• FermiEstimate@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Large, non-nuclear EMPs mostly use explosives. Covering a large battlefield means you’re essentially bringing a massive, single-use explosive charge to the battlefield, staying uncomfortably close enough to benefit from it, and trying to set it off at exactly the right time, because they’re not reloadable. And your enemy is probably thrilled you’re doing this, because it saves them from hauling their own explosives there. (On that note, why are you sitting on this thing instead of dropping it on the enemy?)

    This is in addition to whatever shielding you brought, which is likely bulky and conspicuous. And you’re probably not doing combined arms, because shielding infantry and light vehicles from massive explosions is, it is fair to say, something of an unsolved problem.

    But wait, you might be thinking. I know there are non-explosive ways to generate EMPs. Yes, there are, but you need a power source for those, and if you have a really good, portable one of those and a consistent supply of fuel to run it, you probably have better uses for it, like powering a modest laser. Oh, also, you’re 100% sure your shielding works perfectly, right? You’ll find out quick if you don’t.

    • NegativeInf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Those are a lot of good points. Even if we’re the more portable types of EMP, the downsides are apparent. And I didn’t even think about lasers.

      Does a weapon like CHIMERA stand a better chance at these kinds of drone tactics? I’m just generally curious as to how warfare evolved beyond drones?

      • FermiEstimate@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        The microwave thing? I couldn’t even guess, though I personally wouldn’t want to stand next to it even if it works. A big microwave emitter on the battlefield is just asking to catch a HARM.

        It really doesn’t seem like anyone knows for sure what to do about drones right now.

        • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Microwaves, especially at higher frequencies like I think those use, also don’t travel terribly well through inclement weather or dust. If I was ever up against one of those things I’d bring a super-soaker full of brine and just try to get it really wet.

          They’re also pricey and high tech, and right now Russia can’t even build a non-stupid tank. For a Western military some variant of this might work, maybe using a more moderate frequency from a phased arra, or just lasers. At short range there’s always bullets. Interceptor drones are also bound to be a thing at some point.

          • notabot@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            H.A.R.M - High-speed Anti Radiation Missile.

            Basically, rather than having it’s own radar to track a target, or using IR sensors, it locks on to a target emitting lots of radio noise such as an enemy radar or jammer.