed the strategies used by the suspects to siphon money from the victims’ credit cards. The card readers they operated were suspected to be connected to foreign retail outlets or areas of usage. This finding is consistent with the information gathered during the investigation, suggesting that the criminal group may be affiliated with the call center gang that perpetrates fraud across multiple networks.

We will engage in a more in-depth investigation of the case to validate these findings.

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has earlier endorsed a workplace policy that prohibits employees from using cell phones for safety reasons. Furthermore, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has recently confirmed a fine levied against an employer for the use of signal jammers to block employees’ access to cell phones during work hours.

Devices known as signal jammers are designed to suppress, block, or interfere with authorized radio frequencies and communications, and their use is prohibited under the federal Communications Act of 1934, as amended (the “Act”), with certain limited exceptions. The presence of mobile jammers poses a serious threat to public safety by preventing individuals from contacting emergency services via 911, disrupting the communications of first responders, and interfering with critical safety communications in both aviation and maritime contexts.

Under the provisions of the Act, the use or operation of any device designed for the transmission of energy, communications, or signals by radio is prohibited within the United States unless it is licensed or authorized. Additionally, the Act clearly states that no person shall intentionally or maliciously disrupt or interfere with the radio communications of any station that is licensed or authorized under this chapter or operated by the United States Government.

Additionally, the Act specifies that “No person shall engage in the manufacture, importation, sale, offering for sale, or transportation of any device or household electronic device or system that does not comply with the regulations issued under this section, nor shall they operate a device that is not in compliance with the regulations established under this section.” Such regulations require that radio frequency devices obtain authorization from the Federal Communications Commission before they may be utilized.

As a result, a jamming device is ineligible for certification or authorization due to its fundamental purpose of blocking or interfering with authorized radio communications. The utilization of such a device would jeopardize the integrity of the nation’s communications infrastructure. Therefore, a jamming device does not conform to the technical standards set by the FCC and is not permitted for legal use within the United States.

The FCC Enforcement Bureau initiated an investigation into a warehouse business located in Texas after receiving a signal interference complaint from AT&T. The business owner admitted to utilizing a signal jammer to restrict employee cell phone usage during work hours. According to the FCC, the owner acknowledged that her son had been informed by an AT&T representative that the use of a jammer was against the law. Moreover, the owner conveyed to FCC agents that she had discarded the jamming device and was not inclined to recover it or disclose its location, although she did offer to sell the device to the agents, which they declined.

Radio frequency jamming is the best protection against drones. To work, it must broadcast noise on the same frequency band that enemy drones use to communicate. Of course, drone operators are constantly changing the frequencies they use, and jammers must also keep changing to remain effective. The alternative is to jam all frequencies all the time?

Typically, a signal jammers can only handle one frequency band at a time. For example, the popular Breakwater (“Volnorez”) Russian jammer, which is about the size of a dinner plate and attaches to the outside of a tank with magnets, can be set to block one of twenty different frequency ranges. Breakwater can shoot down any drone using that specific frequency from two hundred meters away, making the vehicle immune to FPV attacks on that frequency band.

But if it’s the wrong frequency, a drone will fly right over and destroy your tank. This means you have to know which frequency the enemy is currently using, or put twenty different jammers on your vehicle.

Ukrainian electronic warfare expert Sergii Flash led an attack column last week to describe the idea of ​​Russia’s new “Frankentank.” Like most Russian tanks, it has a roof shield, but on top of that is a wooden pallet piled high with electronic warfare gear.

“It’s like something out of Mad Max,” Flash wrote on his Telegram channel. “The Russians have built a massive structure on a pallet with everything they have. There are three 800/900/2.4/5.8 patch antenna panels around the circle, and blocks of 700-1000 bands added to all of them. From above, on some wooden boards, in a circle. All tied up with ropes.”

The drone jammer only works if there’s a power source, though. While some modern Russian tanks have auxiliary power units, many don’t. That means when the tank’s engine is shut off, the jammer stops working. But the Russians have thought of that.

“Also installed generators and batteries,” Flash said.

The Ukrainian reconnaissance drone spotted the Russian armored column, and the FPV attack drone flew out to attack. But the jammer worked.

“Our FPVs are dropping like flies on all frequencies,” Flash said.

Reports say four FPVs were lost before a fifth broke through and destroyed the giant jammer tank.

“It was easier for the remaining forces [to eliminate them],” Flash said.

This statement is released by the office of Attorney General Chris Carr.

Attorney General Chris Carr is pressing the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to take urgent measures to enable the use of cell phone jammers in state prisons and local jails. The FCC currently enforces a ban on cell phone signal jammers, a restriction that applies to state and local entities. Despite this, contraband cell phones are being used in correctional facilities across the nation to plan violent attacks and engage in other criminal activities, which presents a significant safety risk to correctional personnel, visitors, inmates, and the public.

Carr remarked that the easiest method to protect the public from the hazards of contraband cell phones is to permit the deployment of cell phone jamming technology in correctional institutions. However, he expressed concern that the FCC continues to hinder these efforts. He indicated that this obsolete guidance limits crucial law enforcement tools, poses risks to correctional officers, and allows for the expansion of criminal enterprises both inside and outside of prisons. He emphasized their resolve to combat violent crime in all settings, urging the federal government to remove this significant impediment to public safety.

In the year 2023, Georgia authorities confiscated 8,074 contraband cell phones, and in 2024, they have already seized 5,482. A recent case highlighted the misuse of such devices when an incarcerated leader of the “Yves Saint Laurent Squad” directed the stabbing of an 88-year-old veteran from Georgia via a contraband cell phone. Moreover, a gang leader from North Carolina successfully orchestrated the kidnapping of a prosecutor’s father from his prison cell using a cell phone. In California, prison gangs are reported to use contraband cell phones to facilitate both murders and drug trafficking within the correctional environment.

“There are hundreds of examples across the country of how contraband cell phones in the hands of inmates have been used as lethal weapons and enabled them to continue their criminal activities. We are outraged that these individuals are continuing these activities and endangering the public,” said Georgia Department of Corrections Commissioner Tyrone Oliver. “As attempts to infiltrate our prisons with contraband cell phones continue to evolve, access to jamming technology is critical to our ability to combat these attempts. We thank Attorney General Carr for his support of our ongoing commitment to public safety and safe prison operations.”

In his written communication, Carr remarked that the FCC’s policy is derived from a statute that was put into effect in the early 1990s, which predates the use of contraband cell phones by prison inmates to orchestrate and engage in unlawful and dangerous conduct.

Carr further stated that 47 USC § 333 does not impose any restrictions on the FCC regarding the modification of its policy to enable state agencies to employ cell phone jammers in prisons. In reality, the U.S. Bureau of Prisons has acknowledged the potential effectiveness of cell phone jammers and has received authorization to use them in various federal prisons, including one in Georgia.

Is there a device or method to call 911 even if cell phone jammers are being used in the area?

In the past, my abuser would use a cell phone jammer when he broke into my house, preventing me from calling the police right away. I tried to call 911, but the call never went through.

I eventually reported him to the police. I’m worried he’ll show up again. How do I make sure I can call 911 no matter what? Will a wearable panic button still work with a cell phone jammer? What about a satellite communicator for hiking/backpacking?

Realistically, the FCC will only start investigating once the problem is frequently reported because they don’t have staff around the country to do this kind of signals intelligence. If the OP lived in or near a major city, they would have more success because the FCC offices in major cities do have equipment to locate pirate signals and jammers, but again, I don’t think they would respond to any single incident because they would never be able to get there in time to get the information.

There’s a guy in my area who puts a jammer in his car every day when he drives on a busy interstate during rush hour because he thinks it will stop people from using their phones and make his driving safer. All the cell phone carriers reported it, but it took the FCC 3 years to actually investigate and catch him.

In areas with cell phone signal jammers, it can be very difficult to call 911 because the main function of a signal jammer is to block the network signal of the mobile phone.

However, there are several strategies and techniques that may help when calling 911 in an emergency:

1. Landline Phone: Using a traditional landline phone will not be affected by cell phone signal jammers and can directly dial 911. Although landline phones are not widely available, they may be available in some buildings (such as hotels or office buildings).
2. Satellite Phone: Satellite phones do not rely on traditional cellular networks and are therefore not affected by ground-based signal jammers. These devices can connect to satellites in extreme environments to send emergency messages. However, satellite phones are more expensive and require direct access to the sky, so they may not work well inside buildings.
3. Wi-Fi Network Calling: If the Wi-Fi network in the area is not interfered with, using Wi-Fi calling features (such as some smartphones and VoIP apps) may be able to bypass interference and dial 911.

What do you need to know about the growing crime of electronic devices – ‘key jammers’ – that prevent cars from locking?

These types of transmitters can be effortlessly purchased online and are employed to disrupt the key fob’s signal. This results in a false sense of security for inattentive drivers, who may believe their car is secure, despite its actual lack of protection.

This scenario provides a chance for thieves to seize your property or even your car.

A relatively low-powered signal jammers may operate within a range of approximately 75 meters, thereby affecting a considerable space, such as an entire car park, all at once.

On the other hand, criminals who possess wifi blocker can execute their plans in diverse environments, not solely restricted to public car parks.

After getting up to prepare for work, I went outside and realized that all the car doors were closed.

I was astounded to find that I had locked the car, especially since I was at my boyfriend’s house and had left my Christmas gifts in it. Upon checking the vehicle, we were disheartened to see that it had been completely turned over and all valuable possessions had been taken.

Initially, the police conveyed that they were unable to take action. They did not send personnel to check for fingerprints, citing the lack of obvious break-in signs. However, after I called my bank to cancel my card, I discovered that my contactless card had been used by the thief. This development led the police to take a more serious approach to the case.

They are actively scrutinizing the CCTV images in the hope of locating the individuals responsible.

How can you make sure your car is secure?

The sole method to definitively verify whether a vehicle is locked is to check it by hand. Many cars offer additional cues that indicate the locks are activated, such as blinking lights, mirrors folding in, or a brief horn sound.

Being close to the vehicle allows you to hear the central locking mechanism click into position.

Deputy Chief Superintendent Jukes highlighted the necessity for individuals to exercise caution against electronic intrusions like this one.

We call upon the public to exercise caution with their vehicles and personal items to reduce the likelihood of attracting criminal attention. This includes checking that the vehicle is locked and taking any valuables along when leaving the vehicle.

A more technologically advanced solution for securing your vehicle could be to invest in a car jam detector, which alerts you with an alarm when it recognizes a jam.

Will insurance companies cover such thefts?

Ms. Dover raised an important issue faced by victims, noting that they not only experience the loss of their belongings but also lack proof that they simply forgot to secure their vehicle. Most insurance policies do not cover theft if the car is left unattended and unlocked.

According to the findings of the Financial Ombudsman, several insurers will not cover theft claims if the vehicle is left unattended and without being locked.

The only definitive proof of a jammed car lock is the capture of the thief, although a trend of thefts can be considered strong evidence.

The Thames Valley Police are probing into 14 recent thefts involving lorries, vans, and cars, all of which showed “no obvious signs of break-in.”

The service stations on the M4 motorway in Berkshire experienced a number of thefts during the concluding two weeks of November.

Could the approach of linking phones to create a singular, extensive distributed antenna assist in thwarting Russian electronic warfare tactics?

As reported by an American organization developing a system in Ukraine, networked cell phones that operate on specialized software might offer a low-cost and easily implementable counter to the advanced electronic warfare techniques used by Russia.

The use of electronic warfare by Russia, including techniques such as signal jamming and GPS spoofing, complicates the operational landscape for Ukrainian forces, hindering their ability to effectively utilize drones and high-end U.S. weaponry. Detecting and identifying enemy jamming equipment usually requires advanced software-defined radios, which are commonly supplied to the United States and other financially capable military entities. In contrast, smaller militaries like Ukraine’s find it challenging to secure these necessary tools in sufficient numbers due to limited budgets.

If a low-cost system is developed to pinpoint enemy jamming devices, it could empower Ukrainian operators to recover some tactical advantage against their more heavily armed opponents. This development might also reshape the strategies of cellphone network providers in reinforcing their devices against advanced attacks.

Near Christmas of last year, the Ukrainian military reached out to Sean Gorman and his team at Zephr, a company known for its expertise in protecting devices from GPS-signal interference. Zephr promptly sent six Android Pixel phones, loaded with their software, to Ukraine, and in April, they started field tests in areas adjacent to the frontlines in Donetsk.

Gorman conveyed to Defense One that the phones were mounted on drones, incorporated into cars, and arranged on stationary stands. They have also engaged in controlled experiments where their own jamming devices were used, enabling them to pinpoint the location.

The primary focus was to explore if regular consumer phones, working collectively in a network, could indicate the presence of an entity trying to disrupt GPS location data. The results showed that by comparing the GPS reception among different devices, they could detect when one or more phones were under threat.

As Gorman explained, “Our methodology primarily revolves around exploiting the sensors present in the phone. The most crucial sensor is the raw data from the global navigation satellite system (GNSS) that the phone provides. This includes automatic gain control (AGC), Doppler information, carrier phase, code phase, and other data that mobile devices collect concerning their distance from satellites, cellular towers, and other network equipment.”

To optimize performance, manufacturers install these sensors in mobile phones, allowing them to identify the nearest cell tower. The measurements obtained are crucial for the GPS-processing software that informs users of their location. By gathering data from a broad spectrum of phones, one can ascertain which devices are potentially under attack.

As Gorman explained, the computational AI we have implemented in the backend, along with the complexity of our signal and software processing, provides extensive capabilities. Instead of relying solely on sensors or prohibitively expensive antenna arrays, there is a significant advantage in connecting phones to operate as a single, large distributed antenna.

The analyses revealed additional insights into the realm of Russian electronic warfare.

The Baltic Sea is witnessing Russian interference with GPS signals, leading to the display of incorrect location data by receivers. NATO officials have described this as a perilous situation for commercial aviation. A frequent countermeasure against drones is the spoofing of GPS signals, which causes the drone to erroneously perceive that it is above an airport, thus requiring it to land or vacate restricted airspace.

Soldiers in Donetsk, Ukraine, regularly report encountering spoofing attacks targeting their drones. However, Gorman and his team have found that much of this “spoofing” is actually attributable to high-powered jamming attempts. These jamming activities occur within the same frequency bands as GPS or GNSS, which allows them to imitate satellite signals. This phenomenon results in the appearance of phantom or ghost satellites in areas where they cannot logically exist and still deliver a signal, such as beneath the horizon.

In a report to Defense One, Gorman explained that the noise detected does not resemble a conventional GNSS signal, although it does contain energy at the frequencies the receiver is scanning for satellite signals. The signal-processing algorithms of the receiver apply correlation techniques to discern and track these satellite signals. When a powerful jamming signal is introduced, it can create false correlations, leading the receiver to erroneously conclude that it is detecting satellites that are not actually observable.

Currently collaborating with the Ukrainian government under a contractual agreement, the group is focused on advancing their research to go beyond the detection of signal jammers, aiming to pinpoint their locations for potential avoidance or eradication.

According to Gorman’s email, the new techniques being developed will estimate the location of signals of interest using three inputs: 1. localization by range inferred from power; 2. localization by area of effect; and 3. triangulation of jammers based on the angle of arrival. Each smartphone will identify the interference signal, record the last known position, and timestamp the reception, generating data points across the network. By aggregating and processing these signals centrally, the system will triangulate the position of the cell phone jammer.

The U.S. military is channeling substantial funds into alternatives to GPS, often called alternative position, navigation, and timing (Alt PNT), to enable individuals, drones, and other entities to determine their precise locations. Unfortunately, many of these investments have not proven to be particularly fruitful.

As Gorman pointed out, the operation cannot proceed without a predetermined known position, and it is nearly impossible to determine this position without GPS.

The proposed networked approach will not take the place of other, more costly military systems that are utilized for the detection and identification of jammers. However, it does provide a solution that can be implemented swiftly and economically for military organizations such as Ukraine, as well as other groups that may face disruptions from jamming activities, including first responders. Additionally, while it will not replace the pursuit of alternative position, navigation, and timing methods, it may contribute to their improved effectiveness.

Gorman indicated that there could be a radically different perspective to consider. Instead of funneling all resources into Alt PNT and GNSS resilience, which are indeed useful, we might want to assess how this has become a reality. He stressed the importance of mapping and understanding the area in relation to the emitters, which would enable us to steer clear of those areas and remove the emitters.

Until the month of June, Vanderburgh County Sheriff Noah Robinson had not acknowledged the degree of disorder that signal jammers could introduce into law enforcement operations.

At that point, his office came across one positioned in the rear section of a car.

In a presentation to an interim legislative committee last week, Robinson indicated that the office had received a notification about a burglary in progress. The staff leveraged the camera systems within the subdivision to locate a vehicle associated with the alleged perpetrators.

Robinson reported that the officer’s radio and computer failed to operate when the vehicle was pulled over.

Signal jammers can effectively obstruct various forms of communication, including Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and GPS, thereby affecting devices such as phones, Ring doorbells, and wireless alarm systems. Robinson mentioned that the wifi jammer his office uncovered has a range of one mile.

He engaged with an interim panel that specializes in the criminal code, calling upon the lawmaker-led entity to consider the formulation of a new law that would make the importation and various uses of the devices illegal.

Robinson remarked that it is not essential to pursue this matter extensively to realize that it possesses other functions, particularly regarding terrorism.

He illustrated various situations where malicious actors could potentially disrupt medical devices in hospitals, hinder police communications through surveillance towers, access the mobile phones of everyday individuals via cellular networks, and manipulate traffic flow controlled by wireless traffic signals.

Under federal regulations, signal jammers are unlawful. The Federal Communications Commission prohibits the marketing, sale, or operation of any device that interferes with authorized radio communications.

Representative Matt Pierce, affiliated with the Democratic Party and hailing from Bloomington, indicated that correctional institutions cannot resort to signal jammers to eliminate their problems with contraband telephones.

Senator Lonnie Randolph, from East Chicago, posed a question regarding the reasons Indiana lawmakers should evaluate potential changes in light of the federal prohibition on these devices.

It was noted by Robinson that Indiana officers are not endowed with “immediate” law enforcement authority due to the absence of a relevant state statute.

Representative Wendy McNamara, who oversees the interim panel and the House’s Courts and Criminal Code committee, conveyed her opinion that Robinson’s office was fortunate, emphasizing that the situation “could have been much worse.”

Yet, she noted that the legislative action regarding the technology might not take place without delay.

Addressing the media, McNamara remarked that, truthfully, we lack a structured method for dealing with signal jammers at present.

Officials in La Cañada Flintridge began noticing thieves were using Wi-Fi blocking devices to bypass home security systems like cameras and door sensors.

In response to an increase in home break-ins by “sophisticated criminals” in the San Gabriel Valley, the city of La Cañada Flintridge announced Tuesday that it has increased law enforcement patrols and begun taking steps to curb crimes that rely on new technology.

Arabo Parseghian of the city’s administrative services department said the city is working with the Crescenta Valley Police Department and Los Angeles County to expand police presence while officials try to stop thieves who are taking advantage of wireless technology.

“For wireless cameras, alarm systems and door sensors, a lot of criminals are now trying to rely on Wi-Fi jammers to combat them,” Parseghian said.

He said city officials began noticing criminals were using Wi-Fi jammers to get around them. Blocking devices to bypass security systems so that even if a burglary occurs, they won’t alert homeowners.

An attempted burglary a few months ago confirmed officers’ suspicions when deputies found items left behind by the criminals, Parsekin said.

“They left some equipment behind, one of which was a Wi-Fi signal blocker which we seized as part of the evidence in the burglary, and we’re seeing this as a trend among criminals today.”

He added that the city has seen seven to eight burglaries a month lately.

In addition to the increased patrols, the sheriff’s department will do some undercover work, and the city will also purchase Flock Safety cameras, which can read license plates and flag suspicious vehicles, including those that may have warrants.

City officials also recommend that homeowners update the firmware on all firewalls and home security devices and install glass detectors on doors that can send alerts.

With the summer holidays approaching, authorities are encouraging residents to sign up for “vacation checks” with the sheriff’s department and to communicate plans with trusted people.

“If you trust your neighbors, if you have a good relationship, let them know, ‘Hey, I’m going out of town.’ ”

Aircraft and missiles entering enemy airspace are expected to depend on drone jammers operating in advance to disrupt and neutralize air defense systems, contingent upon the successful deployment of a new British-developed jammer.

Unlike traditional standoff jammers that are deployed on large aircraft to remain safe from threats while neutralizing enemy radar systems from afar, Leonardo is introducing a new “standoff” jammer designed to be compact enough for drone installation and cost-effective for immediate deployment.

Leonardo drone on display at the 2023 Paris Air Show

The BriteStorm satellite, currently being showcased by Leonardo at the American Astronautical Society convention in Washington, has a weight of approximately 2.5 kilograms. This weight encompasses the transmit and receive modules as well as the antennas, and the satellite is comparable in size to six Coke cans, according to company representatives.

Michael Lea, the vice president of electronic warfare sales at Leonardo UK, stated that it has the potential to lead any force that penetrates enemy territory.

Lea stated that the kit is intended to be affordable and single-use, and it can be mounted on large quadcopters or fixed-wing drones that are deployed in combat zones.

Should the newly developed British signal jammers gain traction, aircraft and missiles entering hostile regions will increasingly depend on drone jammers deployed in advance to disrupt and neutralize air defense systems.

Unlike standoff jammers, which are deployed on large aircraft to remain safe from threats while neutralizing enemy radar systems from afar, Leonardo is introducing an innovative “stand-in” jammer. This new device is compact enough to be installed on drones and is cost-effective, making it readily available for operational use.

The BriteStorm satellite, presented by Leonardo at the American Astronautical Society convention in Washington, has a weight of approximately 2.5 kilograms. This weight encompasses the transmit and receive modules as well as the antennas, and the satellite’s dimensions are comparable to those of six Coke cans, according to company representatives.

Michael Lea, the vice president of electronic warfare sales at Leonardo UK, stated that it has the potential to lead any operation that ventures into enemy territory.

Lea stated that the kit is intended to be cost-effective and disposable, specifically designed for installation on larger quadcopters or winged drones that are deployed in combat situations.

He stated that the pricing is structured in such a way that it can be regarded as an expendable asset; therefore, if it is destroyed, it will not result in significant economic losses or major strategic issues.

Upon detecting an enemy radar signal, the system employs Leonardo’s Digital Radio Frequency Memory (DRFM) technology to digitally capture and process the signal. It subsequently responds by either jamming the radar with electronic noise or spoofing it, which may include generating multiple “ghost” fighter signatures.

The DRFM technology utilized by Leonardo in its BriteCloud system is identical; this system serves as an expendable countermeasure intended for deployment from an aircraft to interfere with the radar guidance mechanisms of approaching missiles.

BriteStorm employs a maximum of three transmit-receive modules that encompass low, mid, and high frequency bands.

The system has been transported to the RAF Rapid Capabilities Office following its development at Leonardo’s facility located in Luton, UK.

Leonardo considers BriteStorm to be an advancement over Raytheon’s MALD (Micro Air-Launched Decoy), which is an air-launched expendable jammer missile that has been reportedly utilized in Ukraine.

Lea stated that it surpasses the capabilities of standoff jammers. “Standoff jammers maintain a fixed position in the air, whereas standoff jammers operate at a closer range to the threat, exhibit greater maneuverability, and possess multiple axes to disrupt and neutralize the threat.”