Originally Posted by
CessnaJock
You've got a very restrictive set of assumptions. First: solid-state. Well, I think I'd use a spark gap. Very intense very broadband energy. Second: batteries. The AC outlets at the seats would work over as many charge-discharge cycles as it took.
Most of those outlets are current and power limited. And a lot of planes don't have 'em at all. And the flight deck can disable them easily.
Further, even where high-tension power lines have cracked insulators, causing sparking, the interference is relatively confined and low enough relative to a desired signal in a narrow-band receiver that it's a non-issue in most cases. It really does take a pretty high powered signal on-frequency to overcome the desired signal.
even if you get past the technical issues, you aren't going to be able to pull-off a spark gap on an airliner without somebody else noticing really fast. And you sure aren't going to be able to provide one in a checked bag in the cargo hold with a sustained power source.
Other than that, I agree that it would be possible to incapacitate an airliner from inside, because the field strength would be orders of magnitude greater than those reaching the airplane from nearby transmitters on the ground. Inverse square law.
I'm not in agreement that it's easy to incapacitate an airliner from the inside. Possible? Remote, but potentially possible with the right equipment, enough time, and plenty of available energy. Likely? No. And highly unlikely for aircraft that are hydraulic or not "fly by wire". More likely? That certain specific systems are affected.
You are aware, I'm sure, that there are EMI rejection standards for most modern aircraft, especially the ones that are fly-by-wire. And that the US Military flys aircraft with high-powered transmitting (propaganda - er truth - broadcasts) and jamming equipment on-board.
In applying the inverse-square law, you also have to consider that power is averaged across the spectrum in which the noise is generated - wider bandwidth, lower power. And a narrow-band receiver rejects a lot of the out-of-band noise. So a broadband-jamming signal will require a lot of power to effectively jam things. Narrow-band jammers are more effective on specific equipment (say a specific ILS frequency) because the power is concentrated in the appropriate bandwidth. Digital systems use error-correction and coding schemes that overcome random noise and interference.
The likelihood of your scenario being successful is slim to none. As noted before, a shoulder-fired rocket will be far, far more likely. And much easier.