Originally posted by luxordelphi
Fascinating as diesel engines are, I'm thinking this was not the death ray that Tesla described. (I'm going to ignore your shell game for the
You asked where the other poster was getting his 3.2MW number from. You said you wanted it in layman's terms. So I gave it to you in detail, simply.
And somehow to you, getting what you said you wanted was a shell game.
Here then are the quotes from the article that go beyond diesel into the non-linear ionosphere (one centimeter at a time). So while you talk about
power output on the ground, the ionosphere has different ideas. Also, you're not saying anything about modulating or concentrating the beam. Also,
you're not talking about ELF generation on the wrong side of the ionosphere. HAARP is not a diesel engine. Nor is it a radio frequency generator.
It's an ionospheric heater.
The beam is modulated and steered by a BAE Systems exciter, that's a custom design for HAARP. It's a direct digital synthesis system, the back end of
the thing is pretty low tech - after all you're only working in the 10MHz zone tops, so you've got about 50ns per sample. It's spiffy, but not a
strain in terms of engineering. It's probably not worth a lot of space here describing how DDS works. In their case, you take a straightforward design
module and rubber stamp it 360 times. Then you have a front end that calculates all the phase relationships for the beam steering. Put in your
steering and modulation program, let the thing munch out all the math, and then on the fly it downloads pre-calculated phase offsets to the DDS
modules. It doesn't calculate on the fly, although you could do that these days, micros are a lot more powerful.
But the exciter can't do some nifty tricks the IRI COULD do, if it had been designed that way. At the high end, you could split the field into two
arrays and sweep with two separate beams, or you could run one beam off the low band dipole and another off the high band dipole, if you cut the total
output power back.
If you want it a bit simpler, the modulation is an artifact of the amplitude output of the exciter, the steering is an artifact of the phase
relationships between the array components. It's a phased array antenna field. The beam is steered and shaped by the interactions between the far
field components coming off the dipoles, that interaction is mathematically determined by the phase relations of the signals going to the amps.
So yes, what HAARP is, is a big HF phased array transmitter. It is powered by diesels, the exciter is a BAE one-off, the finals are D616G's, mostly by
Continental but not totally, it IS in fact a radio frequency generator with a lot of outputs whose phase relationships can be diddled by the exciter.
That calculated phase differential produces a beam, its shape, sidelobes and tilt angle are determined by the exciter's front end calculator.
The USE for it is as an ionospheric heater. But what it IS is a big HF transmitter. With 3.2MW total power output, if you're running both
Now, the antenna's done pretty well, and for what it can't do, the exciter has a pretty good beam calculator. So you can get about 4GW of ERP. ERP
isn't total power though - there's no more than 3.2MW of output. ERP isn't total output power.
The case of a weaponized HAARP was argued by the late Dr. Rosalie Bertell who wrote: “…the nonlinear effects of one billion watts of effective
radiated power being directed at the ionosphere by the HAARP transmitter [is overwhelming]. This is the first phase capability of the project. The
second phase will increase the effective radiated power levels even further—to 4.7 billion watts!
And Dr Bertell was an avid chemtrailer. She was taken by a lot of conspiracy theories, I'm afraid, and the "Dr" part, again, isn't a science
doctorate. She was an MD who went into epidemiology. I suggest she doesn't understand what ERP is. Most people don't. It sounds really shiny
though, and it's not nearly as neat when you use actual output power, so invariably HAARP-doomsters will (mis)use ERP.
“Energy in certain frequencies when reaching the outermost portions of the ionosphere can be amplified up to 1,000 times by natural processes...
(I think in that last quote they're talking about things like the islands that disappeared as pictured in the article.)
Consider - if you took the IRI's entire output power, and delivered it to the ionosphere unattenuated by distance, and multiplied it with a stroke of
your imagination to 1000x - what would you have? 3.2GW? Do you think I could make an island disappear with 3.2GW?
edit to add: if you're talking geometric modulation, then the exciter lets fly with full amplitude and you do the whole thing with beam steering and
chopping the outputs on and off. My previous ref was to power modulation.
edit on 3-12-2012 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)