Wednesday, September 17, 2014
Breaking News

Chinese Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) and High-Powered Microwave (HPM) Weapons vs. U.S. Navy Aircraft Carrier Battle Groups: Can the U.S. Military Effectively Counter “Assassin’s Mace”?

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
or copy the link
pf button both <!  :en  >Chinese Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) and High Powered Microwave (HPM) Weapons vs. U.S. Navy Aircraft Carrier Battle Groups: Can the U.S. Military Effectively Counter Assassins Mace?<!  :  >

By David Crane
defrev (at) gmail (dot) com

July 22, 2011

DefenseReview (DR) started covering the ballistic threats to U.S. aircraft carriers several years ago. We’ve known for some time, now, that China is capable of sinking our carriers through the use of anti-ship missiles and torpedoes, or a combination of both. Fast forward to yesterday, when the Washington Times published a piece on Chinese military “electromagnetic pulse weapons”, or “EMP weapons” that are currently under development, and that can potentially be used to disable U.S. aircraft carriers in a future conflict, including, for example, China’s desired retaking of Taiwan.

According to National Ground Intelligence Center study on the issue, China is apparently also working on high-powered microwave (HPM) weapons, and the EMP/HPM weapons double-whammy directed energy weapon (DEW) combo is part of China’s “trump card” or “assassin’s mace” weapons arsenal, which are designed to level the technological playing field against the the U.S. military. There’s actually a declassified intelligence report on the bio-effects of Chinese EMP and HPM weapons and plans for their use that was obtained by the private National Security Archive. “For use against Taiwan, China could detonate at a much lower altitude (30 to 40 kilometers) … to confine the EMP effects to Taiwan and its immediate vicinity and minimize damage to electronics on the mainland,” the 2005 report said. The report went on to say that any low-yield strategic nuclear warhead (or tactical nuclear warheads) could be used with similar efficacy, and that the Chinese DF-21D medium-range anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM), which Defense Review has already reported on, can be used as an EMP weapons platform in an attack on Taiwan. The National Security Archive is currently also running their own story on that de-classified report.

Electromagnetic pulse weapons mimic the nuclear gamma ray pulse of a nuclear blast/explosion, and are capable of knocking out all electronics-dependent devices, including computers, ground vehicles and aircraft, within the effective range of the weapon.

The Washington Times reports that “according to the report, China conducted EMP tests on mice, rats, rabbits, dogs and monkeys that produced eye, brain, bone marrow and other organ injuries. It stated that ‘it is clear the real purpose of the Chinese medical experiments is to learn the potential human effects of exposure to powerful EMP and [high-powered microwave] radiation.’” This information is obviously important, as it could be used to help the Chinese military to prevent the use of EMP weapons in an attack on Taiwan from pushing the United States accross the nuclear response threshold, i.e., starting a nuclear war with the United States.

China could potentially use EMP and HPM weapons in two different ways: 1) as surprise measure against U.S. naval assets after an initial conventional-weapons strike on the island (Taiwan) has lured them into effective range, and 2) as a bluff measure to dissuade the U.S. from defending Taiwan with a carrier battle group/CVBG.

The bottom line is that if/when China decides to take back Taiwan through military force, the U.S. military will most likely not be able to keep that from happening. Right now, the U.S. is probably stretched too thin militarily and are too weak financially to effectively defend Taiwan.

Related Articles:

Chinese DF-21D ASBM (Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile): Will it Obsolete U.S. Aircraft Carriers?

Future Iranian (Bladerunner 51/Bradstone Challenger Copy) Speedboat Swarms vs. U.S. Navy Aircraft Carriers: Van Riper Redux?

Raptor Beware: Russia Test-Flies PAK FA Sukhoi T-50 5th-Generation Supercruise-Capable Low-Observable/Stealth Fighter Aircraft. Look out F-22.

Chinese Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile (ASBM) ‘Kill Weapon’ Flummoxes U.S. Navy

U.S. Navy Aircraft Carriers Vulnerable to SS-N-27B Sizzler Anti-Ship Missile

U.S. Aircraft Carriers Vulnerable to Attack?: The Ticking Time Bomb

Can the U.S. Navy Defend Itself Against Chinese and Russian Military Tech?

Chinese Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) and High-Powered Microwave (HPM) Weapons vs. U.S. Navy Aircraft Carrier Battle Groups: Can the U.S. Military Effectively Counter “Assassin’s Mace”? by
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
or copy the link

About David Crane

David Crane started publishing online in 2001. Since that time, governments, military organizations, Special Operators (i.e. professional trigger pullers), agencies, and civilian tactical shooters the world over have come to depend on Defense Review as the authoritative source of news and information on "the latest and greatest" in the field of military defense and tactical technology and hardware, including tactical firearms, ammunition, equipment, gear, and training.

26 comments

  1. Pingback: Aimpoint

  2. Pingback: AR-15 Accessories

  3. Pingback: ar 15 scopes

  4. Pingback: Elcan Specterdr

  5. Pingback: Scope Mounts

  6. Pingback: Aimpoint » Blog Archive

  7. Pingback: AR-15 Scopes

  8. Pingback: Eotech

  9. Pingback: Aimpoint Micro

  10. Pingback: Aimpoint Red Dot Sights

  11. Pingback: | AR-15 Accessories

  12. Pingback: Shooting Targets

  13. Pingback: Magpul Stocks

  14. Pingback: Glock Sights

  15. Pingback: : Surefire LED Flashlights

  16. Pingback: SKS Accessories

  17. Pingback: Aimpoint Scopes

  18. Pingback: Ak-47 Stocks -

  19. Pingback: Streamlight

  20. Pingback: | Vortex Optics

  21. Pingback: Aimpoint Comp ML2

  22. Pingback: AK-47 Handguards

  23. Pingback: Rifle Slings » Blog Archive

  24. Pingback: CRKT Knives

  25. Pingback: AR 15 Accessories

  26. Pingback: Magpul UBR

Leave a Reply