posted
The International Herald Tribune (the international edition of the New York Times and the Washington Post) had a front cover story yesterday, speculating whether the US will use an EMP weapon in Iraq.
Its been reported elsehwere, too, such as Newsmax.
quote: When a nuclear device is exploded, it emits a powerful EMP that blows transistors and electric circuits for hundreds of miles. A successful EMP will knock out all electrical and communication systems. Even cars and trucks will stop working. Modern life will come to a screeching halt.
Apparently, the U.S. has perfected a weapon that emits a powerful EMP without the nuclear blast.
A Washington insider says such a weapon over Baghdad would likely collapse Saddam's command and control instantly.
"Saddam's Republican Guard won't even be able to use walk talkies," the insider tells NewsMax.com.
But the Taipei Times quotes an army report report from last year saying it was "bogus".
So? Real (operational) or not?
- First Amongst "You could tell me but then you'd have to kill me" Daves
The Eight-Legged Otter
The Red and the Green Stamps
posted
Time or Newsweek mentioned an EMP weapon that was described as a cruise missile fitted with a massive capacitor, that would discharge over the target and fry electronics.
This magazine mentions it. Near the bottom, the USA was accused of using the weapon in Kosovo. The USA denied they were using it over Kosovo, but did not deny existence of the weapon in its arsenal.
posted
Most nations' strategic C2 systems are hardened against EMP; it isn't that difficult. I suspect the key Iraqi systems would largely be unaffected by any EMP system you could cram into the head of a cruise missile.
The most vulnerable area would be the tactical commo nets, though many tactical systems do have some degree of hardening. Don't know to what degree this is the case with the Iraqi armed forces. The problem with using EMP in a tactical setting is that due to the close proximity of both sides, you stand a very good chance of frying all of your own systems which are not hardened - and there are a LOT of electronics based systems in a division beyond just radios.
And there's another concern. With large population centers in the path of the attack, the coalition depends on the populace hearing warning and advisory broadcasts on their private radio sets. I am aware of no widely available commercial radio geared to the common consumer which is hardened against EMP, so the last thing we would like to do is fry our one conduit to the populace.
Personally, I kind of think the EMP rumors get floated from time to time to distract attention from other electronic/information/C4I warfare tools and tactics which have been extremely effective in the past and which remain classified. After the last Gulf War, one of the aviation technology magazines ran a short piece which claimed the Iraqi computer-based air defense net was taken down in the opening seconds of the war by a virus which the coalition had introduced via a shipment of imported printers. If that story made it into print in that magazine, you can count on it having been vetted by someone in DoD - which means it isn't accurate - but gives an idea of the many other possibilities for taking down communications nets without resorting to Buck Rogers magic weapons.
But then again, only Tom Clancy readers believed in stealth aircraft prior to that night in 1989 when the F117's swept out of the Panamanian night and missed their targets! So who knows?
-------------------- Once a Warrior Prince Posts: 496 | From: California | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
The Eight-Legged Otter
The Red and the Green Stamps
posted
quote:Originally posted by GI Joe: But then again, only Tom Clancy readers believed in stealth aircraft prior to that night in 1989 when the F117's swept out of the Panamanian night and missed their targets! So who knows?
One of the guys I went to Basic Training with was a Panamanian-American who was living in Panama as a kid during the US invasion. He said he had to move to the USA because an F-117A's errant bomb blew up the only school in his district.
Pretty ironic he ended up in the USAF. Of course, he could have been full of it, but it's a funny story.
IP: Logged |
Believe your buddy was having you on. The F117s were only used at Rio Hato, some 70 kilometers outside of Panama City. They missed the enemy barracks and plowed a field. May have killed a couple cows, but no school was touched - at least by the F117s. All the other aerial ordnance was delivered by helo gunships or AC130s. Can't recall any school significantly damaged in the fighting frim any cause, but I din't get over to the Atlantic side, so one may have been damaged over in the Colon area. Virtually no fighting took place beyond those 3 areas (Panama Cty, Colon and Rio Hato).
-------------------- Once a Warrior Prince Posts: 496 | From: California | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:With large population centers in the path of the attack, the coalition depends on the populace hearing warning and advisory broadcasts on their private radio sets. I am aware of no widely available commercial radio geared to the common consumer which is hardened against EMP, so the last thing we would like to do is fry our one conduit to the populace.
A small price to pay in return for wiping out electronic communications from command, though, isn't it?
Anyway, I guess we'll find out soon enough: if it is to be used, it will be used in the next few days.
posted
Before the war actually started, a friend of mine in the military told me that a device like this was to be used in the conflict. But that could have just been the rumor going around.
-------------------- and it's 1 - 2 - 3, what are we fighting for? don't ask me, I don't give a damn Posts: 1319 | From: Florida | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:With large population centers in the path of the attack, the coalition depends on the populace hearing warning and advisory broadcasts on their private radio sets. I am aware of no widely available commercial radio geared to the common consumer which is hardened against EMP, so the last thing we would like to do is fry our one conduit to the populace.
A small price to pay in return for wiping out electronic communications from command, though, isn't it?
Anyway, I guess we'll find out soon enough: if it is to be used, it will be used in the next few days.
Doubt they'll use it now of all times. With many of our troops in range we'll have fried electronic ignitions in all our own vehicles, worthless ballistic computers, fused fuzes, etc thereby losing the advantage of the technical superiority of our materiel. Not wise.
Besides, with most tactical radios based on FM signals - a line of sight technology - both enemy and friendly radio will already be impaired simply by the structures. Finally, defenders don't have to rely on high tech commo for defense of a city. Runners or sound powered telephones will do a quite adequate job.
If such a weapon truly exists, I'm willing to bet we won't waste it at this point.
-------------------- Once a Warrior Prince Posts: 496 | From: California | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
You're right of course: if tanks are making incursions (or are getting beaten back if you believe the Iraqis) into Baghdad, then it wouldn't be prudent unless it was very localised.
quote:Originally posted by put it in writing: Before the war actually started, a friend of mine in the military told me that a device like this was to be used in the conflict. But that could have just been the rumor going around.
Put: Have you gone back and asked your friend in the military where he got his intel?
Remember the main types of intelligence: Humint (human), Sigint (signals), Elint (electronis) and Rumint (rumor). Or, as my S-2 one said, "Hey, I heard the very same rumor from two different people. It MUST be true!"
-------------------- Once a Warrior Prince Posts: 496 | From: California | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
