diy drone jammers

Pic related, of course they can be used for more than just jamming drones, but I think jamming drones will make them a necessity soon. Literally imagine not being able to jam glowie drones. You haven't been paying attention, have you? The problem is you can get them from China easily, but they are quite expensive. The low-range handheld ones are $700 upwards which is acceptable, anything more fancy and the price increases by 10x Anyone experimented by making jammers on their own? Would love to hear your experiences

I can't imagine it's healthy to make such devices man-portable and have them on all the time. The EMF jammer guy in any tactical unit must be the least favored.

>>10750 OH EMMM FUGGIN GEEEEEEE Are you SERIOUSLY like literally and actually unironically QUESTIONING whether athermal non-ionizing radiation is bad for you or not????????? What are you some kind of SCHIZO!??!!?!?!?!?!?!?

I remember someone telling the story of some guy getting the police on his door because his TV, when powered on, would emit signals that would cancel out WiFi signals in the neighborhood by accident. Was pretty comical on the first read. There's probably some folks out there that tried their own tv jammer at home inspired from that story and documented how they did it. unfortunately, search engines are failing me and I can't find that story again. :(

>>10753 Yeah, I understand that the FCC and related authorities are astonishingly rabid when it comes to enforcing interference, illegal broadcasting, etc.

>>10748 It is not healthy. I know for one they can cause baldness. I remember watching a video where some people were talking to a man who was completely bald, eventually they asked why he was bald. He said that he was in the military and that he used to carry a jammer in a backpack much like the image in OP, it could jam any remote detonated explosive devices within a 100 meter radius but the massive amounts of EMF were still damaging to his health and they caused him to go completely bald. People can become sensitized to EMF, it can cause body aches and pains over time, and when they are re-exposed to EMF in the future it can trigger their symptoms again, something as minute as a walkie-talkie can trigger phantom pains. Exposure to EMF can cause tinnitus, heart palpitations, genetic alterations, damage to DNA, damage to sperm, lowered fertility, insomnia, headaches, glioma, fatigue, sleep disturbances, cancers, an inability to concentrate and remember things, it can weaken the immune system. Something to bear in mind is that WiFi routers (if you're within 10 feet of them) and smartphones emit levels of radiation high enough to incur these effects, a jammer backpack emits levels much much higher. So yes, it will absolutely damage your health.

>>10755 OP here, I wear a EMF shielding beanie 24/7 similar to pic releated, it's like a small faraday cage for your head, I use it to protect myself from mind control. I also have orgonites everwhere plus I have radiation shielding on the main defense line of my compound and I can place the jammers in one of the turrets on the screening perimeter, so they activate automatically for a brief period of time when an opfor drone is detected

>>10756 It’s not a faraday cage unless the circuit is completed. Bowl-like shapes (like a beanine) would amplify the signal like a dish-antenna does, making the emf STRONGER in your cranium. That is, if any of this schizotypal EMF bullsoykaf was real and not just dunning-kreuger idiocy.

>>10759 I agree that beanie is completely worthless but the effects of emf on health isn't just dunning-kruger it's objective fact that electromagnetic frequencies are damaging to health, if it weren't the case smartphones wouldn't have warnings for the levels of radiation emanated by them to begin with. Do you think that people just pull soykaf out of their ass? People just make stuff up off the top of their heads, the things people say aren't the result of decades of research into the effects of microwave radiation on human health. The standard levels of energy for emissions by electronic devices are hundreds of times greater than the amount of energy required to adversely effect health.

>>10760 >Do you think that people just pull soykaf out of their ass? No, surely somebody wouldn't go on the internet and just lie like that.

>>10760 I was saying that their understanding of radio technology is dunning-kreuger. They severely overestimate their understanding of it and think themselves an expert when they can’t tell the difference between flux and field lol. Radio like 5G or even 6G has a wavelength bigger than most cities and a measily 6 or so GHz of frequency. Visible light, a thing that doesn’t cause harm, has a wavelength of at least 600 nanometers, and a frequency of about 600THz, yes: Teraherts. That’s thousands of times more energetic than radio, the thing people who become decieved by this no sense think will hurt them. They don’t understand radio, they just think they do. All this crap is coming from a place of ignorance and pride, and suckers falling for it are being taken for a ride and being sold “magic beanies” to sooth their fears and nacebos.

>>10759 You are correct about that EMF beanie being worthless (although OP was brewing soykaf of course). That said, it is undeniable that nonionizing athermal EMF at levels seen in everyday life has health effects. Redditors love to say otherwise, as though the human system follows a discrete, easily explicable digital logic, but they're simply wrong, on a factual level. It would also be an extremely convenient belief in that it permits endless use of technology everywhere at no cost. I'm not a luddite, but it is just the case that it can be meaningfully harmful. A device mounted on your back at most a foot from your brain (remember -- RF decays at 1/r^6 in the near-field and 1/r^2 in the far-field) designed to literally DoS the airwaves around you would certainly be meaningfully harmful. The only question is how much, and if it's worth it. At the end of the day, lowering EMF in unintentional radiators (devices that aren't using RF to communicate) is just a question of improving circuit quality, or adopting new paradigms (like the use of projectors as a display). Lowering EMF in intentional radiators is a question of improving radio technology and SNR. Otherwise, the spectrum and means of broadcast can be changed, as in Li-Fi technologies and infrared IrDA. An ultimate solution would be to develop self-steering beam technology, like an Airy beam, taking SNR through da roof. But this is a sci-fi pipe dream for now. All-in-all, don't get kneejerky and don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. It is the way of humankind to brush up, to invent, things that harm itself at varying degrees. The air that we breathe today is not the same our ancestors did. All of the food is filled with microplastic. But hey, we used to put lead in the gasoline, and now we don't. We are a fearfully-made divine organism that can shape its own trajectory. Indeed, already, EMF limits in Russia, and China are like 1/100 that of the US. EU is similar. The human body /can/ be harmed, but it can also readily regenerate when the stressors are removed and the proper resources for regeneration are provided. So there's really no need to doompost, but yeah, maybe get mad or we'll have more dark ages. Nobody likes cancer and a weakened blood-brain-barrier (that last part is a medical fact: EMF is used to improve brain drug delivery, even.) The question of EMF's harm to help is a political landmine, which is why people, including yourself, are so vitriolic about it. It's possible to believe that computers are cool and even good while taking care to not sleep on top of one. Car enthusiasts know not to huff gasoline or exhaust fumes. In any event, the truth will win out in the end, despite the telecom cartel. It is the way of things.

>>10763 All you have said is that light is more energetic than radio all-else-equal. That is not a rebuttal of empirical evidence.

>>10751 >protip: >its not

>>10766 your brevity feigns wit. I would like to see you expound on the issue. Confront the existing evidence and national guidelines.

>>10764 >it is undeniable that nonionizing athermal EMF at levels seen in everyday life has health effects What are the health effects and why are they impossible to deny? I didn't find that much. Based on https://www.cancer.org/cancer/risk-prevention/radiation-exposure/radiofrequency-radiation.html it sounds like the consensus is something like, "we couldn't find much of anything and don't have much idea how it might do harm (we mostly looked for cancer), but it isn't ruled out yet I guess." This bit seemed the most compelling to me: >Studies of people who might have been exposed to higher levels of RF radiation at their jobs (such as people who work around or with radar equipment, those who service communication antennae, and radio operators) have found no clear increase in cancer risk. >a weakened blood-brain-barrier (that last part is a medical fact: EMF is used to improve brain drug delivery, even.) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20550949/ >levels of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (EMF) that increase brain temperature by more than 1°C ... The balance of experimental evidence does not support an effect of ‘non-thermal’ radiofrequency fields with microwave and mobile phone frequencies on BBB permeability. I bet it takes a really strong radio to nuke your brain by 1C or more, but maybe I'm wrong. What kind of device would it take to actually heat up your insides like that? I can at least agree that I don't want to be microwaved.

>>10767 let me try to explain... ionizing radiation has "very bigly energy" and radiowaves has unbligly energy, which differ by orders or magnitude. you say "the kinetic energy from dynamite can destroy a bridge so why cant my punches? they both produce kinetic energy and i punch very bigly" but no matter the biglyness of your punches, they cannot destroy the bridge.

>>10769 alright so argue against the decades of studies proving a correlation between microwave radiation exposure and the array of health issues mentioned in this thread

>>10770 >[citation needed] how about the decades of studies on how some studies arent taken seriously because they're "kinda soykaf, actually"?

Read Robert O. Becker's books (Cross Currents and The Body Electric). Also, strangely (or not), Soviet Union had much stricter limits on allowed EMF exposure than the West even today.

>>10748 The TLDR is RF soykaf is stupidly complicated and there isnt much you can effectively DIY unless you already have the required skill-set. You could DIY the power circuitry and antennas with hobbyist-level knowledge, but thats about it. That said you dont need military-tier jammers to fuarrrk with consumer drones, basically all of them use the wifi frequencies: 2.4ghz for the remote and 5.8ghz for the video feed. Some diy drones do use 868-915mhz or other sub-ghz frequencies or maybe 1.2ghz for the video feed but theyre rare so dont worry about it. It depends what you want to accomplish. If you just want it to fuarrrk off that shouldn't be too hard to accomplish. A pair of FPV goggles for target-frequency acquisition and a powerful video emitter would be enough to soykaf on most drones, If the pilot loses the video feed because youre blasting porn on the same exact frequency his drone uses he'll flip the fail-safe switch and the drone fuarrrks off, or if youre lucky it doesnt have a gps to use for return-to-home so it just lands or drops. Saturating the 2.4ghz band for a few seconds should be enough to trigger an automatic return-to-home and make it fuarrrk off, tho even soykaf drones might use "frequency-hopping spread spectrum" (like mine for example) making jamming difficult and spoofing impossible... thats why you just saturate the entire spectrum and call it a day. You'd need at least 4 antennas and probably 4 amplifiers. Any drone thats not complete soykaf will have a GPS and will be able to return-to-home, and GPS jamming isn't worth you time or money. If it is then just get the chink jammer. But really, if you want to counter drones what you need isnt a jammer --> its a big drone with a netgun. Its infinitely more effective and you can DIY it for like 300$USD

>>10771 Body Electric is a good book, you can check out this site which will spoonfeed you information https://bioinitiative.org/ Also another thing to note is that the Soviet Union actually bombarded the American embassy in Moscow with microwave radiation for years throughout the 50s-70s to see what effects it would have on the individuals they targeted, and guess what, they developed an abnormal condition affecting their lymph nodes, cancers, anemia, ulcers, memory problems, depression, etc. Three diplomats died of cancer consecutively, one after the other, so one diplomat would replace another who would end up dying, and so on. When the CIA discovered what the Soviets were doing they didn't step in to put a stop to it, they just passively observed the situation and gathered information for themselves by studying afflicted personnel so they too could learn about the effects of the radiation until the Soviet government drastically amplified the intensity of the signal which resulted in the discovery of the signal. Also funnily, when news of the signal came to light and the whole incident broke out the US government complained about the signal targeting the embassy while also maintaining that it was not harmful to human health, and that there was no connection between the signal and the health issues personnel developed despite the fact they had secretly been examining affected personnel before news of the signal broke out. There was also the Eugene signal, the U.S government bombarded the town of Eugene, Oregon with a 4.75mHz 500,000 watt pulse signal causing residents of the town to report headaches, insomnia, stuffy ears (also caused by microwave radiation), and throat problems.

>>10774 >Criticism: >The following government health authorities and independent expert groups have reviewed the BioInitiative Report and made the following comments on the merit of its claims. Health Council of the Netherlands >The Health Council of the Netherlands reviewed the BioInitiative report in September 2008 and concluded it is a selective review of existing research and does not present a balanced analysis considering the relative scientific quality of different studies. Some of the shortcomings identified included that the report made false claims as well as claims which lacked scientific basis.[citation needed] >In 2008, they concluded: >In view of the way the BioInitiative report was compiled, the selective use of scientific data and the other shortcomings mentioned above, the Committee concludes that the BioInitiative report is not an objective and balanced reflection of the current state of scientific knowledge.[5] >Australian Centre for Radiofrequency Bioeffects Research (ACRBR) >In December 2008 the Australian Centre for Radiofrequency Bioeffects Research (ACRBR) reviewed the BioInitiative Report and concluded: >Overall we think that the BioInitiative Report does not progress science, and would agree with the Health Council of the Netherlands that the BioInitiative Report is "not an objective and balanced reflection of the current state of scientific knowledge". As it stands it merely provides a set of views that are not consistent with the consensus of science, and it does not provide an analysis that is rigorous-enough to raise doubts about the scientific consensus. >The ACRBR also points out there are statements in the report that do not accord with the standard view of science, and the report does not provide a reasonable account of why we should reject the standard view in favour of the views espoused in the report.[citation needed] >The ACRBR also noted that the state of science in this area is continually being debated and updated by a number of expert bodies composed of the leading experts in this field and strongly urged people to consult these views for a balanced assessment of the research.[6] >European Commission’s EMF-NET >The European Commission's EMF-NET coordination group for investigating the impact of electromagnetic fields on health made the following comments in October 2007 regarding the BioInitiative Report: > There is a lack of balance in the report; no mention is made in fact of reports that do not concur with authors' statements and conclusions. The results and conclusions are very different from those of recent national and international reviews on this topic… If this report were to be believed, EMF would be the cause of a variety of diseases and subjective effects...[7] >Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Committee on Man and Radiation (COMAR) >The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Committee on Man and Radiation (COMAR) reviewed the BioInitiative Report in 2009. They concluded: > ...that the weight of scientific evidence in the RF bioeffects literature does not support the safety limits recommended by the BioInitiative group. For this reason, COMAR recommends that public health officials continue to base their policies on RF safety limits recommended by established and sanctioned international organizations such as the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, which is formally related to the World Health Organization.[8] >German Federal Office for Radiation Protection >The German Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS) commented in October 2007 on a newsmagazine TV show on the German network ARD that featured the BioInitiative Report shortly after its release. They said: > The BfS conducted a preliminary review of the so-called "BioInitiative Report" immediately after its release and concluded that it had clear scientific shortcomings. In particular, it has undertaken to combine the health effects of low- and high-frequency fields that are not technically possible. The overwhelming majority of studies underpinning the report are not new: they already have been taken into account in the determination of currently applicable standards.[9] >French Agency for Environmental and Occupational Health Safety >The French Agency for Environmental and Occupational Health Safety (Agence française de sécurité sanitaire de l’environnement et du travail, AFSSET) analysed the contents of the BioInitiative Report and in October 2009 said: > ...the different chapters of the report are of uneven editing style and quality. Some sections do not present scientific data in a balanced fashion, do not analyze the quality of the articles cited, or reflect the personal opinions of their authors ..., [the report] is tinged with conflicts of interest in several chapters, does not reflect a collective effort, and is written in militant style.[10] >Indian Council of Medical Research >The Indian Council of Medical Research reviewed the 2012 version of Bioinitiative Report in February 2013 and said: > …on critical examination of the Bio-initiative 2012 Report, has observed that the report is not based on multi disciplinary weight – of evidence method leads to a scientifically sound judgment & objective and there is no balanced reflection of the current state of scientific knowledge. However, the evidence given in the report cannot be ignored and hence, need further investigation in this area.[11][12] >Other >In the March/April 2008 newsletter of the Bioelectromagnetics Society, publishers of the journal Bioelectromagnetics and to which several BioInitiative Report contributors belong, a commentary noted "...analysis by good theoretical physicists suggests that nothing is going to happen but the deposition of additional energy that, if sufficient, can elevate tissue temperature. But physicists don’t know everything so we turn to the biologists and find that an analysis of the biological database reveals no consistently reproducible (independent) LLNT effect after about 50 or 60 years of research."[13] thats your source? thats the best you got? literally the entire world came together to call these dudes retards. its soykaf for the birds, trash science for retards. >Overall we think that the BioInitiative Report does not progress science >Overall we think that the BioInitiative Report does not progress science >Overall we think that the BioInitiative Report does not progress science >Overall we think that the BioInitiative Report does not progress science

>>10775 Did you bother researching any of the studies their site provides or did you just immediately look for information to discredit bioinitiative while also disregarding everything else in my post like I knew you would?

>>10775 you are some kind of weird wage slave. Idk why you are doing this, but I don't trust a word you type.

>>10776 it would be like researching flat-earth theories: i dont need to read each and everyone of them to individually asses their scientific value. >>10777 thats a cool opinion you got. i feel like telling you what i think of you based on that statement would be mean and pointless because you already know what you are.

>>10778 I know you're a little cock sucking rat.

>>10755 For how tech savvy Lains are supposed to be, it really is amazing that people can't into basic research. Either that, or trolls everywhere. The Jamming trucks used by many armies for decades casued the crews severe injuries including burns and other physical or mental problems. Fire control radars are even worse. >>10756 Nigga, just use tin foil, it's way cheaper than some glitterboy hipster beanie. >>10769 You shoud get a 5G blocking positive ion pendant... https://www.naturesenergieshealth.com/products/scalar-energy-pendant As for OPs question, there are a few technologies that counter counter-drone jamming. You can pull a russia nd just wide area jam, but you paint a picture to anyone with an electronic warfare suite or even a radio direction finder to target you.

>You shoud get a 5G blocking positive ion pendant ill be fine dont worry

The easiest way to illustrate how hard em shielding is a simple attempt to shield your phone. If you cant call yourself anymore you succeeded. Making that attempt you will find quickly how difficult it really is. As for OP's goal the first change i would do is go for a directional antenna. Not only will you achieve more with less power but you will also spare anyone else in the vicinity getting affected by your shenanigans.

>>10775 Wow, all of those government agencies are telling me it is wrongthink. Guess I know what to believe now.

The dunnig-kreuger analysis was spot-on. Countless egostictical idiots proudly explicating their non-existent awareness of Radio technologies without the slightest thought they might be wrong or misunderstand. You know what they say: You can’t argue with an idiot.

>>10775 Please remember that these idiots live in an unfalsifiable constructed “truth”. If you cite information that contradicts their belief, then they’ll just dismiss it. If it gives the impression of support, they’ll shove it in your face all day. They routinely misinterpret information, warp the truth, and spread misinformation to support their hyperreality. They’ve already reached their forgone conclusion and have closed their minds, it’s basically impossible to convince them of anything. You can’t stop them from fooling themselves. It might be better to be the conman who sells magic beanies, because then you’re at least doing something productive with them. It’s funny, yet sad. They don’t want the truth, they just want to feel special.

>>>10781 > For how tech savvy Lains are supposed to be, it really is amazing that people can't into basic research. > Ion pendants Holy soykaf, the fuarrrking irony!

>>10777 Checked. This is standard course for any magnetobiology or bioelectromagnetics discussion. Telecom is owned by wealthy people who also own tons of utilities in all major countries, they rake in billions per year easily. They have Sh!lls and bots out everywhere that automatically destroy any discussion. Back in the day when I made 5G threads, here on Lainchan, which gets maybe 1 post per hour, my thread very quickly blew up. All kinds of weird soykaf, weird behavior... you know, the typical bullshit you egt from sh!lls. Not like Lainchanners at all, It's very clear they monitor chans in particular and replied. >>10775 Like this guy here is not a real person. Period. Maybe, MAYBE, and I do mean MAYBE, if he was indoctrinated into the "skeptics" cult sphere, or is an engineer who works with or tangential to RF, he would do this. No one else would have the knowledge of the space to reflexively go to wikipedia and spam this exact section. It just doesn't happen. That's not the only hint though. My advice, don't engage with people who just deny flatly and seem to have no depth or personality. Just ignore them completely. Also be wary of wasting your time and energy on people who seem permanently stuck on the "if" stage. There's no hazy "if", if you've done your fuarrrking research.

>>10791 This is just flipping the script. Projection. Plus a bit of gaslighting. >They don’t want the truth, they just want to feel special. And finally ending with a cap to the narrative. A core to explain it all. This is known as framing. You want to get in early and establish perceptual anchors to get people saying "prove you're not what I was told you are". It's to increase the barrier artificially. The common example is, say a house has a huge kitchen window. The kids break the garage window. The father gets home and they start off by telling him "so you know that kitchen window...." so he anchors on that, "oh no don't tell me." Then they say, no it's fine, but we broke the garage window. This lessens it inn his mind, phew, at least it's not the kitchen. This is anchoring, I say this soykaf all the time and nobody gets it. They're just doing that in reverse, and they also want to get you think tribally, so you won't go to the weird others. So tiresome.

>>10778 You don't need to individually assess hundreds of studies, all you need to do is give something a chance instead of immediately looking for information to discredit the source of information I gave you. The U.S government has already shown its intent to hide information about the effects of microwave radiation, and were responsible for the creation of the current standards of safety which are hundreds of times greater than the levels necessary to cause harm to the body. All of the scientists around the times of the Eugene and Moscow signals who raised concerns about the dangers of microwave radiation were slandered and ostracized much like they are now. You don't even consider why Russia has significantly lower standards than those of America and Europe, you don't consider any experimentation conducted by the U.S government on people, you don't consider anything other than the information readily available to you by establishment information sources because you aren't serious, you don't actually care about anything you just passively consume information while making no attempt to learn anything on your own.

>>10795 >You don't need to individually assess hundreds of studies They don't need to, but they ought to. Assuming good faith, it's the only thing that would shut them up and turn their brain on.

>>10792 Do you not understand the sarcasm? >>10795 >>10796 The primary mechanism utilized to observe the safety of any given product is limited to the legal bias of innocent until proven guilty, and thereby any product is safe until proven dangerous. If you read the manual for any 5G phone, it actually has a safe distance to be held from skin to prevent injury. These manuals are often inundated with fine print, or only available after extensive searching and downloading. The specific spectrum used is known to be dangerous, the solution then is to put the liabilty on the customer by saying they should have known better than to misuse the product (it was all in the literature). Cell towers have radiation hazard placards, but the fact that damage is not instantaneous makes it "safe" because it would take a lawyer demonstrating that by using a product that is not yet fully developed for long periods over 20-30 years, the customer is harmed. At that point, the counter arguement is it could have been any number of things that caused the problem. Just look at monsanto and round-up. It took decades to show that chemical herbicides are dangerous, even though anyone who used them could tell you that anecdotally. Back to the OP tho, the FCC does not take kindly to jammers. It even became an issue when police wanted to protect sports stadiums because they were not supposed to use jammers which would interfere with other signals.

>>10799 >If you read the manual for any 5G phone Any phone*. Always been that way. I also don't care, I know their little games. It's the same reason the focus is put on cancer, deliberately, because the epidemiological water is so muddy you'll never get anywhere. They did this in the late 80's. Have to stop playing by their rules and get off their terrain. Stop acting like they're legitimate.

>>10788 >directional antenna that'd obviously be a must, but thats not really the problem. OP could totally DIY some yagis, biquads or cantennas cheaply and easily. the problem is the electronics you need to feed your antenna.

>hurr durr muh 5G >still no foolproof tutorial of making a simple jammer Also the radiation limits are set on the level that would prevent strong adverse effects not to optimize health. So it should be beneficial to keep it lower.

>>10803 Wrong. Dose response is highly nonlinear. Standards are set to avoid heating, that's it. Don't make more of it than it is with a bunch of language nonsense.

>>10804 >dose response is highly nonlinear Indeed, jtcs logarithmic ;)

>>10805 Wrong. So goddamn arrogantly wrong. You don't even know the first thing. I'll be glad when all of this soykaf is dealt with and I never hve to talk to you people again.

>>10806 Sometimes I wish the NWO/Illuminati/Whatever was real so they could save me from idiots like the 5G retards ITT Sadly, they never seem to amount to much more than a minor annoyance like with gang stalking soykaf and giving people headaches :(

>>10807 You are a ballsack. To be a ballsack, this is your role in the world. You are a ballsack for the world. You are the world's ballsack. You are a ballsack.

>>10808 That isn't true. There isn't an ounce of testosterone in that guy.

>>10748 When you realize how hard is to make an amplifier which sends junk, but stays in a fixed frequency or range of fixed frequencies without too much soykaf out of it (wasted energy), and have enough transmission power to cover a 300m radius, or even 1km in the case of top tech, you will see that the $700 from china is probably a scam. But radio is cool, you can do it via software, get any dongle compatible with GNU RF, find the frequency in which each equipment operated, and just hammer it. The problem is the amplifier, and keeping it stable in a certain frequency. https://wiki.gnuradio.org/index.php/Hardware

>>10751 >Are you SERIOUSLY like literally and actually unironically QUESTIONING whether athermal non-ionizing radiation is bad for you or not????????? Laion, do you have idea how many drones, not even just the cheap ones, but in general, make use of 2.4ghz? Take your attitude back to 4chan... this isn't the place for you to act condescending especially when you have all the wrong info.

>>10813 >le go back to [site] maymay

https://discoveryoftech.com/how-to-make-a-drone-jammer/ Just build these, make them pluggable and create dead zones in a city, for the lulz of course.

>>10815 these are just not going to be effective what-so-ever against any drone thats not a literal toy, i have those components just laying around and im tempted to make one, strap it to my drone and fly around just to demonstrate how unbothered it would be

>>10773 >But really, if you want to counter drones what you need isnt a jammer --> its a big drone with a netgun. Its infinitely more effective and you can DIY it for like 300$USD Hell yeah. I know the police force in Japan uses drones with nets to capture criminal drones that transport suspicious goods. Because of that! The criminals THEMSELVES are using similar netting systems to counter-attack those capturing drones. Remember a quote going around about that story of a policeman saying "This is the most fun we had in a while"

Kinda surprised this hasnt been mentioned yet >A HERF gun made from microwave oven parts. >disclaimer this is actually dangerous: a microwave's high-voltage capacitor will kill you, a herf gun can cook your retinas, magnetrons contain berylium, probably forgetting a bunch of stuff. A typical microwave oven operates at 2.45Ghz, if you give it a kilowatt of power it will soykaf out ~700watts of RF noise "possibly maybe" at the desired frequency. Its not super practical, its heavy: the transformer alone weights like 30lb, and to get that much power it would need to be plugged into an outlet. The battery-powered ones ive seen use those <30watts chinese high-voltage pulse generators, and are kinda soykaf.

>>10833 holy soykaf that project in the webm is fuarrrking mental. Good post, terrible idea, must be really fun in practice though :D also the pony pillows in the background lmao. love this guy.

https://hackaday.com/2015/10/15/hijacking-quadcopters-with-a-mavlink-exploit/ >Many commercial-grade drones use ardupilot/px4 and rely on the mavlink protocol for telemetry to the base-station >Mavlink is bidirectional and can be used to control a drone from said base station. >Those drones can be exploited by simply setting a SiK telemetry radio to the same ID. >You can then use a base-station software like "mission planner" to control the drone remotely, pressing the "disarm" button and having it turn its motors off and fall from the sky for example. >The "return-to-china" function cracks me up. >3DR's SiK radios are the "default" telemetry radio for ardupilot/px4, but they might use something else.

>>10824 Just use a trained falcon >Your drone just got falcon-ed

This costs a bit less and is usually pretty effective.

>>11893 lol thats a pretty good shot. >>10821 >>10815 should make one with a microwave oven's guts

>>11895 >>10821 The only thing this will do reliably is summon the FCC. Test your funkaf in a cage or one will be provided to you at no extra cost.

One problem that nobody has addressed is the way your testicles glow when you are around one of these things for too long.

>>11903 in my observation the FCC isn't that fast. Someone will come if you do it a bunch in a small area over several days. If you just do it once randomly no one will be able to find you unless you screw up otherwise.

>>11903 >>11906 FCC enforcement is almost all geriatric HAM nerds tattleing on people. Unless you're by a military base or airport nobody else is monitoring the airwaves.

>>11911 first of all thats a banger of a number you've got there. Good job. secondly though thats probably true I do know people who have been successfully foxhunted for reckless transmissions. Hams are one thing, but wireless network companies do care about their bands and do investigate persistent problems

>>10766 This is your obligatory reminder that high magnetic fields cause unconsciousness or death. Thermal? Nope. Non-ionizing? Nope. Large-scale physiological effects? Yep.