Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Radiofrequency Weapons

Posted by Hemos on from the destroy-the-records dept.

BWJones writes "Global security is running a fairly detailed and interesting story on E-bombs (not email bombs, rather electronic microwave weapons) taken from the IEEE Spectrum Online. We have long known (since the 1940's) about the effects that high energy weapons can have on electronic components from nuclear blasts, but this class of weapons is designed to exclusively attack electronic infrastructure. "

5 of 377 comments (clear)

  1. military use? by Shakrai · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hmm.. maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree on a subject that I'm not too familiar with, but as I recall most military applications are shielded against EM pulses (to protect against the EMP effects of nuclear weapons). Wouldn't it then stand to reason that "e-bombs" would be more useful on civilian infrastructure/targets? I.e: You can take out that TV station (like we may have done in Iraq?), but you (probably) won't be able to fry the radar on that MIG-29.

    With that in mind, could these weapons then become like chemical or biological weapons? Deadly to civilian populations but mostly useless against modern first-world military forces? If Saddam had gassed our troops it might have caused a few casualties and slowed us down... but it wouldn't have stopped us. If he had gassed the NYC subway system.....

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  2. Irregular armies by poszi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Modern wars are fought mainly between irregulars armed with AK-47 and mortars. No, it won't revolutionize these conflicts and it doesn't matter against partisants.

    --

    Save the bandwidth. Don't use sigs!

  3. Not arming ourselves for the real fight by swb · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The real fight the US faces is NOT relatively high-tech foes like the Soviet Union, but low-tech guys armed with home-made bombs scavanged from artillery rounds and AK-47s.

    What good is this kind of technology against these foes? It's almost impossible to think we even face an enemy capable of fielding a large force for a stand-up battle, let alone one easily immobilized by EM. Even the North Koreans, on anyone's short list for potential combat, likely rely heavily on WWII-era or older combat communications unaffected by EMP.

    1. Re:Not arming ourselves for the real fight by pclminion · · Score: 5, Insightful
      The real fight the US faces is NOT relatively high-tech foes like the Soviet Union, but low-tech guys armed with home-made bombs scavanged from artillery rounds and AK-47s.

      A few measly freedom fighters with some old Russian guns? Please. The reason we are so mired in the Middle East right now isn't that we can't win, it's because we cannot allow ourselves to do what is necessary to win.

      We could easily, permanently end the situation in Iraq. Sweep 500,000 troops through the country, shooting everyone they encounter. Or simply nuke it. We can't do these things for obvious political reasons. But to suggest that we are developing these new weapons such as EMP to protect us against these new, "difficult" enemies is ludicrous. They aren't hard to beat. It just requires ruthlessness to beat them, which we are unwilling to exhibit on the global stage.

      No, these EMP weapons are most likely meant for use against U.S. citizens when they finally rebel, or against Europeans when they finally decide they've had enough of our bullshit. Any revolution in this country would be coordinated via cell phone, telephone, and internet. A simple weapon to knock all out simultaneously is something the government cannot afford not to have in its arsenal.

  4. Re:Hmm... by valkraider · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unless the people building the "destroy" device also have the contract to "rebuild". Then it makes perfect sense!