Drive a newer ride? Might want to ditch it.

[mancat 2,368]

"2. Radar navigation is next to useless unless your within range of navigation aids ie. broadcast stations or recognizable landmarks which look nothing like they do in real life when you see them on your radar scope."

 

I might disagree with this one a a little bit. There are lots of times you have nothing on your scope, however radar is usually the best indication of approaching hazards to navigation and for that purpose it is always in use regardless. So I would never call it next to useless in any situation. The impetus for this whole conversation was the theory stated in the Fox news article that disrupting GPS reception could "hijack" a ship and cause a catastrophe and that just isn't going to happen. Try to steer me toward rocks, another vessel, or anything else and me or my officers are immediately going to see that something is amiss and do any number of things to intervene up to and including shutting down all power and dropping anchor. There is no such thing as a remote controllable ship.

 

FWIW I could easily set up the required equipment to create a remotely-controllable container ship - at least rudder control is very easy. Engine speed, not so much.. Of course it would violate all known IMO and USCG regs but it's VERY doable with current technology.

 

We already allow our fleet of ships to be controlled by computer when possible.. The fuel savings are immense, the ride is smoother, as the computer is much more precise in maintaining a straight bearing over heavy seas. The crew creates and maintains courses of GPS headings/waypoints on the electronic chart computer, and when the ship gets into open waters, it's completely steered by computer over the majority of the course. A lot of ships use ECDIS and auto-pilot steering stands now.. It is actually a very huge potential security problem, and not many of the systems are properly secured - some even connected to the internet for automatic chart updates on the ECDIS workstation.

 

As far as bridge navigation equipment being still usable without GPS.. Well a radar still works without GPS, but most modern radars are Automatic/Advanced Radar Plotting Aid units that rely on GPS, AIS, and electronic charts systems to show all nearby vessels, show the ship's current position and track, and overlay known charts and hazards on the radar display. Crews are so reliant on these systems now that it's actually a pretty big deal when they have to pull out the paper charts and rely on watch standers to spot ships and hazards.

 

We have veered way off course here.. Pun intended.. I will leave it at that.

Edited July 29, 2013 by mancat

[DogMan 2,343]

It is no theory that is exactly what they did.

 

Of course the crew was aware of it and in fact feedback from the crew was that of unease over just how much control was achieved.

 

I used to work on radars, APN 59s, they are very limited close to the point of radiation just the nature of the beast, close returns are by necessity squelched.

 

All these things you say that would be done if you became aware of a problem are true, if you are aware.

 

Complacency is ever the friend of the hacker and that IS going to happen.

Yeah, OK pal. You're obviously missing my key points so there is no point in going back and forth. With my two decades as navigating officer and captain I'm afraid there isn't much you're going to school me on so we'll just leave it right here. Have a nice day.

[DogMan 2,343]

 

"2. Radar navigation is next to useless unless your within range of navigation aids ie. broadcast stations or recognizable landmarks which look nothing like they do in real life when you see them on your radar scope."

 

I might disagree with this one a a little bit. There are lots of times you have nothing on your scope, however radar is usually the best indication of approaching hazards to navigation and for that purpose it is always in use regardless. So I would never call it next to useless in any situation. The impetus for this whole conversation was the theory stated in the Fox news article that disrupting GPS reception could "hijack" a ship and cause a catastrophe and that just isn't going to happen. Try to steer me toward rocks, another vessel, or anything else and me or my officers are immediately going to see that something is amiss and do any number of things to intervene up to and including shutting down all power and dropping anchor. There is no such thing as a remote controllable ship.

 

FWIW I could easily set up the required equipment to create a remotely-controllable container ship - at least rudder control is very easy. Engine speed, not so much.. Of course it would violate all known IMO and USCG regs but it's VERY doable with current technology.

 

We already allow our fleet of ships to be controlled by computer when possible.. The fuel savings are immense, the ride is smoother, as the computer is much more precise in maintaining a straight bearing over heavy seas. The crew creates and maintains courses of GPS headings/waypoints on the electronic chart computer, and when the ship gets into open waters, it's completely steered by computer over the majority of the course. A lot of ships use ECDIS and auto-pilot steering stands now.. It is actually a very huge potential security problem, and not many of the systems are properly secured - some even connected to the internet for automatic chart updates on the ECDIS workstation.

 

As far as bridge navigation equipment being still usable without GPS.. Well a radar still works without GPS, but most modern radars are Automatic/Advanced Radar Plotting Aid units that rely on GPS, AIS, and electronic charts systems to show all nearby vessels, show the ship's current position and track, and overlay known charts and hazards on the radar display. Crews are so reliant on these systems now that it's actually a pretty big deal when they have to pull out the paper charts and rely on watch standers to spot ships and hazards.

 

We have veered way off course here.. Pun intended.. I will leave it at that.

Yeah, nobody is arguing that it's not possible to create anomalies. That's actually pretty easy. What's almost impossible is for a terrorist to create the kind of anomalies with GPS or any other system that would create a marine disaster, which was the point of the article. Crews are reliant on on modern plotting systems but we are not dependent on them. When we renew our radar qualifications it is all done by manual plotting. There are no USCG certified officers that don't have to do this. Human lookouts are always required to be stationed regardless of any equipment being used, that's the law, and we rely on them every day. There are constant cross checks and observations happening on the bridge while underway. That is a constant. You can control my vessel by remote means for a while if I let you, but if I don't, you won't get far.

[breid1970 327]

Amen.

 

The deckapes had this weird tradition. While underway during calm seas they would try to get the ship to do a complete 360 with out getting caught. That means they had to trick the CO XO OOD CDO , Strike, The QM (navigation). And that does not even cover back up nav or any of the watch standers. And what s as the reward for all this? If you pulled a 360 as helmsmen and didnt get caught the BMC would authorize you to wear a sail cloth needle in your hat. Crazy deck apes.

[Rhodes1968 1,638]

 

It is no theory that is exactly what they did.

 

Of course the crew was aware of it and in fact feedback from the crew was that of unease over just how much control was achieved.

 

I used to work on radars, APN 59s, they are very limited close to the point of radiation just the nature of the beast, close returns are by necessity squelched.

 

All these things you say that would be done if you became aware of a problem are true, if you are aware.

 

Complacency is ever the friend of the hacker and that IS going to happen.

Yeah, OK pal. You're obviously missing my key points so there is no point in going back and forth. With my two decades as navigating officer and captain I'm afraid there isn't much you're going to school me on so we'll just leave it right here. Have a nice day.

 

 

Im not attempting to "school" anyone. I am saying not all ships are run as tightly as yours would be and complacency happens as it did on the Asian airliner crash. We both know and have seen conditions where radar is not all that useful due to the limitations of the technology.

 

Thus the need for the rules you so faithfully enforce. Do you maintain all ships are run to your standards?

 

Any attempt to do this would involve some pretty fair target selection most likely with inside assistance.

Your ship of course would not be a "soft" target. Yet those targets do exist.

 

May you have an excellent day.

[magsite20 1,664]

just more stuff to add to my list:

• win lottery
• mess around with playmate of the month
• have a car new enough to have shit that can be hacked
• have a life that was interesting enough that someone might want to fuck with my car
• mess around with another playmate of the month.
• be elected president

[montec 164]

The last thing computer controlled that wasn't the engine or trans(by the way all mine still have a cable or linkage that controls them) was ABS. I pulled that plug after the fucking thing released and I almost ended up under a semi trailer. Fuck that shit. I had the pedal down and hard and it released all 4 wheels. So I have 3 lights on in the dash, ABS, Brake, and ETC.

[psl sniper 963]

I think im safe...................................

[breid1970 327]

Some peoples children. I swear.

[Dogster 577]

I do a lot of my own work on my trucks, 78 & 79 Fords and my 94 GMC. My favorite car was a 71 - the most advanced thing on it was a mechanical solenoid. I had the high beam solenoid go out one night (stuck on) - pulled into a rest area, pulled the solenoid apart, got the parts meshing the way it should and re-greased - problem solved.

 

My main problem with older vehicles now is the lack of regular gas, it is damn near impossible to find. Long term options including getting rid of the EPA and the communists in power who insist on putting ethanol in gas, rebuilding engines and fuel delivery systems to deal with ethanol or pouring in an ethanol cleaner / enzyme every time you fill up.

 

At some point I will buy an even older truck and rebuilding it from the frame up including making sure the fuel system and engine can deal with ethanol if that is all there is.

You could try using marine grade, its still unleaded but lacks the ethanol. Many stations near lakes or waterways carry it.

[montec 164]

 

I do a lot of my own work on my trucks, 78 & 79 Fords and my 94 GMC. My favorite car was a 71 - the most advanced thing on it was a mechanical solenoid. I had the high beam solenoid go out one night (stuck on) - pulled into a rest area, pulled the solenoid apart, got the parts meshing the way it should and re-greased - problem solved.

 

My main problem with older vehicles now is the lack of regular gas, it is damn near impossible to find. Long term options including getting rid of the EPA and the communists in power who insist on putting ethanol in gas, rebuilding engines and fuel delivery systems to deal with ethanol or pouring in an ethanol cleaner / enzyme every time you fill up.

 

At some point I will buy an even older truck and rebuilding it from the frame up including making sure the fuel system and engine can deal with ethanol if that is all there is.

You could try using marine grade, its still unleaded but lacks the ethanol. Many stations near lakes or waterways carry it.

 

 

In my area the water ways since am land locked are in a commie state and that f'ng state was trying to push a min of 20% in unleaded but got delayed and their minimum was 10% for many years now as the ethonal producers have alot of pull in it.

[Cbass 23]

Charlie Miller is the man. He is known as the Mac Hacker for a reason. Worked for NSA for a while and probably still does as a consultant. If he wanted to hack your car or your boat he would. Any of these technologies that increase the security or usability through computers also increase the complexity of a system and will eventually lead to alternate attack vectors that "experts" had never thought of. These nerds will exploit them because they are 1) creative 2) they have tons of time on their hands (not getting laid) and 3) it is a fun game for them. They are all at DefCon this week talking about how they are going to eff with your shit. As more of these nerds look into the GPS and car thing more flaws in the system will be found. Denying this could become a problem, is actually part of the problem.

 

http://www.forbes.com/free_forbes/2010/0412/technology-apple-hackers-charlie-miller.html

 

If you think you don't need to be worried about hacking in general because you have nothing of value that is a mistake as well in my opinion? Sometimes these nerds do it for the "lulz" as they say. Some try to make money. Some might target you to make a political statement. Similar to those bastards who beheaded that British chap not to long ago just for being affiliated with the armed services. So if you can say that you have no money (or credit), no ties to any type of government or political associations (that includes the NRA), then you still might get hit by pure randomness. While the chances are slim right now, they will increase every day that we become more dependent on the 1's and 0's to run our lives. Cars, boats, refrigerators, they are trying to hook everything up to the Internet.

 

http://www.kvoa.com/news/car-thieves-use-mystery-gadget-to-hack-in/

 

I seem to recall the Iranians managing to bring down one of our drones a couple of years ago. The government vehemently denies they hacked/spoofed the GPS signal to bring it down. As sad as it is, I think I trust the Iranian government more than I do my own lately. They are letting the Russians and Chinese check it out as we speak. Good times

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/iran-stole-secrets-us-rq-170-drone/story?id=17925395

[slippingaway 89]

 

 

Here is an even "bigger" problem.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/07/26/exclusive-gps-flaw-could-let-terrorists-hijack-ships-planes/

While it is technically possible to affect the GPS on ships and planes I think this article makes it seem a little too simple to control their movements enough to wreak real havoc. Ships, which I operate, and planes have a myriad of systems including human beings that would detect bogus information from GPS systems in a pretty short time, in which case the GPS would simply be turned off. There is definitely some danger in having the GPS affected during an autoland of an airliner in fog but even then there are safeguards and redundancies in place. I'm not too concerned (yet) about the control systems in cars, either. In general it is all improving the way we drive as well as safety but we have to be on guard for those trying to take advantage and abuse, just like in everything else.

 

 

Bigger problem is that a lot of marine GPS and nav equipment is just shoddily made, especially the software.

 

I work for a company that operates about 20 container ships, and a handful of them have what are supposed to be mission-critical GPS units. They link into major navigational systems to provide GPS location to radar, electronic charts, etc. - very important systems. Yet, the GPS units contain a serious software bug that will randomly drop the GPS NMEA data to these sensors, and suddenly the radar and other equipment has no idea where the ship is and cannot accurately plot a position. The GPS unit has to be completely reset to factory defaults and reprogrammed when this occurs. The manufacturer refuses to admit that there is a bug in the units, or offer a fix, because they are a couple years out of warranty. These units are less than ten years old.

 

So here we are planning to replace the faulty GPS head units. Planned obsolescence.

 

I run into this sort of crap all the time in the marine industry with various pieces of important equipment that is supposed to work 100% of the time. I can't imagine that it's much different in other industries.

 

Your words ring true, but one point rang out to me like a damned bell: Planned obsolescence... designed for the dump.

What's better than buying the latest, state of the art equipment that promises all? Having to do it all over again, after products fail just outside of warranty.

 

I see it all in the tech industry.

 

In Russia, they have saying: "Cheap people pay twice."

 

So incredibly sad that even though something may not be cheap when purchased, it can still be made of cheap, substandard parts, where the designer might have designed a flawless board, and the manufacturer switches out components, such as the mil-spec capacitors rated at 10+ years, for "consumer grade" capacitors that start failing within 2 or 3 short years

[psl sniper 963]

just get an m35a2 and be done with it..................................

[P2AB 9]

 

My main problem with older vehicles now is the lack of regular gas, it is damn near impossible to find. Long term options including getting rid of the EPA and the communists in power who insist on putting ethanol in gas, rebuilding engines and fuel delivery systems to deal with ethanol or pouring in an ethanol cleaner / enzyme every time you fill up.

You could try using marine grade, its still unleaded but lacks the ethanol. Many stations near lakes or waterways carry it.

 

I can get it in my area from 2 or 3 gas stations, but it is getting harder to find. The one station I used had 3 grades of NO ethanol and 1 of ethanol, they just switched it around 1 of no ethanol and 3 or ethanol. All due to the EPA BS.

 

When it came out that Commiesota was going to a minimum of 20% ethanol I wrote the gov and asked him if he was going to pay for all my small engines and replace my 3 trucks. No answer of course.