Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!military
From: shuee@venus.iucf.indiana.edu (DAVID W. SHUEE)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Anti-radiation missles
Message-ID: <1990Aug22.025326.16209@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 22 Aug 90 02:53:26 GMT
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 12
Approved: military@att.att.com



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.edu