shuee@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (DAVID W. SHUEE) (08/22/90)
From: "DAVID W. SHUEE" <shuee@venus.iucf.indiana.edu>
The idea of useing anti-radiation missles like a HARM is to give your self
some "stand off" distance before radar "Burn Through" { The distance where your
ECM signal can not jam because the radar return is more powerful than the ECM.}
on targets like SAM sites. Why waste all that money on something that can't
shoot back? You do not need the direction finding or signal lock on to bomb
most radio sites. This could be done with the normal radio in the plane / helo-
gunship. There are lots of ground based jammers or the airborne EC-130 for the
freq. range you gave to disturb the C^3I net. Nuff said?
shuee@venus.iucf.indiana.eduScott.Johnson@gatech.edu (Scott Johnson) (08/28/90)
From: gatech!p0.f7.n391.z1.fidonet.org!Scott.Johnson@gatech.edu (Scott Johnson)
DW> The idea of useing anti-radiation missles like a HARM is to
DW> give your self some "stand off" distance before radar "Burn
DW> Through" { The distance where your ECM signal can not jam
DW> because the radar return is more powerful than the ECM.} on
You forgot one of the main purposes for developing the things...
to hit the radar ANTENNAE. In WWII, they could've cared less about
knocking out the hard, dug-in radar stations, but hit those exposed
fragile antennae and you put the whole thing out. They couldn't do it
back then, and now they can.