Re: [SG2] weapons

From: "Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com>

> Several orders of magnitude tougher, and I'm quite well aware about
how far 
> the microwave warhead R&D has advanced. So far, the defensive side is
*way* 
> ahead. Which is a pity, since my job would be one hell of a lot easier
if 
> EMP warheads could reliably knock out the target's defensive systems.

Given the toughness of the ERC-32 and similar space-qualified
processors, I
don't see EMP as ever being good enough to take out systems hardened
against
it. Physical destruction is easier.
  
> >Also there is a very big difference in between
> >taking out a chip and taking out a chip conected to a sensor that is
trying
> >to recieve a signal.
> 
> Depends entirely on what *type* of signal the sensor is looking for...
and 
> how it is designed.

Yup. The whole architecture, not just the components, must be examined.
But
it's possible (even easy) to make whole systems that are at least as
tough
as the weakest component.
 
> Don't bet your life on it. I'm not going to, and it is my job that
depends 
> on finding a counter to PDS/ADS.

Remember: if you can't decrease the signal, increase the noise. A PDS
whose
CFR is too high is useless, and if hard-kill, positively dangerous to
the
user.

Looking at it from the opposite side, (I've been involved with making
PDS/ADS) the attacker has all the advantages, if he knows how to take
the opportunities he's given. You, no doubt, would see things
differently.
It's tricky putting complex electronics in something soldier-proof, 
long-shelf-life, capable of withstanding X g's of acceleration,
and programmable to meet changing threats. And of course, inexpensive.

Then of course, there's the adage "Shoot the archer, not the arrow".