On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 15:10:43 -0500, Leon Fisk
wrote:

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 11:58:03 -0600, Ignoramus4770
wrote:

On 2007-11-21, Leon Fisk wrote:
On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:12:19 -0600, Ignoramus10223
wrote:

I would be amazed if simple "wrap it in foil and use twisted wire"
approach did not 100% prevent premature detonation through any kind of
RF generator.

i

I worked in two-way radio/RF for most of my career. It
really isn't all that easy to shield things from RF. What
looks good to the eye can leak horribly and what you would
swear could never work does...


But would RF deliver enough amps to cause detonation?

i

IF you got lucky and hit a resonate frequency, maybe, but I
really doubt if this is useable. Remember these guys have
their own communication equipment that can't be knocked
off-line for any length of time either. If you make
something powerful enough to detonate the IED's they will
most likely wipe out their own communications. I wouldn't be
surprised if on-board computers in vehicles went berserk and
shut down too at the levels it would most likely take.

Why do you think it would take so much power? How much power do you
think it takes to initiate an electric cap?

Hint: U.S. military caps are specified to initiate with 16.3
millijoules of energy delivered in a period of not less than 10
milliseconds nor more than 24 milliseconds. That's a power level of
between 0.67 and 1.63 watts.

This isn't to say that the notions of flails and heavy blast-proof
non-manned vehicles aren't viable or even possibly best approaches,
only to argue that while they seem to be obviously viable approaches
they are not obviously the only viable approaches.