"JAMMERS" or EMMITTERS??

[reconeil]

"JAMMERS" or EMMITTERS??
by N.R. Filidei (December 27, 2004)

On a news segment this morning about the extreme and never before done security measures taken for the upcoming Inaugural, one such logical and sensible precaution against terrorist attacks,...jumped-right-out at me. Such being: "JAMMERS" and/or devices blocking any signals to any high-tech activated explosives, whether roadside planted in vehicles or just planted anywhere. Believe it truly smart using such.

So then, and since disclosed that such things actually exist, why not have "Such" for every Scout Section or lead element of every motorized patrol or convoy in Iraq? Would be truly quite smart using such, and for all walking patrols also.

I know that if The Boys and I were similarly in such a sticky situation or patrolling and/or reconnoitering in terrorist assassin infested territory way-back-when,...all twelve of us would most certainly have appreciated such an additional survival tool and/or way of staying alive or staying out of a hospital.

Though, and being totally honest and: "Gung-Ho" as we were, I've no doubt whatsoever that to-a-man multi-signal EMMITTERS would have been much more preffered.
After all, safely pre-detonating such devices while about 200 or 300 yards away and quite likely killing those planting same and not yet having scurried away to take cover,...WOULD BE MUCH BETTER.

Hey,...even way-back-when we trained 24/7 to kill the enemy and not give them a chance to escape (if at all possible).

Besides, no one is ever trained to politically-correctly be walking or riding targets of opportunity, for muslim assassin vermin.
Also, isn't letting such rats eat some of their very own poison and/or explosives...INFINITELY MUCH BETTER?

"Works-fir-me" and probably for most of The Troopers and also Trooperettes nowadays(?),...and probably even Old Clint Himself also?

The End


Neil

[Jumper208]

If they were to use these Jammers/Emitters on a convoy, would they still be able to communicate while they are jamming signals that might detonate an IED?

[reconeil]

Don't see why not, since anyone programming such: "JAMMERS" or EMMITTERS and/or greatly needed necessities in Iraq or anywhere terrorists clandestinely sneak attack and murder,...would undoubtedly also have the expertise of not disrupting any and all communication frequencies of Friendlies ONLY, from such apparently high-tech life savers of Friendlies ONLY.

Sure, it's not fair, sensitive and/or politically-correct to blow up enemies with their own devices, and also force them to communicate with smoke signals alone. But, so what(?),...and SCREW THEM (kill them also) ONE & ALL!!!

Neil

[SparrowHawk62]

Have a Navy EA-6 circle overhead! Jammed the friggen commies for years, should work just as well on any of the sand hoppers.

[Jumper208]

Well if they can do this without disrupting friendly communication signals, I say go for it. What the hell are we waiting for?

Here's kind of a twisted thought though (bear with me, I don't really know squat about transmitting frequencies). What if the IED's are rigged to go off on a similiar frequency that is used by the friendlies? Could it be possible that WE are setting these IED's off when we communicate with each other? Even if the signal is scrambled so that it can't be interpreted, the Frequency waves could still set off a device, couldn't it?

[David]

One draw back to this in a combat situation would be the ease of which all units could be triangulated by enemy fire using said signals.

[QM3steve]

Knowing a bit about communications and not much about detonation devices, I would be surprised that it was another source that detonated the devices. If it were someone else, they would have to know EXACTLY where we were at the time. That would mean standing there and seeing the device blow. Any long range receivers would detonate long before arrival. The device would have to be based on a "line of sight" frequencies that react at short distances. Finding the reacting frequency would be difficult. Even when the frequency is scrambled, the transmitting device gives off a signal. A remote controlled device sent ahead of the "unit" would help, provided it could give off multiple frequency transmissoins quickly. The drawback would be the expense of replacing the remote "vehicle." Although the cost of the remote is nothing compared to the cost of a life lost.

[David]

It's really very simple. They are using cell phones. You call the phone attached to the device and, closing the circuit when it rings, it explodes.

They do not have to be anywhere near the device. They can stand off at long range (LOS) using optical enhancement devices or someone near the scene can act as a spotter.

[reconeil]

Good Questions (even though over my head), and some good ideas.

Still, and despite any disputing or can't be done type responses, I figure that if: "JAMMERS" are deemed appropriate for protecting The Inaugural and all gathering: "High Mucky-Mucks and/or ruling elite,...such defensive measures against terrorists ARE EVEN MORE NEEDED for: "America' Finest" and/or U.S. Combat Troops, in the thick of it all. You can incase a Humvee in steel, and it still cannot be protected against High Explosives. Same goes for tanks.

Plus, and if tricky: "JAMMERS" apparently work so well (good enough for The President of The United States),...I gotsta believe that tricky or 200-300 yard; "EMMITTERS" would work just as well.

Besides, nothing else to date ACTUALLY WORKS against such sneaky scum, and/or The Low-life Terrorists/Assassins, anyway.
So,...why not give such an exceptionally cost effective American Life Saver a-shot? The results for America can't be any worse than already suffering now.

Neil

P.S. Maybe I didn't make myself clear about the: "JAMMERS" or EMMITTERS??...suggested for Our Troops. I meant for such to be pin-point targetted, such as quite effective: "Reconnaisance by Fire" (with machineguns and such), which was SOP for road or area reconnaisances of suspect spots, in my day. If even after studying spot with binoculars, if it still looked hinky or could be troublesome,...shoot at it and see if can draw fire prior to advancing towards a quite likely and possible ambush, and just hoping for the best.

[Jumper208]

Originally posted by David It's really very simple. They are using cell phones. You call the phone attached to the device and, closing the circuit when it rings, it explodes.

They do not have to be anywhere near the device. They can stand off at long range (LOS) using optical enhancement devices or someone near the scene can act as a spotter.

So then really all we would have to do is Jam all cellphone communications withing a set perimeter of a convoy while it is traveling down the road? If the can't call the DEVICE, then they can't DETONATE it.