Devilleader501 Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Since the whole idea of the Super Bug taking over for the Prowler. I was thinking why doesn't the military come up with say a 747 with a Radome on it like the AWACS then stuff the thing with every jammer configuration known to man. Give it a huge power output and you have a Prowler that could knock out power to damn near a whole country. Give it a whole squadron of say F-16's to fly cover and give it a KC-135 for fuel and you would have one badass Electronic Warfare squadron. Instead of the whole Prowler/EA-18G configuration. Seems legit and would only cost a billion less than the F-35. Running for cover now!! Lol Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MusicOn Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 (edited) Off the top of my head the top two challenges to this approach are physics and tactics: 1. Jamming energy dissipates as the square of range - so you have to have four times the power to buy twice the standoff distance - and it scales up exponentially from there. So you rapidly run into a power limitation even on a 747 (not to mention the interference and safety issues with pumping out that many megawatts). 2. Tactics: Modern radar systems are not as susceptible to sidelobe intereference - thus, vertical and horizontal alignment with the protected entities is important. An EA-6B or EA-18G can remain close enough to its protected entities and is manueverable enough to make it work. A 747 could only ever provide general standoff support. Finally, you remove other SEAD tactics from the table such as ARMs and corridor chaff by using a standoff asset. Just some thoughts. Interesting concept though! I know there have been similar ideas of using a combination of "EB-52s" in a standoff jamming role in conjunction with tactical "stand-in" SEAD assets such as F-16/8s etc. Edited February 27, 2014 by MusicOn Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Devilleader501 Posted February 27, 2014 Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 Interesting. I guess this is why i posted this is to figure out what the thoughts of other people are. I actually never thought about SEAD. Another thing though wouldn't there be enough cabin space to harness a unit able to power such an ability in say 747 or 787. We have an aircraft that has a laser in it i would think something like this is possible. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Aaronw Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 Maybe it is time for the nuclear aircraft, takes care of the power problem and gives it plenty of loiter time. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_X-6 Would be extra cool if they would revive the B-36 for the job. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
spejic Posted February 27, 2014 Share Posted February 27, 2014 We have an aircraft that has a laser in it i would think something like this is possible. That laser is powered chemically, not by electricity generated on board. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Devilleader501 Posted February 27, 2014 Author Share Posted February 27, 2014 That laser is powered chemically, not by electricity generated on board. Not denying this at all. But what powers the chemical unit to make the laser. I know i uncorked the can of worms on this one. But i wanna know what you all think about it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pigsty Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 But what powers the chemical unit to make the laser Chemical energy. You mix the right substances, the result is capable of being turned into laser light. See here. So there's no electrical energy involved beyond what's necessary to pump them together, and to cool the system. This was done partly because it was understood that you can't tap enough energy from even a 747's engines to power a laser without the plane falling out of the sky. The power output you're talking about is much, much greater. The only source, ultimately, is the aircraft's fuel, as that's what's burned in the engines to generate thrust and electrical power. No aircraft would be capable of carrying enough without running into the vicious circle of needing to be bigger to carry so much weight, so needing more fuel to push that weight around, etc. The other big challenge to this barking idea is that you really shouldn't "knock out an entire country" as it will hurt a very large number of blameless people and won't do anything to improve their impression of you. If indiscriminate obliteration by nuclear means was unacceptable, how is this any better? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Devilleader501 Posted February 28, 2014 Author Share Posted February 28, 2014 Im not talking about taking out power in a country only take it back to the 1900'S for a while so we could attack strategic military implacements. Knock all radio com. And you have a military that is usless unless it sends morse code or smoke signals. Like i said it was just an idea. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Scooby Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 You'd fry the crew too. The other aircraft get the job done, no need to mess with success. One of our Hornet pilots accidentally left a jammer on over Florida and knocked out a lot of service, we made CNN. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Devilleader501 Posted February 28, 2014 Author Share Posted February 28, 2014 Lol i heard that a Prowler is what killed New York about 10 years back. I dont know i just think seeing a 747 with a radome would be cool. Just think of the possibilities. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Im not talking about taking out power in a country only take it back to the 1900'S for a while so we could attack strategic military implacements. Knock all radio com. And you have a military that is usless unless it sends morse code or smoke signals. Like i said it was just an idea. If you want to take a country back to the 1900's for a while, you can do this more efficiently with a single USB memory stick than all the jamming 747's we could build. Read up on this a bit, there are some pretty impressive (and downright scary) advances being made. Forget the kid's fantasy above, google "Operation Olympic Games" and then understand that the technology used in that scenario is long obsolete. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Devilleader501 Posted March 1, 2014 Author Share Posted March 1, 2014 I'm actually a computer guy so I know how bad things can get with computers. I rebuild them everyday. But like I originally stated if a jammer came out your computer would be useless. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
vince14 Posted March 1, 2014 Share Posted March 1, 2014 If you want to take a country back to the 1900's for a while, you can do this more efficiently with a single USB memory stick than all the jamming 747's we could build. Read up on this a bit, there are some pretty impressive (and downright scary) advances being made. Forget the kid's fantasy above, google "Operation Olympic Games" and then understand that the technology used in that scenario is long obsolete. 11bee is right - nowadays, if you want to turn the lights off in any specific country you don't need anything more elaborate than someone working on the inside and a USB stick. I work in Information Security and, believe me, there are some very scary potential scenarios we deal with where critical national infrastructure is taken out of commission by a virus attack. I know of one very large global energy company (that shall remain nameless) that had over 43,000 endpoints wiped over a single weekend due to the actions of a disgruntled employee. It nearly bankrupted the company and could have ignited another global recession. Vince Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.