Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
The Electronic Battlefield Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
SYSOP    11/4/2012 11:31:02 AM
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
WarNerd       11/4/2012 11:51:10 AM
What happens to a human in the area of effect for one of these weapons?  I am sure that someone, somewhere, has already claimed that these are a death ray, or some such.
Is it politically possible to use a weapon that is sure to become so controversial?
Quote    Reply

TonoFonseca    EMPs on people   11/4/2012 12:52:49 PM
What scares me is that the next step is to use electromagnetic waves to destroy the neurocircuitry in our nervous systems - effectively killing people and making a lot of chemical weapons obsolete.  
Quote    Reply

trenchsol       11/5/2012 2:13:12 AM
Well, sufficient microwave radiation can fry meat in microwave ovens. So, yes, depending on power output, it could hurt humans.
Quote    Reply

Batou    Regan's Star Wars   11/6/2012 3:31:11 AM
Does Neutron bomb mean anything to anyone here but now it's transportable and reusable -
" target="_blank">link
Quote    Reply

JayCrawford    Just like WarNerd predicted   11/6/2012 8:02:33 PM
Yes, Batou: It means that you know so little that you would mistake the humanly lethal effects of fast neutrons (intended to stop the Soviets from using mass tank formations) with the humanly non-lethal effects of an EMP overload which burns out electronics.
Heavens, man! From where does your sound-bite psuedo-knowledge come? I guess your inability to spell Ronnie's name is probably reflective of a...ah...deficiency of information.
[Sigh] Anyway, please say "Hi" from us to your 80s-holdover friends with Physicians for Social Responsibility.
Quote    Reply

Griff       11/7/2012 6:36:49 AM
Ok from what I gather you would need an AESA with 10,000 nodes (currently stetching 2,000 in the nose of a plane max) for the beamwidth of 1 degree. This is the minimum required to create a beam (a weak one) which would be useful to destroy electronics of incoming SAMS. Now where would an antenna of the required size fit on a cruise missile let alone the required size of the power source and computer. Where is the value in such a missile with huge costings that is essentially disposable after one use? Or is the release of such info to create interest for funding?
Quote    Reply

WinsettZ       11/8/2012 9:36:47 AM
Probably for funding.
Though the idea of using an aircraft's radar systems to fry incoming air to air missiles is a very promising one. Done right, it would make the difference between an appropriate equipped aircraft and an aircraft that doesn't that much starker.
The other question is if a legacy aircraft with sufficiently powerful AESA goes up against a stealth aircraft...and while missiles are expended BVR; if those missiles are destroyed, what happens next? If missile-killing technology becomes good enough against missiles, then we're back to dogfights, at least until more hardened electronics (or even two-stage guidance systems) to allow missiles to survive long enough for terminal guidance to bring the missile into killing range.
Could be a strange time in the near future... 
Quote    Reply