Ultra-Tech EMP Vulnerability

[lexington]

The ETC and LP guns in Ultra-Tech are noted as having electronics that are integral to their function.

Does this mean that they can be rendered useless by an EMP?
What change in statistics would there be if an LP gun was designed to be sparked mechanically rather than electrically?

[starslayer]

Any EMP powerful enough to fry the electronics in a gun is likely much more of a threat to the operator of that gun due to the radiation then to the gun itself.

Further the electronics inside an LP gun would be comparatively simple enough that they could be hardened without taking up additional space, and the gun body itself may act as a Faraday cage if built out of, or impregnated with, a conductive material.

Finally if the need for a mechanically actuated gun exists due to widespread low radiation EMPs existing- then the gun will still FIRE ON ITS OWN when hit with an emp; possibly burst firing all ammo, or exploding the propellant cartridge (making the distinction between electronics fried and gun destroyed vs mechanical components intact gun destroyed rather irrelevant)

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by lexington

The ETC and LP guns in Ultra-Tech are noted as having electronics that are integral to their function.

Does this mean that they can be rendered useless by an EMP?

Assuming the electronics aren't shielded, sure, but it's a relatively simple shielding task, and tends to be mandatory for ETC (and mass driver) weapons (which produce fairly high magnetic fields on their own).

[lexington]

Originally Posted by starslayer

Any EMP powerful enough to fry the electronics in a gun is likely much more of a threat to the operator of that gun due to the radiation then to the gun itself.

Further the electronics inside an LP gun would be comparatively simple enough that they could be hardened without taking up additional space, and the gun body itself may act as a Faraday cage if built out of, or impregnated with, a conductive material.

Finally if the need for a mechanically actuated gun exists due to widespread low radiation EMPs existing- then the gun will still FIRE ON ITS OWN when hit with an emp; possibly burst firing all ammo, or exploding the propellant cartridge (making the distinction between electronics fried and gun destroyed vs mechanical components intact gun destroyed rather irrelevant)

Thank you very much, I hadn't thought it would be so easy to harden the electronics.

[David Johnston2]

Frankly I'm foggy on what the EMP grenades are good for. I let them destroy nanoswarms but that's probably dubious.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by David Johnston2

Frankly I'm foggy on what the EMP grenades are good for.

Messing up civilian electronics? If you've got people doing a high-tech driveby shooting, well, the grenade might not take out the guns, but it will certainly kill the car and any consumer electronics (phones, for example) they're carrying.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Messing up civilian electronics? If you've got people doing a high-tech driveby shooting, well, the grenade might not take out the guns, but it will certainly kill the car and any consumer electronics (phones, for example) they're carrying.

Shouldn't TL9+ standard military e-weapons be designed for use against TL9+ standard military electronics?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Molokh

Shouldn't TL9+ standard military e-weapons be designed for use against TL9+ standard military electronics?

That assumes a design like that is possible; the other possibility is that they simply aren't used against military targets. Being able to kill civilian electronics is perfectly useful in a wide variety of situations.

[starslayer]

Anything with an antenna for receiving by design cannot be hardened (antennas allow low electromagnetic energies to enter an amplifier and be made stronger so that they can be read). Many other sensors are also similarly vulnerable; like the charged coupling devices on cameras/optics. Thus even military communication technologies which rely on antennas, and EM fields are vulnerable to EMP bursts, as well as many sensor technologies like night vision, and video optics. Screwing up communication is huge already, when radio waves are also controlling ROVs and active status updates to home base it will be even worse for those ties to be cut even if it's only for the 5-30 seconds it will take for an circuit breaker that protected the inner electronics to reset itself. At TL8-9 some sort of self-resetting circuit breaker sensitive enough to protect a circuit may not be an option requiring the operator to replace a sacrificial bridge (an em sensitive fuse which is very easy to burn out), or a whole board of the antenna assembly.

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Anthony

That assumes a design like that is possible; the other possibility is that they simply aren't used against military targets. Being able to kill civilian electronics is perfectly useful in a wide variety of situations.

And there are some kinds of electronics that can't be shielded. If it's supposed to pick up electrical or magnetic signals - e.g. its a sensor, or a communications device, sheilding it means it doesn't *work*. And zapping any radios or radars that are turned on when the weapon goes off, even if it's only until somebody pushes the circuit breaker back in, is marginally useful - if nothing else it breaks the locks or guidance links of homing weapons. Likewise anything that must have a lot of onboard processing capability *and* be small can't really be heavily protected - killing nanobots actually makes a lot of sense as an ultratech EMP application.