
US Military's Microwave Weapon Can Fry North Korean Missile Electronics - seedifferently
http://www.newsweek.com/us-militarys-microwave-weapon-can-fry-north-korean-missile-electronics-and-735044
======
mitchellberry
There is not any proven tech that can take down an icbm reliably.

This is reassuring propaganda plain and simple.

If the US and allies could take down a rocket they'd shoot down every NK test
missle just to make a point.

Absolutely delusional saying this system can take down consumer drones and
then extrapolate that out to a missle that is travelling at speeds measured in
machs.

Even with drones I don't see how this is more effective than radio signal and
gps hijacking which can control a malicious drone rather than destroy it in
place. Various companies already do this incredibly well, shoutout to D13.

~~~
klodolph
Not arguing about the propaganda point, but there are legitimate reasons for
not shooting down test missiles.

If you always shoot down test missiles, then NK just has to keep firing test
missiles until they build one that doesn't get shot down.

~~~
clort
or until they run out of money

~~~
littlestymaar
Money for what ?

As long as they don't rely on foreign supply for their missiles[1], they can
manufacture them forever without having to pay anything to anybody.

[1]: it may sound like a bold hypothesis, but I doubt anyone would ship
missile materials to North Korea. China could, of course, but that would be _a
bit risky_ diplomatically.

~~~
dragonwriter
> it may sound like a bold hypothesis, but I doubt anyone would ship missile
> materials to North Korea.

Historically, Iran, North Korea, and Pakistan cooperated on nuclear and
missile tech, though I think that was engineering rather than parts.

------
grandalf
This story is meant to make the American public more willing to support an
attack on NK. Americans are generally happy to support strikes that we view as
high tech and not targeting/harming civilians directly.

But in reality any strikes with RF weapons will be accompanied by significant
conventional strikes.

I think there is still zero chance that there will be any sort of war between
the US and NK. NK holds all the cards and has played them quite effectively.
The only question is how much longer our president will continue to bluster
embarrassingly before he realizes his actual strategic reality.

One other possibility is that the US would be willing to undertake a strike on
NK even if there was a decent chance of NK launching a successful attack on
Seoul. In that scenario, the goal of the PR is to help Americans feel that
every "high tech" thing possible was done to stop NK and that the casualties
were sad but ultimately worthwhile.

US bluster over NK reveals both the failure of power projection toward China
and China's full knowledge that the US has more to lose from failed
negotiations than China does. China will let this play out slowly and let our
leaders act foolish as long as they wish.

It's funny how even in spite of the widespread mockery of our president, there
is much less mockery of the foolishness underlying US "tough talk" aimed at
NK. I think we believe that the tough talk is aimed at NK and not at the
American people.

------
lisper
This story has been all over the news in the last 24 hours, but it's sending
my bogometer well into the yellow because Faraday cages are a simple and
effective defense against any electromagnetic interference. (That's why you
can safely peer into your microwave oven while it's pouting 1500 watts into
your leftover lasagna.) So this feels like a Saddam-has-WMDs-style
disinformation campaign to me. It also has a whiff of desperation to it since
we really so seem to be pretty helpless to stop NK from developing the ability
to deliver nukes to the continental U.S. without more collateral damage to
Seoul than the American public is likely willing to accept (to say nothing of
the residents of Seoul!)

I fear that the ethos of tell-a-lie-often-enought-and-it-becomes-the-truth has
permeated very deeply into the U.S. government. That approach often works in
politics. In physics, not so much.

~~~
leggomylibro
I love the explanation I got from my high school physics teacher for why
microwaves aren't dangerous to be near; anyone comment on whether it's
actually accurate? Or whether I may be misremembering it?

'You can look into the microwave safely because the holes in the grate are
smaller than the amplitude and thicker than the frequency of the microwave.'

~~~
whatshisface
That can't be right because the amplitude of EM waves has nothing to do with
spatial displacements (unlike guitar strings). The way it works is that every
point in space has an E (electric) and B (magnetic) field vector which can
oscillate around a 3D space. The vectors _point towards_ other places in
space, but their meaning is a field strength and direction at _a single
point_. So this diagram[1] is actually describing the EM fields along a
_single line_ , not in the volume of space that the (purely illustrative)
arrows are drawn in.

The correct understanding of Faraday cages is that their holes must be small
relative to the wavelength: this is easy to remember because on a very large
wavelength scale you would expect the tiny holes to not be very noticeable,
and on a very short wavelength scale you're essentially talking about the
light that you can see your food with.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light#/media/File:Light-
wave.s...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light#/media/File:Light-wave.svg)

~~~
leggomylibro
Huh, interesting; thanks. The more you know...

...the more likely you are to misremember things and mislead people,
apparently. Leadership, hooo!

------
vorotato
well don't tell them that they'll just wrap their missiles with microwave
doors.

~~~
blackflame7000
Don't worry we passed sactions limiting their microwave imports

------
njarboe
Maybe the world should support any country with nuclear weapons in their
efforts to build domestic ICBMs. If a nuclear power attacks a country, having
it arrive on the tip of an ICBM leaves no doubt where it came from and who is
responsible. Using a submarine, shielded shipping container, 4x4 across the
Mexican border, etc. to plant and explode a nuclear weapon in the USA or other
country would cause much greater long term harm to global political and social
systems.

On the other hand, one does not want North Korea armed with hundreds of atomic
weapons and the ability to end civilization single-handedly. How about this as
an opening offer to North Korea? We will accept you with 10 warheads and end
the embargo. You allow full inspections of any location at any time, so the
number of warheads can be verified. Seems like new approaches to the North
Korea problem are needed as they now have detonated a ~100kT device.

~~~
phkahler
Your response to NK is IMHO exactly what NK wants. They think that having
nuclear weapons will get them a seat at the table. Which table I'm not sure.
What they want from that point I suspect is more than just elimination of
sanctions.

~~~
timthelion
Would it be so terrible to end sactions against North Korea? Trade should rise
the middle class North Koreans up, and the last thing a wealthy middle class
wants is war. A well fed and housed middle class seems the best insurance
against war possible.

------
SubiculumCode
This N. Korea standoff is a tough situation. I cannot help but wonder if
satellite weaponry exists that the U.S. could use to laser beam their dear
leader? [Edited for clarity]

~~~
TylerH
The weaponization of space is generally outlawed by the Outer Space Treaty of
which both the United States and North Korea are signatories.

~~~
barry-cotter
Yeah, and the US doesn’t spy at the UN because it signed treaties saying it
wouldn’t, like all the other members of the UN.

------
pps43
I suspect that North Koreans have heard of Faraday cage and shielding. The
missile has no need to communicate with the outside world, it can use astro
and inertial navigation systems.

------
En_gr_Student
FELCMSMRCS <\- you are welcome, even if you never said thank you per our
agreement.

------
richardfeynman
Most of North Korea's ICBMs are deep underground in elaborate fortified tunnel
systems. Can this technology really pierce deep into mountains?

~~~
dboreham
Is this true? Everything I've read says they use mobile launchers (that they
bought from China on the basis they had been de-militarized and converted for
"logging").

------
Cyberdog
Wow, so the weapon fries Nork electronics and _only_ Nork electronics?
Weaponry from other nations as well as domestic electronics and infrastructure
are completely unaffected?

Hmm. Somehow, I doubt it.

~~~
Cyberdog
I don't seem to be able to edit this comment anymore, but since it's being
downvoted so much, perhaps I need to clarify the tone:

Isn't it interesting that this article is written to imply the microwave
weapons will specifically target Nork military hardware when it could be used
upon other "enemies" and civilian populations too?

