Boeing, Air Force Demonstrate Missile

How about sitting next to the approach glide path at LAX?

This **** may well drive up defense cost yet again,
but also it will eventually drip down to terrorist activities,
driving up cost on everything.
Have this thing in the car luggage, drive around and flip on the switch on occasion and be a general pain in the ****

The F-35 is hardened, although to what extent is not public knowledge. It could not do the nuke mission without it.

Better question:

If they can make it re-useable and safe enough as to not cripple the host aircraft (a cruise missile in this case), how long till we see them pod mounted (or internal) on fighters for EW and missile defense?

It would be hard (pun intended) to harden a missile against an HPM due to it needing an EM pathway to receive radar returns, proximity fuse returns, and datalinks.

Along the same lines, how about ADA using it to take out inbound missiles & PGMs.

Max range? The beauty of a LO missile is that you can come very close to the target, tens of meters.

Wonder if meteorological conditions have an influence on the warhead performance.

Re self-damage: Maybe it glides over the target, and maybe if the targets are closely spaced, the missile would just have to remain stable over a few seconds, something that could be achieved without electronics.

In any case, if that technology proves stable and capable to function over larger distances all non-hardened equipment is virtually useless (like the F-35). And the off-the-shelf dream was a dream.

More likely DECM (Directed Energy Counter Measures)

DRCM looks and sounds too close to DIRCM

btw, Several sources have hinted that the APG-81 can put out enough energy and focus it well enough to do this.

Very interesting, and agree with @spudman, if DIRCM,
it’s only a matter of time before DRCM now.

Better question:

If they can make it re-useable and safe enough as to not cripple the host aircraft (a cruise missile in this case), how long till we see them pod mounted (or internal) on fighters for EW and missile defense?

It would be hard (pun intended) to harden a missile against an HPM due to it needing an EM pathway to receive radar returns, proximity fuse returns, and datalinks.

Along the same lines, how about ADA using it to take out inbound missiles & PGMs.

Video of test http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-BukbpkOd8

How do they attack multiple targets in one run?

So far I had the impression that to create a strong EM puls you’d need an explosive coil contraction (explosively pumped flux generator), in the process destroying the assembly. What are they using here? Marx generators fueled by capacitor banks? Interesting; also what’s the size of that missile?

Still, I think that (cruise) missile better be real LO to get close to the intended target.

The calculations and data depend on the mechanism by which the EMP is created. I don’t think this EMP device can disable systems from relatively long range farther than a conventional warhead.

DJ

It buzzes the rooftops of your adversary’s financial stonghold while wrecking the banking computer networks with high power microwaves. Then it flies out to sea to ditch in 1000m of deep blue.

I work for major network integrator….I’m suddenly deeply in love with this weapon and approve wholeheartedly of its development and frequent deployment.

I’m also now off to price up fruit baskets……

Power relay & control stations; communications control centers, nodes, & relays, etc could be attacked and cause just enough damage during a simultaneous A2G or cruise missile attack as to ensure a greater level of success by the attacking forces.

Great weapon for a defence company to manufacture….one that forces clients to buy multiple weapons systems of each type for redundancy purposes. Suspect that BAE, Thales, IAI etc, etc are sending fruit baskets to Boeing heirarchy already!.

Serious question though how is this concept to be employed?. Cant be in direct support of a strike package or the strike, presumably, gets EMP-whacked too?. Cant be too far ahead of the package either or the serious opfor gets chance to wheel out redundant, shielded, units or switch out fried PCB’s and gets systems back up. The ramifications, if the follow-on strike package believes the target is in the stone age and then a clever opponent lights them up at close range, could be quite tragic!.

Is this a ‘peacetime’ weapon for use against soft targets or maybe a psyops tool???

It’s the perfect “We didn’t do nuffin'” weapon.

It buzzes the rooftops of your adversary’s financial stonghold while wrecking the banking computer networks with high power microwaves. Then it flies out to sea to ditch in 1000m of deep blue.

And the following day your Foreign Secretary laments “It was a stroke of bad luck that the [bad guy’s] banking system crashed.”

Great weapon for a defence company to manufacture….one that forces clients to buy multiple weapons systems of each type for redundancy purposes. Suspect that BAE, Thales, IAI etc, etc are sending fruit baskets to Boeing heirarchy already!.

Serious question though how is this concept to be employed?. Cant be in direct support of a strike package or the strike, presumably, gets EMP-whacked too?. Cant be too far ahead of the package either or the serious opfor gets chance to wheel out redundant, shielded, units or switch out fried PCB’s and gets systems back up. The ramifications, if the follow-on strike package believes the target is in the stone age and then a clever opponent lights them up at close range, could be quite tragic!.

Is this a ‘peacetime’ weapon for use against soft targets or maybe a psyops tool???