# Does nobody think this is detectable?



## last1 (Aug 21, 2011)

This is my very first post on here and I was wondering myself if any kind of radio waves, certain electrical items in cars, and other currents/waves can be detectable by satellite?

This may have been brought up in another post, I haven't looked, but this may be the difference in living and dying or surviving and being "found"? If something major does happen like (for all of the people who think like me) a global pandemic spread by the government(s) through birds or "disease spreading" planes, or a takeover by China/Korea/any other nation.. Would you not be worried or at least cautious to use anything involving electricity? I'm more worried about how the government or the "leaders" of the world at that point will find me than I am about living comfortably.

I just turned 19 and I'm brand new to prepping/self-reliance but I want to start now and gain more knowledge than anything because I believe the knowledge and know-how is greater than the physical items needed during a G.O.O.D. moment. You can always improvise with what you have learned.


----------



## efbjr (Oct 20, 2008)

*Electronic fog...*



last1 said:


> This is my very first post on here and I was wondering myself if any kind of radio waves, certain electrical items in cars, and other currents/waves can be detectable by satellite?
> 
> This may have been brought up in another post, I haven't looked, but this may be the difference in living and dying or surviving and being "found"? If something major does happen like (for all of the people who think like me) a global pandemic spread by the government(s) through birds or "disease spreading" planes, or a takeover by China/Korea/any other nation.. Would you not be worried or at least cautious to use anything involving electricity? I'm more worried about how the government or the "leaders" of the world at that point will find me than I am about living comfortably.
> 
> I just turned 19 and I'm brand new to prepping/self-reliance but I want to start now and gain more knowledge than anything because I believe the knowledge and know-how is greater than the physical items needed during a G.O.O.D. moment. You can always improvise with what you have learned.


If you could see all the electronic emissions in the air at any one time, it would look like a fog over the earth. You have emissions from the very low frequencies (VLF) to the ultra high frequencies (UHF) and higher. You have all types of power levels from high power radar and television stations, 50,000 watt clear channel AM, down to low level transmitters that are found in cell phones. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to scan all of the available frequencies continuously. Unless you know what specific frequency you need to scan, and in what general direction, you will probably miss it. You also need highly specialized equipment. Case in point...the Voyager spacecraft are several billion miles beyond the edge of the known solar system, but are still beeping away, and are still detectable, but you a large scale radio telescope to hear them. Closer to home...all commercial aircraft are fitted with transponders that identify them to air traffic control radars. A military radar could detect theses flights if there were no transponders, but there would be no way to identify them unless an actual intercept was launched. The transponder system is the only way to sort out the traffic and safely manage it. It is doubtful that home generators, and auto electrical systems would be capable of generating a detectable field beyond a few miles.

If the SHTF to the degree that nearly all of these transmissions went silent worldwide, then you might be able to triangulate on the source of surviving transmitters. I think the greater possibility is that a satellite, or high flying recon aircraft, would search for heat signatures of power plants, surviving communities, and cultivated croplands. It would be much easier to spot these than locate electronic emissions.


----------



## Turtle (Dec 10, 2009)

Most new cars do have some sort of remote access feature, even if the owner is not paying for the service.

See, dozens of years ago, the government developed a three-stage system to be implemented and required in all cars sold in the U.S. This is the origin of the OBD (On Board Diagnostics) systems in your car, where there is a data jack under the dash somewhere that technician can plug in to. The first phase of this plan was started sometime in the mid-Eighties. OBD-I was simply a computer that would ensure the car was behaving within a set of parameters.

Sometime in the Nineties, OBD-II (phase two) was rolled out, which allowed technicians to simply plug in to the car to download it's history (sort of like the black box on an airplane) and allow the technician to monitor performance of systems like emissions control systems, to ensure that the vehicle complies with government standards. This is the level at which we are currently.

Now, Phase Three, or OBD-III, is where it gets sticky. OBD-III _mandates_ that the government be able to track the vehicle remotely, via satellite. Ostensibly, this is to ensure that the vehicle is complying with the law at all times, not just when you take it in to the emissions testing station. However, there has been talk that it could be used to automatically ticket an individual who exceeds the posted speed limit on a road, ticket a young driver who is out past the age limit on their driver's license, and very obviously used to track the owner's movements. These capabilities are present in a great many vehicles currently being produced (such as GM's OnStar system and Ford and Chrysler have similar systems), but the monitoring of these systems is not mandated, as the implementation has been fought due to privacy issues.

So, basically, if you want to remain totally off the grid.... buy a vehicle built before the mid-Eighties, and obviously don't get a cellphone.


----------



## BillS (May 30, 2011)

In a SHTF situation I'm not going to be worried about any kind of detection by satellite. I think our biggest concern is the coming economic collapse. The Federal Reserve is printing trillions of bogus dollars. Pretty soon we'll see hyperinflation like Germany did in the 1920s. The prices of a number of agricultural and industrial commodities have gone up an average of about 30% in the last year. I consider hyperinflation to be 100% certain. That means we'll see sudden and huge price increases in food, gasoline, and everything else. That's why storing a year's supply of food and water is so important. To me, other scenarios are still possible but much less likely in the next few years.


----------



## LincTex (Apr 1, 2011)

Current FLIR equipped aircraft can see a human body from 100+ miles away. I doubt they care if your car emits a signal. If they want to find you, they will.

I am with Bill.... stuff is getting EXPENSIVE and getting worse. I paid $5 a gallon for milk the other day - that's NUTS!!!!!


----------



## movax0 (Aug 23, 2011)

In the late 90's I worked on some electronics for an experimental advertising program.

The way the program works is that an LCD billboard (you see these everywhere) tailored advertising to your car, by detecting the radio station you are listening to as you drive by the sign. You can also detect and use sat radio, cell phone info, etc. This is commonplace now.


----------



## texas_red (Sep 9, 2011)

movax0 said:


> In the late 90's I worked on some electronics for an experimental advertising program.
> 
> The way the program works is that an LCD billboard (you see these everywhere) tailored advertising to your car, by detecting the radio station you are listening to as you drive by the sign. You can also detect and use sat radio, cell phone info, etc. This is commonplace now.


Like _Minority Report_...

Very annoying.


----------



## partdeux (Aug 3, 2011)

Turtle said:


> Most new cars do have some sort of remote access feature, even if the owner is not paying for the service.
> 
> Sometime in the Nineties, OBD-II (phase two) was rolled out, which allowed technicians to simply plug in to the car to download it's history (sort of like the black box on an airplane) and allow the technician to monitor performance of systems like emissions control systems, to ensure that the vehicle complies with government standards. This is the level at which we are currently.
> 
> Now, Phase Three, or OBD-III, is where it gets sticky. OBD-III _mandates_ that the government be able to track the vehicle remotely, via satellite. Ostensibly, this is to ensure that the vehicle is complying with the law at all times, not just when you take it in to the emissions testing station. However, there has been talk that it could be used to automatically ticket an individual who exceeds the posted speed limit on a road, ticket a young driver who is out past the age limit on their driver's license, and very obviously used to track the owner's movements. These capabilities are present in a great many vehicles currently being produced (such as GM's OnStar system and Ford and Chrysler have similar systems), but the monitoring of these systems is not mandated, as the implementation has been fought due to privacy issues.


Don't forget to wear your Al Foil hat.

Very few cars can be remotely controlled. The percentage is likely in tenths of 1 percent. Even with the cars that can be remotely controlled, there are very few examples of where it's application is authorized. I don't think any of us would complain about the authorized usages, such as theft, police chase, etc... but there is always the overton window!

I'd love to see the satellite system that tracks the cars  I work in automotive in product development and can tell you that's a bunch of hooey  Somebody is feeding you a bunch of stuff that just isn't true.

The comment here and in other threads about being able to retrieve things like crash data, yes it's there, but it requires a court order to get to the data. Close friend of mine was involved in a lawsuit against the OEM. The OEM requested the plaintiff's attorney approve access to the crash data. It was done by a 3rd party, under the watchful eye of the OEM's engineers and the plaintiffs experts. Once the data was retrieved, the lawsuit was over. Owners claims of the accident were totally bogus, and not only that, the owner intentionally caused the problem.


----------



## VUnder (Sep 1, 2011)

partdeux said:


> Don't forget to wear your Al Foil hat.
> 
> Very few cars can be remotely controlled. The percentage is likely in tenths of 1 percent. Even with the cars that can be remotely controlled, there are very few examples of where it's application is authorized. I don't think any of us would complain about the authorized usages, such as theft, police chase, etc... but there is always the overton window!
> 
> ...


My neighbor had a crash and the state trooper hooked a laptop up to his truck right there on the spot. Told him he had been speeding some time before he had the accident, but told him he was driving speed limit when he actually had the wreck. State trooper told him that he and his wife had seatbelts on..... so go figure that one out. I took my mid 90's one ton and took out all the fuel injection, cut the wiring harness with some bolt cutters, put a carburetor on it, old style distributor, and I moved the computer to between the steering wheel and the seat, where it belongs. I used the original intake on the 460, just tapped the fuel injector holes and put pipe plugs in there. Took a thick piece of aluminum and made an adapter for the carb to fit the intake. Screwed the duraspark box on the top of the old air breather box. Still running just fine and gets the same mileage as before, without so much junk and bs to go wrong with it.


----------



## partdeux (Aug 3, 2011)

VUnder said:


> My neighbor had a crash and the state trooper hooked a laptop up to his truck right there on the spot. Told him he had been speeding some time before he had the accident, but told him he was driving speed limit when he actually had the wreck.


Unfettered total BS.

First of all, the buffer size is extremely small. Secondly, black Box stored crash data is only available the OEM's. Thirdly, am LEO is not going to do that type of investigation at the scene, ain't going to happen. That data is NOT stored in the main computer. Even the police departments have to go to the OEM's to retrieve the data, and that happens only with a court order.

If that conversation actually happened, it was the LEO trying to BS the guy into admitting he somehow caused the accident.


----------



## VUnder (Sep 1, 2011)

partdeux said:


> Unfettered total BS.
> 
> First of all, the buffer size is extremely small. Secondly, black Box stored crash data is only available the OEM's. Thirdly, am LEO is not going to do that type of investigation at the scene, ain't going to happen. That data is NOT stored in the main computer. Even the police departments have to go to the OEM's to retrieve the data, and that happens only with a court order.
> 
> If that conversation actually happened, it was the LEO trying to BS the guy into admitting he somehow caused the accident.


This guy wasn't pulling my leg. He was a direct part of the Iran Contra affair. The pilot that was shot down is from right here. I did some work for the pilot's dad awhile back. He is computer savvy and would know if someone was pulling his leg.


----------



## partdeux (Aug 3, 2011)

VUnder said:


> This guy wasn't pulling my leg. He was a direct part of the Iran Contra affair. The pilot that was shot down is from right here. I did some work for the pilot's dad awhile back. He is computer savvy and would know if someone was pulling his leg.


I'm smelling something here, oh yea, BS 

I can tell you from personal knowledge of working at an OEM in advanced product development, he has no idea what he's talking about.


----------



## VUnder (Sep 1, 2011)

partdeux said:


> Unfettered total BS.
> 
> First of all, the buffer size is extremely small. Secondly, black Box stored crash data is only available the OEM's. Thirdly, am LEO is not going to do that type of investigation at the scene, ain't going to happen. That data is NOT stored in the main computer. Even the police departments have to go to the OEM's to retrieve the data, and that happens only with a court order.
> 
> If that conversation actually happened, it was the LEO trying to BS the guy into admitting he somehow caused the accident.


One vehicle crash, they hit a deer, and then the ditch, so it was already known about whose fault.


----------



## VUnder (Sep 1, 2011)

partdeux said:


> I'm smelling something here, oh yea, BS
> 
> I can tell you from personal knowledge of working at an OEM in advanced product development, he has no idea what he's talking about.


I am in Magnolia. Look up " Buzz Sawyer Jr. Ronald Reagan, Oliver North, Magnolia" and read the whole obituary, and then lets talk. I am telling you the truth. If I tell you the moon is made of cheese, you better get some crackers and head on up there. His son's plane was shot down Oct. 5, 1986, and that is what started the whole Iran Contra affair. This other guy that I am not going to mention, was all in the middle of it too. For all I know, he is the guy they made the movie Lord of War, about.


----------



## kejmack (May 17, 2011)

VUnder said:


> My neighbor had a crash and the state trooper hooked a laptop up to his truck right there on the spot.


That is a crock! Your neighbor is lying. I know. I work for a police department.


----------



## VUnder (Sep 1, 2011)

kejmack said:


> That is a crock! Your neighbor is lying. I know. I work for a police department.


With him being who he is, there isn't any telling who the state trooper was.


----------



## partdeux (Aug 3, 2011)

kejmack said:


> That is a crock! Your neighbor is lying. I know. I work for a police department.


LOL, I tried


----------



## Turtle (Dec 10, 2009)

kejmack said:


> That is a crock! Your neighbor is lying. I know. I work for a police department.


Yeah, i'm with you on that one. My department gets all of the fancy new toys, and I can assure you, if there was such a beast, we would have one.

As for the ability to remotely access vehicles, i'm gonna have to call shenanigans on the estimate that less than one percent of all cars produced have that capability. Given that the vast majority of GM products have OnStar, I'm going to estimate (conservatively) that about a fifth of modern cars being produced have some remote access ability.


----------

