Gomig-21
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2016
- Messages
- 7,901
- Reaction score
- 11
- Country
- Location
You beat me to it, dammit!
I think your point of view is more influenced from the conventional munition sense and effect and not from an EMP perspective. Like SC mentioned, that's one tactic that can be used with that particular munition IF the development process doesn't involve producing larger ones of such munitions for larger targets and results.
I see a small munition is much better and more effective in the field in many ways as it gives you the option of selecting specific targets and minimizing the effected zone while reducing unnecessary spread. For example -- and this is all assuming that there isn't much defensive capabilities at that point, but that is also an advantage to the smaller munition as it makes it not just that little bit more difficult to detect, but to track for SAMs and their radars on systems such as the PAC III or iron dome or even S-300/400 - any of the Russian-built SAM systems etc. -- and drop one or 2 directly over a military tower. Assuming the hit was successful, now you've taken out the tower and a 200 meter radius of associated and important equipment within that proximity. That pretty much cripples a very important aspect of communication that sends out and lands fighter jets.
Also, this is perfect for the target you mentioned [grids] if you want to disable the power to a much larger section which would include civilian use unfortunately, which in many cases would be needed and the beauty is the very low (almost nil) collateral damage and particularly civilian injuries and deaths. The author of the article SC posted mentions a list of targets and since he is an American, his mention of those specific targets in this section is only because of the obvious fact that it possibly creates intended alarm and/or caution, to a certain degree. So I'll copy/paste the quote for accuracy but my intention is to only specify this author's opinion on the list of targets (which include the one you mentioned which I agree also, is a very important one) such a small weapon could be capable of disabling:
A single EMP attack against even a country the size of the Israel or Iran would have a devastating effect. The explosion itself might not pose much danger to those below, but the EMP would damage or destroy phones, power grids, communications networks, computers, laptops, smart cards, vehicle electronics, fuel pumps, medical equipment, industrial robots, and just about anything else that has a microchip or even a slightly advanced electrical circuit.
Saudi Arabia to develop ‘microwave weapon’ using Ukrainian supplied technology (defence-blog.com)
My guess is that of course it's not as easy as he says in his quote. I'm pretty sure that most air defense systems would need to be somewhat neutralized prior to sending in these EMP attacks which would not be an easy feat, even for powerful countries such as the US, Russia, China etc. Getting to a military tower is not as easy as 1-2-3 of course. And countries that have been at war or have been involved in a conflict for a while have excellent defensive SAM systems set up that would make things much more difficult. But the bottom line is the effective level of an EMP even at only 200 meters coverage is still very devastating and disabling.
It's amazing how militarily developing the Ukraine is, when we see it exporting the ToT to such advanced systems and so much more already. But this technology is not one that too many countries have or are capable of producing because of its devastating effects preceded by the knowledge to achieve building it effectively. It's very impressive. And Saudiya has been quite the recipient of many of these developments to improve its own capability.
