5 ms·

For reasons I still can't fathom, a contractor for the Israeli military purchased many copies, apparently so their tanks and troops could remain oriented after

For reasons I still can't fathom, a contractor for the Israeli military purchased many copies, apparently so their tanks and troops could remain oriented after all other electronic systems failed. Possibly in case of EMP attack?

uoaei 3y ago
For an app? Running on an electronic device?
- pmontra 3y ago
  If you keep that device off and shielded it should survive the attack. Then you switch it on. Power should come from the tank, plus the internal battery for how long it lasts. If the tank can't power on after that attack it's useless anyway.
spacebanana7 3y ago
Their threat model is more likely about GPS jamming or other more vanilla electronic warfare techniques.
jonathankoren 3y ago
EMPs are a fantasy. Absolutely and unreservedly a complete fantasy. ZERO have ever been tested, and there’s literally a better use for a nuclear warhead. Not only is it a a completely hypothetical attack, it would look identical to a normal nuclear ICBM attack, and absolutely would result in a traditional retaliatory attack. Why would anyone trade an EMP for all their cities? Literally doesn’t make sense. No one in the nuclear arms control world takes it seriously. It’s a boogeyman for defense contractors and grifters, but I repeat myself. All that said, GPS denial is a very real thing, and has been repeatedly demonstrated in an operational context. It’s relatively trivial to do. You just need a regular ground based antenna, and not a particular strong transmitter because satellite signals are weak. Just broadcast a different timing signal and voilà! You now tricked someone into thinking they’re 50 miles away from where they really are. https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-overrated-threat-from-electromagnetic-pulses-46e92c3efeb9 https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-overrated-threat-from-e... https://www.c4isrnet.com/opinion/2022/07/22/why-isnt-russia-jamming-gps-harder-in-ukraine/ https://www.c4isrnet.com/opinion/2022/07/22/why-isnt-russia-...
- orbital-decay 3y ago
  >ZERO have ever been tested Wait what? There were specific nuclear EMP tests. And sure, in any realistic nuclear war scenario EMP is just an unpredictable byproduct like your link says, but that doesn't make it fantasy I believe?
  - irjustin 3y ago
    I wonder if the parent is talking about pure EMP without the nuke because those are pure fantasy. Kill all electronics w/o all the fallout.
    - jonathankoren 3y ago
      No. That’s not what I mean. I’m talking about big boogeyman of an EMP attack that destroys the either the North American electrical grid and assorted electronics or merely all electronics in a city. There is no nonnuclear EMP weapon. Every proposed EMP attack is literally a hydrogen bomb delivered via an ICBM and detonated at extremely high altitude. That is the only way to deliver one to the proper place and the only way to deliver the required energy. That’s just the physics. Even then, the actual effect at ground level, is unpredictable because of simple shielding and atmospheric turbulence. But the undetermined effects aren’t what makes an EMP fantastical. It’s fact that it’s delivered by an ICBM! The premise of an EMP attack is that somehow the attacker could surprise their enemy and land a catastrophic knockout blow near instantaneously (where “instantaneous” is defined as “between 10 and 30 minutes” (i.e. the flight time of either an SLBM or ICBM)) with little to no retaliation. A Launch on Warning policy (i.e. launch a retaliatory strike when an incoming missile is detected in the air) along with ground and space based surveillance systems makes attempting to execute an EMP attack suicidal. Missile launch detection systems have been operationally deployed and maintained since the 1960s. They work. Launch on Warning has been the policy of the United States since the 1960s. Implicit in a LOW policy is that the retaliatory strike order is given in minutes from a detected launch. This means the retaliatory nuclear weapons are already sent on their irreversible course before any incoming detonation occurs. This is the defense posture a hypothetical EMP attacker is lobbing an ICBM into. This isn't fantasy. This isn't just math. It’s the explicit nuclear posture of the United States for the past 60 years. It’s what makes Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) work, and arguably has maintained peace between nuclear states for 70 years. If an attacker has decided to launch a nuclear laden ICBM they just started a full on nuclear exchange, because that’s the response. No one is waiting to see where it goes. It’s “The missiles are flying. Hallelujah, Hallelujah.” Now. Given that you’re in an inevitable nuclear exchange, is it reasonable to waste a nuke on a roll of the dice on whether it actually do anything when you could actually blow something up? Nay! Knowing that you are being blown up? On a related note, this is the exact situation why the proposed Prompt Global Strike weapon is suicidal. An ICBM armed with high explosives, looks exactly like an ICBM armed with nuke. Similarly, a kinetic energy hypersonic glide vehicle is not suicidal specifically because it doesn’t travel on a ballistic arc.

uoaei 3y ago

For an app? Running on an electronic device?

pmontra 3y ago
If you keep that device off and shielded it should survive the attack. Then you switch it on. Power should come from the tank, plus the internal battery for how long it lasts. If the tank can't power on after that attack it's useless anyway.

spacebanana7 3y ago

Their threat model is more likely about GPS jamming or other more vanilla electronic warfare techniques.

jonathankoren 3y ago

EMPs are a fantasy. Absolutely and unreservedly a complete fantasy. ZERO have ever been tested, and there’s literally a better use for a nuclear warhead. Not only is it a a completely hypothetical attack, it would look identical to a normal nuclear ICBM attack, and absolutely would result in a traditional retaliatory attack. Why would anyone trade an EMP for all their cities? Literally doesn’t make sense. No one in the nuclear arms control world takes it seriously. It’s a boogeyman for defense contractors and grifters, but I repeat myself. All that said, GPS denial is a very real thing, and has been repeatedly demonstrated in an operational context. It’s relatively trivial to do. You just need a regular ground based antenna, and not a particular strong transmitter because satellite signals are weak. Just broadcast a different timing signal and voilà! You now tricked someone into thinking they’re 50 miles away from where they really are. https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-overrated-threat-from-electromagnetic-pulses-46e92c3efeb9 https://medium.com/war-is-boring/the-overrated-threat-from-e... https://www.c4isrnet.com/opinion/2022/07/22/why-isnt-russia-jamming-gps-harder-in-ukraine/ https://www.c4isrnet.com/opinion/2022/07/22/why-isnt-russia-...

orbital-decay 3y ago
>ZERO have ever been tested Wait what? There were specific nuclear EMP tests. And sure, in any realistic nuclear war scenario EMP is just an unpredictable byproduct like your link says, but that doesn't make it fantasy I believe?
- irjustin 3y ago
  I wonder if the parent is talking about pure EMP without the nuke because those are pure fantasy. Kill all electronics w/o all the fallout.
  - jonathankoren 3y ago
    No. That’s not what I mean. I’m talking about big boogeyman of an EMP attack that destroys the either the North American electrical grid and assorted electronics or merely all electronics in a city. There is no nonnuclear EMP weapon. Every proposed EMP attack is literally a hydrogen bomb delivered via an ICBM and detonated at extremely high altitude. That is the only way to deliver one to the proper place and the only way to deliver the required energy. That’s just the physics. Even then, the actual effect at ground level, is unpredictable because of simple shielding and atmospheric turbulence. But the undetermined effects aren’t what makes an EMP fantastical. It’s fact that it’s delivered by an ICBM! The premise of an EMP attack is that somehow the attacker could surprise their enemy and land a catastrophic knockout blow near instantaneously (where “instantaneous” is defined as “between 10 and 30 minutes” (i.e. the flight time of either an SLBM or ICBM)) with little to no retaliation. A Launch on Warning policy (i.e. launch a retaliatory strike when an incoming missile is detected in the air) along with ground and space based surveillance systems makes attempting to execute an EMP attack suicidal. Missile launch detection systems have been operationally deployed and maintained since the 1960s. They work. Launch on Warning has been the policy of the United States since the 1960s. Implicit in a LOW policy is that the retaliatory strike order is given in minutes from a detected launch. This means the retaliatory nuclear weapons are already sent on their irreversible course before any incoming detonation occurs. This is the defense posture a hypothetical EMP attacker is lobbing an ICBM into. This isn't fantasy. This isn't just math. It’s the explicit nuclear posture of the United States for the past 60 years. It’s what makes Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) work, and arguably has maintained peace between nuclear states for 70 years. If an attacker has decided to launch a nuclear laden ICBM they just started a full on nuclear exchange, because that’s the response. No one is waiting to see where it goes. It’s “The missiles are flying. Hallelujah, Hallelujah.” Now. Given that you’re in an inevitable nuclear exchange, is it reasonable to waste a nuke on a roll of the dice on whether it actually do anything when you could actually blow something up? Nay! Knowing that you are being blown up? On a related note, this is the exact situation why the proposed Prompt Global Strike weapon is suicidal. An ICBM armed with high explosives, looks exactly like an ICBM armed with nuke. Similarly, a kinetic energy hypersonic glide vehicle is not suicidal specifically because it doesn’t travel on a ballistic arc.