Various Hi-Tech Weapons
Source: The World of 2025 Neutral Particle Beam :
A Neutral Particle Beam (NPB) weapon produces a beam of
near-light-speed-neutral atomic particles by subjecting hydrogen or
deuterium gas to an enormous electrical charge.62 The electrical
charge produces negatively charged ions that are accelerated through a
long vacuum tunnel by an electrical potential in the
hundreds-of-megavolt range. At the end of the tunnel, electrons are
stripped from the negative ions, forming the high-speed-neutral atomic
particles that are the neutral particle beam. The NPB delivers its
kinetic energy directly into the atomic and subatomic structure of the
target, literally heating the target from deep within.63 Charged
particle beams (CPB) can be produced in a similar fashion, but they
are easily deflected by the earth's magnetic field and their strong
electrical charge causes the CPB to diffuse and break apart
uncontrollably. Weapons-class NPBs require energies in the hundreds of
millions of electron volts and beam powers in the tens of megawatts.64
Modern devices have not yet reached this level.65
Particle beams are an outgrowth of conventional atomic
accelerator technology. Weapons-class particle beams require millions
of volts of electrical potential, powerful magnetic fields for beam
direction, and long accelerating tunnels. Current technology
accelerator devices with these capabilities weigh in the hundreds of
tons and require enormous power sources to operate.66 Composed of
neutral atoms, NPBs proceed in a straight line once they have been accelerated and magnetically pointed just before neutralization in the accelerator. An
invisible beam of neutrally charged atoms is also remarkably difficult
to sense, complicating the problem of beam control and direction.67
Capabilities:
Like lasers, NPBs are essentially light-speed weapons.
More difficult to control and point than the light weapon, the NPB is
strictly a line-of-sight device (cannot be redirected). Moreover, a
NPB would be difficult and expensive to place in orbit. Many tons of
material must be lifted and a complex device must be constructed under
free-fall conditions. This means the power supply, accelerator, beam
line, magnetic focusing and pointing device, stripper, maneuvering
system, and SAT/BDA system must all be located on a large platform on orbit. A
useful constellation of NPB systems in LOW must contain many platforms
(dozens) to avoid gaps in coverage. A constellation in higher orbit
would require fewer platforms, but it would be correspondingly more
difficult to control the beam and put it on target.
In addition, the NPB is strongly affected by passage
through the atmosphere, attenuating and diffusing as it passes through
dense gas or suspended aerosols (e.g., clouds, and dust).68 A
space-based NPB is therefore most useful against high flying airborne
or spaceborne targets. At relatively low powers, the penetrating beam
can enter platforms and payloads, producing considerable heat and
uncontrollable ionization. Thus, the NPB is useful at the low end of
the spectrum of force, producing circuit disruption without
necessarily permanently damaging the target system. At higher powers,
the NPB most easily damages and destroys sensitive electronics,
although it is fully capable of melting solid metals and igniting fuel
and explosives. Like the laser, the NPB is inherently a
precision-aimed weapon. To be most effective, an NPB weapon should
therefore receive very precise targeting information (inches) and must
have a pointing and tracking system with extreme stability (10 to 100
nanoradians). With this level of support, the NPB would be able to
quickly disable targets by centering its effect on vulnerable points
(e.g., fuel tanks, control cables, guidance and control
electronics, etc.).
Like the pulsed laser weapon, the NPB can be used to
discriminate against decoys in a ballistic missile defense scenario
(e.g., a very difficult, but theoretically possible mission). When the
beam penetrates a target, the target's atomic and subatomic structure
produce characteristic emissions that could be used to determine the
target's mass or assess the extent of damage to the target. The
SDIO/BMDO has already researched and demonstrated detector modules
based on proportional counter and scintillating fiber-optics
technologies that are reportedly scaleable to weapon-level
specifications.69
Countermeasures:
Rapid maneuvers and dense shields are the best
countermeasures for an NPB. If the beam can be generated successfully
and pointed at the target, it is difficult to defend against. Since
the beam deposits its energy deep into the target's atomic structure,
the primary weapon effect is penetrating heat deposited so rapidly it
causes great damage.
Evaluation:
It does not appear feasible to develop an NPB weapon
system as a space-based system even by 2025 due to the weight, size,
power, and inherent complexity of the NPB. Also, due to the
line-of-sight restrictions, the timeliness and responsiveness would be
low to moderate as the weapon "waited" for the target to move within
view. The flexibility and selective lethality of the NPB is also
moderate in that it can range from temporary to permanent damage.
Precision is excellent in theory, but questionable in use due to
earth's magnetic field and countermeasures. Since the beam is strongly
affected by passage through the atmosphere, ground-or sea-based
targets probably
could not be targeted. Finally, the reliability of such a complex,
easily-affected weapon is moderate at best. The NPB weapon system does
not appear to be practical in 2025.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
High-Power Microwave:
A high-power microwave (HPMW) device also employs
electromagnetic radiation as its weapon effect. Not as powerful as
nuclear-driven EMP weapons, HPMW weapons create a narrower band of
microwave electromagnetic radiation by coupling fast, high energy
pulsed power supplies to specially designed microwave antenna arrays.
Microwave frequencies (tens of megahertz to tens of gigahertz) are
chosen for two reasons: the atmosphere is generally transparent to
microwave radiation (all-weather capability) and modern electronics
are particularly vulnerable to these frequencies. Unlike most EMP
weapons, HPMW weapons produce beams defined by the shape and character
of their microwave antenna array. HPMW beams are broader than those
produced by NPBs and lasers, and this space-strike weapon system does
not require extreme pointing and tracking accuracies (100 nanoradian
stability and one meter target accuracy are adequate). HPMW weapons
can be trained on a target for an extended period of
time, provided the power supply and HPMW circuitry can withstand the
internal currents. As a rough point of comparison, HPMW systems
produce 100 - 1,000 times the output power of modern electronic
warfare (EW) systems.87
Capabilities:
This light speed weapon can be understood as a microwave
"floodlight" that bathes its targets in microwave radiation. More
directional and controllable than EMP, the general effect of this
weapon on electrical systems is well described in the section on EMP.
Unlike conventional EW techniques, the effects of a HPMW weapon system
usually persist long after the "floodlight" is turned off (depends on
power level employed).88
Laboratory experiments have revealed that modern
commercial electronic devices can be disrupted when they receive
microwave radiation at levels as low as microwatts/cm2 to
milliwatts/cm2.89 The more sensitive the circuit, the more vulnerable
it is. While many electronic devices can be shielded using the same
techniques outlined in the section on EMP weapons, most sensors and
high-gain antennas cannot be shielded without preventing them from
performing their primary functions.
HPMW weapons are inherently limited by the fundamental
laws governing electromagnetic radiation. A space-based HPMW weapon
must have an antenna or array of phased antennas with an area measured
in acres to point and focus its beam properly on terrestrial targets.
The resources necessary to construct such huge structures could be
expensive to lift into orbit, and difficult to assemble in the
free-fall environment. Like the NPB, the HPMW weapon is a
line-of-sight device that must "see" its target before it can fire.
The level of pulsed, electrical power required to
produce weapon-level microwave fluxes is now becoming available (for
ground-based systems). Compact, scaleable laboratory sources of
narrow-band, high-power microwaves have been demonstrated that can
produce gigawatts of power for 10 to a few hundred nanoseconds.
Ultrawideband microwave sources are less well developed, but research
in this area appears promising.90 A HPMW weapon should, however, be
able to temporarily disrupt circuits and jam microwave communications
at low-power levels.
A space-strike HPMW system would consist of a
constellation of satellites with very large antennas or arrays of
antennas. The farther out in space the constellation resides, the
fewer the number of satellites required. However, there is a
corresponding increased requirement for more power and larger
antennas. Another possibility is to overlap "spot" beams from many
smaller HPMW satellites on each target, gaining the benefit of high
power on centroid (but a very much larger combined spot) at the cost
of satellite proliferation. A useful distributed HPMW weapon system of
this type might resemble the Iridium or Teledesic constellations of
LEO communication satellites (many tens to hundreds of satellites;
however, the HPMWs would not be
small satellites).
At low powers, the HPMW weapon system is fully capable
of jamming communications when pointed at the opponent's receiving
stations or platforms, in addition to its obvious uses against an
enemy's electrical and electronic systems at higher power levels.
Since water molecules are also known to absorb certain bands of
microwave frequencies, it is also possible a properly designed HPMW
weapon system could be used to modify terrestrial weather.
Countermeasures:
Modern advances in microelectromechanical devices and
nanotechnology could eventually result in devices and sensors so small
that they are only a tiny fraction of a microwave wavelength in size.
Minute devices, if small enough, could be immune to HPMW weapons
simply because microwave frequencies cannot couple enough energy into
them to cause damage. Advances in optical computing and photonic
communications could also be a useful countermeasure. Optical devices
are inherently immune to microwave radiation, although the sections of
optical circuits where light is converted back into current would
still have to be shielded. The countercountermeasures outlined in the
section on EMP weapons are also useful for HPMW weapons.
Evaluation:
The all-weather characteristics of the HPMW make it very
attractive for a 2025 weapon. With a space-based version, this
light-speed weapon would be high in timeliness and responsiveness.
However, the flexibility and precision characteristics are similar to
the nuclear EMP device-low. In addition, like the NPB, it is limited
by line-of-sight restrictions. Moreover, its requirement for acres of
antenna for each of the satellites required for a LEO constellation
simply make it impractical. Finally, selective lethality is, like
EMP, somewhat unpredictable. And by 2025, if nanotechnology is
perfected and incorporated widely into electronic systems, this could
negate much of the effects of a HPMW. Thus, the HPMW weapon system is
not deemed suitable for space-force application in 2025.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Electromagnetic Pulse:
An electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is a sudden,
high-intensity burst of broad-band electromagnetic radiation. The
range of electromagnetic frequencies present depends on the source of
the EMP. The high-altitude airburst of a nuclear weapon produces an
intense EMP which, because of the relatively long duration of the
explosion, contains strong low-frequency components (below 100 MHz).70
Conventional EMP devices built with explosively driven, high-power
microwave technology produce a less intense, very short (nanoseconds)
burst composed primarily of microwave frequencies (100 MHz - 100
Ghz).71 The range of the EMP effect depends on the strength of the
source, as the initial electromagnetic shock wave propagates away from
its source with a continuously decreasing intensity.72
The gamma radiation produced by a fission or fusion bomb
interacts with the atmosphere, creating a large region of positive and
negative charges by stripping electrons from atmospheric gasses.73 The
motion of these charges create the EMP. The pulse enters all
unshielded circuits within range, causing damage ranging from circuit
malfunction and memory loss to overheating and melting.74
Militarily useful EMP can also be created by mating a
compact pulsed power source (gigawatt range), an electrical energy
converter, and a high-power microwave device such as the "vircator"
(virtual cathode oscillator).75 An advantage of a conventional EMP
device is that it can be triggered in a shorter amount of time,
thereby putting more output energy into the higher microwave
frequencies (above 100 MHz). Since modern electronics operate
primarily in these microwave bands, the EMP produced by conventional
devices is potentially very effective in shutting down electronics.
Explosively pumped EMP devices such as the vircator have another
advantage: it is possible to design them to focus their EMP in a
particular direction. Even a
focused EMP effect produced by a conventional device will probably
have a lethal radius measured only in hundreds to thousands of meters,
depending upon the strength of the power source and atmospheric
absorption (particularly at frequencies above 20 Ghz).76
Finally, the USAF Phillips Laboratory has produced
compact plasma toroids with energies in the range of 10 kilojoules.77
Directed at solid targets, the plasma toroids induce rapid heating at
the surface, producing extreme mechanical and thermal shock as well as
a burst of X rays.78 The X-ray burst can also be used to generate EMP.
While theory predicts the toroids will be rapidly dissipated by the
atmosphere, there may well be a method of delivering high-energy
plasmas to the vicinity of a target that does not involve long paths
in air.
Capabilities:
The few experiments with nuclear bursts in space have
revealed that the size of the nuclear EMP effect is related less to
the yield of the bomb than to the altitude of the burst. A 100-kiloton
burst at an altitude of 60 miles would create damaging EMP over an
area equal to half the US. At 300 miles, the same burst would create
EMP over an area equal to the entire US plus most of Mexico and
Canada. The gamma burst from a (purely theoretical) microyield nuclear
device might be used to create a more manageable EMP effect.79
Electrical devices exposed to an EMP burst experience
effects ranging from temporary electronic disruption at the outer edge
to destructive electrical overvoltages near the center. Modern
semiconductor devices, particularly those based on MOS (metal oxide
semiconductor) technology such as commercial computers, are easily
damaged by these high-voltage transients.80 Long ground lines, such as
electrical transmission wires, act as enormous antennas for the EMP
burst.81 Power transmission and communication grids are therefore
extremely vulnerable and will probably be destroyed by the burst. Any
system containing semiconductor electronics, including airborne
platforms, would be shut down or burned out by the burst unless it was
completely protected with heavy, expensive electrical and magnetic
shields, well designed electrical filters, and careful grounding. An
extremely effective area weapon, the EMP produced by a nuclear
airburst would undoubtedly produce severe damage to the civilian
infrastructure.
A more flexible form of EMP weapon system would employ
either a microyield nuclear weapon (yield below two kilotons), a
conventional explosively driven EMP device or plasma technology to
produce the EMP.82 Microyield nuclear weapons or conventional EMP
devices could be delivered to the vicinity of the target as a bomb
(perhaps by a TAV) or as the warhead of a missile. Given the
unpredictable but damaging effect of EMP on electrical and electronic
equipment, these EMP "explosions" are best used against enemy
platforms and facilities that depend on sophisticated electronics,
particularly the enemy's command, control, and communications system
(strategic target) and the enemy's air defenses (operational
target).83 Missiles equipped
with EMP warheads are also effective weapons in the fight for air
superiority, since modern high-performance fighter aircraft depend
heavily on sophisticated, and therefore vulnerable, electronics.
The main difficulty with the nuclear EMP effect is its
indiscriminate nature. The pulse travels in every direction and covers
large areas of the planet, potentially damaging friendly assets just
as greatly as those of the enemy. Another impediment to the use of
nuclear-driven EMP weapons is the worldwide aversion to nuclear
weapons, particularly nuclear weapons on orbit. Once a nuclear bomb
explodes in space, the charged particles produced can easily be
trapped in the earth's Van-Allen radiation belts. This would greatly
increase the radiation exposure for any satellite passing near the
radiation belts, disrupting or destroying poorly shielded satellites.
The charged particles would remain in the radiation belts for an
extended period of time, denying the use of space to friend and foe
alike.84
Countermeasures:
Nuclear-driven EMP is omnidirectional, spraying large
areas with damaging, broadband electromagnetic radiation. EMP created
using more conventional technologies is characterized by
directionality, relatively short range, and electromagnetic output
centered in the damaging microwave frequencies. Arriving at light
speed, the broadband nature of EMP makes it extremely difficult and
expensive to defend against.85 Thus, the primary countermeasure for
EMP weapons is electromagnetic shielding. Shielding must be provided
separately against the electric and magnetic field components of EMP
and it must take into account the broadband nature of the pulse. Since
a great range of frequencies are present in EMP, the designer must
shield
against low, medium, and high frequencies. The designer must also
install protective electrical filters wherever an electrically
conductive channel enters electrical systems (e.g., power cables,
transmission lines, antenna inputs, etc.). Since filters perform
differently at different electrical frequencies, this is a difficult
task.86 A single mistake in grounding, filter design, or shielding
geometry is enough to provide entry for damaging amounts of EMP,
especially in high-speed computer circuitry. This suggests the
appropriate counter countermeasure. The antagonist need only break a
few electrical grounds, shift the output spectrum of his EMP attack,
or penetrate the shielding at a few critical points to render this
countermeasure worthless. Once the energy from an EMP effect has
entered a region's power grid, communications grid, or computer grid,
the entire network can be disrupted for a period of time or even
destroyed.
Evaluation:
Due to its indiscriminate nature, nuclear-driven EMP is
only appropriate in total war scenarios (zero flexibility). The
conventional EMP weapon, on the other hand, shows more flexibility in
that it could be directional and its effects could be localized. Both
forms of EMP weapons are at least moderate in their timeliness and
responsiveness, since an EMP "bomb" could potentially reach its target
within 30 minutes after launch (by means of a delivery vehicle similar
to the modern ICBM). The precision of the EMP weapon is relatively
low-it is generally useful only for area targets (e.g., enemy towns,
large facilities, or a squadron of enemy aircraft). The
survivability and reliability of EMP weapons are moderate to high,
particularly if the weapons themselves are ground based (as the
payload of an ICBM or surface launched ballistic missile [SLBM]).
Finally, and most unfortunately, the selective lethality of EMP
weapons is low. The effect of an EMP burst on any given electrical
system is highly unpredictable, since it depends in great detail on
the precise geometry of the engagement, the exact design of the
electrical system under attack, and even the current state of the
atmosphere. In sum, the conventional EMP weapon has very interesting
possibilities as a potential future weapon. However, the currently
unpredictable lethality, limited flexibility, and questionable
precision make it unattractive as the primary component of a
space-strike weapon system in 2025.
Illusion:
Sun Tzu said "all war is based on deception."91 Military
commanders have always sought to hide their intentions, capabilities,
and forces from their opponents. The most prominent modern example of
deceptive techniques is stealth technology, which seeks to hide
platforms from sensors by reducing the various sensor cross sections
(i.e., radar, optical, infrared, acoustic, etc.). Modern advances in
holographic technologies suggest another possibility: weapons that
project false images to deceive the opponent.92
Holograms are produced by scattering laser light or
intense bursts of white light off objects and forming
three-dimensional interference patterns. The information contained in
the interference pattern is stored in a distributed form within solid
emulsions or crystals for later projection with a source of light
similar to that used to produce the interference pattern.93
Capabilities:
Full color holograms can only be produced with white
light sources, and even the best modern white-light holograms are
imperfect.94 It is certainly possible to make holograms of troop
concentrations, military platforms, or other useful objects, although
the larger the scene the more difficult it is to produce the proper
conditions to create a convincing hologram. No credible approach has
been suggested for projecting holograms over long distances under
real-world conditions, although the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology's Media Lab believes holographic color projection may be
possible within 10 years.95 Holographic and other, less
high-technology forms
of illusion may became a potent tool in the hands of the information
warriors (see the AF 2025 information warfare white papers).96
Countermeasures:
The best countermeasure for holographic illusions is the
use of multiple sensor types. The most convincing optical illusion
could easily be exposed by its lack of an appropriate infrared or
radar signature. The likely proliferation of sensors and sensor types
on the battlefield of 2025 makes the use of merely optical illusions a
temporary expedient, at best. Nevertheless, considerable confusion
could be created, at least temporarily, by projecting false infrared
signatures (platform exhausts) or radar signatures (missiles) or by
concealing one type of platform within the illusion of another type
(or of nothing at all- a form of camouflage).
Evaluation:
Illusion weapons are and will probably continue to be
too limited in the 2025 time frame. The flexibility is low, precision
uncertain, survivability and reliability are low, and the selective
lethality involves deception only. With the proliferation of sensor
devices projected for 2025, the attempt at deception would likely be
detected so quickly as to have little effect.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Projectile Weapons-Ballistic Missiles:
Ballistic missiles are popular with many countries today
due to their capability to deliver a payload to the country next door
or to a country on the other side of the world. They can even be used
to deliver satellites into space (Atlas and Titan IVs are popular in
the US). Their fuel can be liquid or solid and they are fairly
reliable. The guidance systems can use global positioning system (GPS)
receivers or inertial navigation systems and US systems are known to
be very precise (measured in feet). Finally there is a wide range of
possible payloads: nuclear warheads, chemical/biological devices,
submunitions, solid masses, satellites, nonlethal payloads like foams
or a debilitating gas, and so forth.
Capabilities:
The modern ICBM/SLBMs are strategic weapons of
deterrence. As such, they inevitably carry devastating nuclear
payloads. However, this is not the only possibility. With a CEP
already measured in feet, ballistic missiles (theater or
intercontinental) could be configured to carry more conventional
payloads.98 The simplest useful payload is a solid tip (essentially a
ton of cement in the nose). Few fixed targets could resist the sheer
momentum of several tons of material
delivered precisely at high speed from space. A simple variation on
this approach replaces the solid tip with a high explosive charge.
Equipped with the proper high speed fuse and possibly a shaped charge,
this weapon could be very effective against many hardened facilities,
especially shallowly buried bunkers or tunnels.
A ballistic missile could also be configured to carry a
variety of submunitions. A reentry vehicle could be equipped with many
long, dense rods that, when properly dispensed at high speed, would be
excellent bunker busters. Alternatively, the reentry vehicle could
contain hundreds or thousands of metal or ceramic flechettes (darts)
designed to shred area targets such as enemy bases, weapon-making
facilities, or threatening troop concentrations. The conventional EMP
bombs described previously could be delivered to enemy C4I, air
defense, and industrial facilities, disrupting or damaging all
electronics without necessarily exacting a high cost in lives.
Finally, a ballistic missile could be configured to deliver some form
of nonlethal payload such as hardening foam, irritating gas, or foul
smelling liquid.99
As regional wars in the Middle East have recently
demonstrated, it is also possible to deliver chemical and biological
weapons (CBW) with ballistic missiles. These unsettling, but
potentially very effective area weapons share several disadvantages
with nuclear weapons. CBWs are condemned by most nations as cruel and
unusual weapons. Preemptive use of these weapons certainly invites
worldwide condemnation. CBW devices are also uncontrollable once
released-the areas affected are denied to friend and foe. Worse yet,
chemical and
biological agents are spread uncontrollably by environmental and
natural vectors (e.g., insects and animals). In their current form,
CBW devices are decidedly not precision weapons.
Countermeasures:
Ballistic missiles, whether theater or strategic in
nature, are a particularly high-value target for space-strike laser
weapon systems. Ballistic missiles spend tens to hundreds of seconds
in the boost phase (theater ballistic missile [TBM] versus ICBM)
followed by tens of seconds to tens of minutes in the postboost
phase.100 These missiles are easily detected by their plumes only
during boost phase, the shortest phase of their trajectory. During
this brief interval of vulnerability, a light-speed kill by a space-ba
sed or space-borne laser weapon system can settle the problem before
it has the opportunity to deploy MIRVs (multiple independently
targeted reentry vehicles). In general, ballistic missile
countermeasures have been
addressed in great detail by the Ballistic Missile Defense
Organization. The solutions range from direct interception by
high-speed rockets and missiles to airborne and ground based-high
energy laser strikes.101
The appropriate countercountermeasures are obvious.
Stealthy reentry vehicles could be built that elude ground- and
space-based sensors, although the designer would be forced to address
optical, infrared, and multifrequency radar problems simultaneously.
Alternatively, very small, very agile reentry vehicles that greatly
complicate the problem of terminal defense could be designed.
Evaluation:
Most of these missile-delivered weapons could be built
today. All of the essential technologies, including precise delivery,
are already available. The flexibility of the/a ballistic missile
system is moderate, precision good, survivability may be tenuous in
2025, reliability is good, and selective lethality is limited with
this system. Because of these limits on selective lethality and
potential survivability problems, the ballistic missile will probably
not be suitable for space force application in 2025.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
Projectile Weapons-Kinetic Energy:
This type of projectile weapon is closely related to the
solid-tipped ballistic missile. Kinetic-energy weapons come in two
classes related to their velocity-the Kinetic Energy Penetrator (KEP)
and the Hydrodynamic Penetrator (HP).102 The KEP has a maximum impact
velocity of 3 kilofeet per second (kfps), about the maximum speed of
an SR-71 Blackbird. The KEP destroys the target by shattering it with
an enormous blow. Since some areas of a target are more vulnerable to
shattering blows than others, precise targeting is necessary for an
effective KEP.
The HP has a minimum impact velocity of 8 kfps. When a
penetrator strikes a target at this extreme velocity, both target and
penetrator react to the collision as if they were fluids (their
behavior described by hydrodynamic equations of motion). The impact
attacks the molecular composition of the target, spreading dense
impact shocks at enormous speed.
A nagging problem for KEW systems is the heat and shock
generated on reentry. This can affect the precise delivery of the
weapon. An exciting new concept has been proposed that promises to
ameliorate this problem. By concentrating a laser beam in the area
immediately in front of the hypervelocity KEW, it is possible to
create a laser-supported detonation wave (called an "air spike") that
partially shields the KEW. The air spike transforms the normal conical
bow shock into a much weaker, parabolic-shaped oblique shock.103
Researchers estimate that a properly designed air spike could decrease
the effects of shock and heat on a hypervelocity object by over 75
percent (making Mach 25 seem like Mach 3).
Researchers have also experimented with enhancers for
the two basic classes of KEW. Pyrophoric compounds might be added to
increase lethality by generating intense heat. Provided extremely
high-speed fuses could be developed, explosive charges might be added
to increase the weapon's ability to penetrate the target's outer
shell. The dense rods or flechettes mentioned above as submunitions
for ballistic missiles might also be used by a KEW to increase its
area of effect, provided the submunitions could be dispersed properly
at these enormous velocities. It has been suggested that low-speed
submunitions or dispersed EMP bombs might be used to help the KEW
penetrator overcome defensive systems and reach the target.104
The high velocities needed by KEW systems can be
generated chemically (by rockets) or electromagnetically (by the
"rail-gun"). The rail-gun consists of a long, usually evacuated, tube
containing electrically conducting rails and surrounded by high-power
electromagnets.105 The projectile is the only moving part. The
projectile is placed on the rail and a large current is generated
within the rail and the projectile. Simultaneously, time-varying
magnetic fields are induced in the magnets with powerful pulsed power
supplies. The resulting electromagnetic force rapidly accelerates the
projectile to extreme velocities. Rail-guns are being actively studied
by the US military,
although to date researchers have only been able to accelerate small
masses to hypervelocity. Velocities achieved 20 years ago have not
been exceeded to this day. Navy technologists report that their main
problem lies in developing small, high-power, stress-resistant power
supplies.106
Finally, an interesting variation on the HP concept
involves the use of meteorites as a weapon.107 Naturally occurring
meteorites at least the size of large houses (necessary to survive
drag-induced heating in the atmosphere) could be intercepted in space
and redirected to a terrestrial target. If done with sufficient
stealth and subtlety, the impact could even be "plausibly denied" as a
natural occurrence. Meteorites 30 feet in diameter could be counted on
to generate nuclear weapon-size explosions (20 kilotons), but without
the lingering radiation.108
Capabilities:
The capabilities of a kinetic-energy projectile would be
similar to the better known precision guided missiles (PGMs). The
kinetic-energy projectile would most likely be a PGM without
explosives, but which travels so fast it can take out surfaces as well
as targets buried hundreds of feet underground. Moreover, the
kinetic-energy projectile can take out single targets or area targets
(using hundreds of flechettes or rods). Besides precision, perhaps its
most attractive capability is that it is an all-weather weapon.
Finally, KEW are versatile in that they could be safely launched from
the US and find their targets anywhere in the world within 30 minutes
or they could reside in relatively small satellites (storage
containers) in LEO waiting to be dispensed and reach their target
within a few minutes.
These rather simplistic satellites could easily be integrated with the
global information network (GIN), the "utilities," and a command and
control system.
Meteors can be hundreds of magnitudes more deadly than
KEW. However, there are several significant shortfalls to meteorites
as weapons. They are hardly a timely weapon- the war fighter must
patiently wait for nature to deliver his "ammunition." The uneven
shape and heterogeneous composition of meteorites makes it highly
unlikely they can be guided precisely to a target. Since it is also
impossible to predict how much of the meteorite will survive the fall
from space, meteors are best classified as area weapons with a very
uncertain radius of effect.
Countermeasures:
The countermeasures against KEWs are basically the same
as for ballistics missiles, except that the KEWs are envisioned to be
considerably smaller. Thus, they would be more difficult, if not
impossible, to attack once they begin their descent from space. The
countermeasure would best be applied against the KEW delivery platform
be it a small satellite, a TAV, or some sort of pod.
If the KEW uses GPS for terminal guidance, it may be
possible to jam the GPS signal. This may be especially effective for
protecting mobile targets (the KEW GPS receiver would require
real-time updates to hit these mobile targets). However, this would do
nothing to prevent the use of KEWs that work strictly on trajectory or
an internal guidance and targeting system against static targets.
Evaluation:
Meteors, as a weapon, are impractical, even in 2025. Of
course, since KEW technology is available today, it will certainly be
even more precise and deadly in 2025. A few hundred KEW "storage
containers" placed in a LEO would make the timeliness and
responsiveness very high (within a few minutes). Precision and
reliability would also be high. However, the flexibility and selective
lethality would be low-total destruction would be the only choice,
unless used as a demonstration of power. Thus, the KEW would not be
the ideal weapon of 2025. Due to its all-weather capability, however,
it would be a good complement to some other weapon capability.
http://tuvok.au.af.mil/au/2025/