Microwave Warheads to Fry Enemy Electronics

[alex_greene]

Raytheon Planning Missiles That Fry Electronics With Energy Beams

Admittedly, they are talking about using microwaves or radio waves to fry electronics, rather than an actual EMP - which, to date, can only be generated by a nuclear detonation of some sort.

According to the blurb, "It's not had much luck strapping microwave weapons onto drones, but that's definitely a goal for the service, as is a missile that would fry all electronics in a given radius. And Raytheon rival BAE is even building a microwave gun for ships."

So, perhaps not yet.

But soon.

 

[rust]

You would only have to break a couple of international agreements which
explicitly prohibit the use of radiation weapons ... :roll:

 

[DFW]

Raytheon Planning Missiles That Fry Electronics With Energy Beams

Admittedly, they are talking about using microwaves or radio waves to fry electronics, rather than an actual EMP - which, to date, can only be generated by a nuclear detonation of some sort.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/e-bomb3.htm

Let's just say that they can be made without a nuc wapon.... :wink:

 

[phavoc]

It's also not a huge issue, but more expensive, to create electonics that are immune to EMP.

Most space-based electronics are very tough (though not totally immune it seems) to radiation bursts. They also typically have a great deal of redundancy built into them. I recall reading an article where it described each chip in the satellite having 10x the number of components required, to allow for 90% damage to the chip without affecting the function.

They are also eminently reprogrammable, to allow for emergencies and such. Quite different than what we use commercially today for the most part.

I've always thought that Traveller starships would have EMP-resistant electronics and rad shielding as a matter of fact. For as tough as starship armor is, it certainly isn't a far reach to expect that they would make them resistant to radiation damage. You'd think diving through a gas giant a starship would encouter a bit of radiation.

 

[AndrewW]

I've always thought that Traveller starships would have EMP-resistant electronics and rad shielding as a matter of fact. For as tough as starship armor is, it certainly isn't a far reach to expect that they would make them resistant to radiation damage. You'd think diving through a gas giant a starship would encouter a bit of radiation.

Ah, but then there would be less call for fib computers or radiation shielding on the hull.

 

[phavoc]

Ah, but then there would be less call for fib computers or radiation shielding on the hull.

Lol... not my fault nobody bothered to update the basic rules reflecting 1970s tech...

Though come to think of it, the ships of the Star Trek 'verse were flying through the galaxy back in 1966... a decade before Traveller. Flying right next to suns and worrying only about the heat melting their hulls. They could take the rads it seemed (not sure if they had any episodes that featured radiation being an issue).

Marc! You shoulda watched more ST!!!

 

[DFW]

It's also not a huge issue, but more expensive, to create electonics that are immune to EMP.

True. It would be trivial to totally protect the computers on a Trav space ship from external EMP.

 

[rust]

Potentially silly question: Would a starship not be a Faraday's Cage and
therefore immune to EMPs anyway ? :?

 

[DFW]

Potentially silly question: Would a starship not be a Faraday's Cage and
therefore immune to EMPs anyway ? :?

All except sensors that connect to the outside. That would be handled by only having fiber optic connections to those and very conditioned power to them on isolated circuits.

Even though the rules were written in the '70's they were written without sufficient tech knowledge of that time.

 

[far-trader]

Potentially silly question: Would a starship not be a Faraday's Cage and
therefore immune to EMPs anyway ? :?

All except sensors that connect to the outside. That would be handled by only having fiber optic connections to those and very conditioned power to them on isolated circuits.

Or in 70's tech, a simple choke/breaker arrangement. EMP shuts you down briefly as you reboot all the protected systems on the other side of your antennas.

FWIW (and I suppose IMO) CT ships/computers seem to model hardened systems quite well imo for size, endurance, etc. BEFORE High Guard added the whole FIB etc. And further isn't Nuke EMP only a real threat in a significant atmosphere and/or with a strong magnetic field to generate and propagate the EMP? As in there is no EMP in deep space but a nuke going off close to a world like Earth will create an EMP in the atmosphere. Which makes space combat nuke effects non-EMP and hardening against it pointless.

Not that hardening wouldn't have it's place for other reasons, including against being the subject of planetary nuke attack or other EMP effect.

As for the ship hull being a Faraday cage, it could be if built that way, but not by default of simply being a hull. Though the only rational read is that the hull does include a fantastic and full radiation shield as part of it's construction. Among other magics.

And on the subject of ST dealing with it, don't forget they had magic shields to protect them from everything... except Plot Expediency I do vaguely recall an episode or two of ST dealing with radiation sickness, but can't remember which series or how.

 

[DFW]

Or in 70's tech, a simple choke/breaker arrangement. EMP shuts you down briefly as you reboot all the protected systems on the other side of your antennas.

Yes, sounds correct to me.

And further isn't Nuke EMP only a real threat in a significant atmosphere and/or with a strong magnetic field to generate and propagate the EMP? As in there is no EMP in deep space but a nuke going off close to a world like Earth will create an EMP in the atmosphere. Which makes space combat nuke effects non-EMP and hardening against it pointless.

I do know that the magnetic field can redirect & focus EMP by up to 90 degrees depending on latitude. In space I think you'd have to be a lot closer to be effected & it would be less em rad.

 

[locarno24]

Admittedly, they are talking about using microwaves or radio waves to fry electronics, rather than an actual EMP - which, to date, can only be generated by a nuclear detonation of some sort.

Not necessarily. Radars and comms gear put out humungous quantities of RF. This is why ships have safety interlocks on their IFF, navigational radars, fire control, etc, to stop them transmitting when anyone is aloft doing maintenance on or near the antennae - that intensity of radio waves or microwaves will do very unpleasant things to the poor deckies.

I dread to think what you could do to electronics at close(ish) range with the megawatt-order power you get out of an AEGIS phased array radar.

P.S. The "microwave gun for ships" referenced in the comment in fact dates back some four years.

Note that this may not 'blow' out electronics - if you have a circuit breaker system and protective faraday cage, the core of a system may be fine. BUT, you're still going to be shut down whilst I'm firing. Which means your air defence systems are not shooting at me, which means I win by default; I don't care if a SAM system functions whilst I'm not there.

 

[DFW]

Which means your air defence systems are not shooting at me, which means I win by default; I don't care if a SAM system functions whilst I'm not there.

Not really. Those are hardened systems. How do you think it works on fighters? Those systems don't shut down every time an enemy jet, at close range, "paints" them.

 

[locarno24]

No. But then they aren't anywhere near the same level of radiated power.

Even the shiniest things in the sky are capable of generating only a few kW - two orders of magnitude less than a big phased array.

And yes, they do - they don't go 'out of cheese error' but you do get relatively low radiated output (i.e. same order of magnitude*) producing sufficient signal noise to prevent effective use (i.e. fire control).

That - and indeed this whole news story - are basically a modern version of an active jammer. Just higher power and directional.



Also - given the 'concept graphic', this story is more talking about suppressing IADS radar systems controlling surface-to-air missile installations, which can be held in a continuous beam far more effectively for a longer period of time.

It's the same weakness that allows them to be suppressed with anti-radar missiles very easily - fling a HARM (or whatever) back down the beam and you can either shut down your radar (losing the ability to shoot back with your missile batteries temporarily) or lose the radar (same result but permanently).

It's not a perfect doctrine (you can have multiple networked antennae now, or else retain a few quiet ones for the 'killshot' whilst others act as search radars, or have frequency-hopping radars that aren't as easy to track), but it's the basis of the 'wild weasel' doctrine, which has, to date, worked well enough in the wars where it's been used in anger.


* For reference - estimated power of F-15e AESA is ~ 22 kW, estimated power of EA-6B jammer suite ~10kW

 

[DFW]

No. But then they aren't anywhere near the same level of radiated power.

Correct. However range is far more important. That's why ship based doesn't effect planes attacking. Also, IR & optic based based isn't effected at all.