[ARCHIVED THREAD] - True or False, An EMP Question (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 9/24/2009 11:45:50 AM EDT
|
After starting to read "Light's Out" I began to wonder how real an EMP can be.
So that brings me to the question.... True or False: Can an EMP affect todays modern vehicle's electrical systems and render them useless or un-drivable? |
|
The short answer is: Not really.
Modern vehicle electronics are very well shielded. The long answer is that enough of an impulse close enough to them could fry them, but chances are the vehicle would be blown away so it's a moot point. Almost all modern vehicles have failsafes in that they have "limp home" modes where they will still run even if the computer is dead. |
|
well now, there is the possibility of an emp bomb. which would be the emp effect of a nuclear bomb, without all the nasty death side-affects. that very well could fry all the electronics.
when electricity flows, it creates a magnetic field around the wires, (put an extension cord on the floor of a shop covered with meta shavings and run something, watch the distubance of the metal parts) this theory goes both ways, the street light signals are basically a coil of wire in the ground and when your vehicle passes over them it creates a small electric charge telling the sigal computer that there is a vehicle at the light. emp works by generating a very large magnetic pulse that in turn creates a very large electric pulse that can fry the sensitive electrical components, and also, less sensitive components can be affected by the high energy electrical pulse burng off the solder connectios, and melting wires. the emp bomb in oceans 11 is not a fictional device one could in theory make a device that would have a similar affect. (but it wouldt look like that one..) there are also other ways to generate emp. but that stuff is......complicated. |
|
Quoted:
^^^^^ yep, i hear the guy whom wrote that work is a real hack!..  
K. Fo sho! 
Love "Lights Out". And I believe there is a lot of good insight into human nature and interaction in there. It's also REALLY good for getting non-preppers into prepping. But I don't lose any sleep at all over the prospect of EMP. At this point in our country, we're in MUCH greater danger of economic meltdown or some other meltdown that may or may not be initiated by terrorist activity. I believe they are much more likely to use chem/bio weapons or a few nukes in large cities. Very little chance of EMP knocking-out a large chunk of America IMO... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
After starting to read "Light's Out" There's your problem!
Thats funny stuff right there.
From what I understand an EMP would mostly effect the power grid and sensitive electronics plugged into it. There have been tests done and I think most modern vehicles would still function but may have with a few dashboard lights on. |
|
Severe Space Weather 01.21.2009 + Play Audio | + Download Audio | + Email to a friend | + Join mailing list January 21, 2009: Did you know a solar flare can make your toilet stop working? That's the surprising conclusion of a NASA-funded study by the National Academy of Sciences entitled Severe Space Weather Events—Understanding Societal and Economic Impacts. In the 132-page report, experts detailed what might happen to our modern, high-tech society in the event of a "super solar flare" followed by an extreme geomagnetic storm. They found that almost nothing is immune from space weather—not even the water in your bathroom. The problem begins with the electric power grid. "Electric power is modern society's cornerstone technology on which virtually all other infrastructures and services depend," the report notes. Yet it is particularly vulnerable to bad space weather. Ground currents induced during geomagnetic storms can actually melt the copper windings of transformers at the heart of many power distribution systems. Sprawling power lines act like antennas, picking up the currents and spreading the problem over a wide area. The most famous geomagnetic power outage happened during a space storm in March 1989 when six million people in Quebec lost power for 9 hours: image. According to the report, power grids may be more vulnerable than ever. The problem is interconnectedness. In recent years, utilities have joined grids together to allow long-distance transmission of low-cost power to areas of sudden demand. On a hot summer day in California, for instance, people in Los Angeles might be running their air conditioners on power routed from Oregon. It makes economic sense—but not necessarily geomagnetic sense. Interconnectedness makes the system susceptible to wide-ranging "cascade failures." To estimate the scale of such a failure, report co-author John Kappenmann of the Metatech Corporation looked at the great geomagnetic storm of May 1921, which produced ground currents as much as ten times stronger than the 1989 Quebec storm, and modeled its effect on the modern power grid. He found more than 350 transformers at risk of permanent damage and 130 million people without power. The loss of electricity would ripple across the social infrastructure with "water distribution affected within several hours; perishable foods and medications lost in 12-24 hours; loss of heating/air conditioning, sewage disposal, phone service, fuel re-supply and so on." "The concept of interdependency," the report notes, "is evident in the unavailability of water due to long-term outage of electric power––and the inability to restart an electric generator without water on site." Above: What if the May 1921 superstorm occurred today? A US map of vulnerable transformers with areas of probable system collapse encircled. A state-by-state map of transformer vulnerability is also available: click here. Credit: National Academy of Sciences. The strongest geomagnetic storm on record is the Carrington Event of August-September 1859, named after British astronomer Richard Carrington who witnessed the instigating solar flare with his unaided eye while he was projecting an image of the sun on a white screen. Geomagnetic activity triggered by the explosion electrified telegraph lines, shocking technicians and setting their telegraph papers on fire; Northern Lights spread as far south as Cuba and Hawaii; auroras over the Rocky Mountains were so bright, the glow woke campers who began preparing breakfast because they thought it was morning. Best estimates rank the Carrington Event as 50% or more stronger than the superstorm of May 1921. "A contemporary repetition of the Carrington Event would cause … extensive social and economic disruptions," the report warns. Power outages would be accompanied by radio blackouts and satellite malfunctions; telecommunications, GPS navigation, banking and finance, and transportation would all be affected. Some problems would correct themselves with the fading of the storm: radio and GPS transmissions could come back online fairly quickly. Other problems would be lasting: a burnt-out multi-ton transformer, for instance, can take weeks or months to repair. The total economic impact in the first year alone could reach $2 trillion, some 20 times greater than the costs of a Hurricane Katrina or, to use a timelier example, a few TARPs. Above: A web of interdependencies makes the modern economy especially sensitive to solar storms. Source: Dept. of Homeland Security. [Larger image] What's the solution? The report ends with a call for infrastructure designed to better withstand geomagnetic disturbances, improved GPS codes and frequencies, and improvements in space weather forecasting. Reliable forecasting is key. If utility and satellite operators know a storm is coming, they can take measures to reduce damage—e.g., disconnecting wires, shielding vulnerable electronics, powering down critical hardware. A few hours without power is better than a few weeks. NASA has deployed a fleet of spacecraft to study the sun and its eruptions. The Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO), the twin STEREO probes, ACE, Wind and others are on duty 24/7. NASA physicists use data from these missions to understand the underlying physics of flares and geomagnetic storms; personnel at NOAA's Space Weather Prediction Center use the findings, in turn, to hone their forecasts. At the moment, no one knows when the next super solar storm will erupt. It could be 100 years away or just 100 days. It's something to think about the next time you flush. SEND THIS STORY TO A FRIEND Author: Dr. Tony Phillips | Credit: Science@NASA more information Space Weather Events—Understanding Societal and Economic Impacts –– the full report may be freely downloaded from the National Academy of Sciences web site NASA's Heliophysics Division Space Weather resources: NOAA Space Weather prediction Center; Spaceweather.com NASA's Future: US Space Exploration Policy |
|
Original Link with photos/diagrams: http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/21jan_severespaceweather.htm?list82826 Quoted:
Severe Space Weather 01.21.2009 + Play Audio | + Download Audio | + Email to a friend | + Join mailing list January 21, 2009: Did you know a solar flare can make your toilet stop working? That's the surprising conclusion of a NASA-funded study by the National Academy of Sciences entitled Severe Space Weather Events—Understanding Societal and Economic Impacts. In the 132-page report, experts detailed what might happen to our modern, high-tech society in the event of a "super solar flare" followed by an extreme geomagnetic storm. They found that almost nothing is immune from space weather—not even the water in your bathroom. ~snip~ |
|
The EMP commission tested 30+ cars and most survived, or had quirks.
Read around page 115 of the EMP commission report. We tested a sample of 37 cars in an EMP simulation laboratory, with automobile vin-
tages ranging from 1986 through 2002. Automobiles of these vintages include extensive electronics and represent a significant fraction of automobiles on the road today. The testing was conducted by exposing running and nonrunning automobiles to sequentially increasing EMP field intensities. If anomalous response (either temporary or permanent) was observed, the testing of that particular automobile was stopped. If no anomalous response was observed, the testing was continued up to the field intensity limits of the simulation capability (approximately 50 kV/m). Automobiles were subjected to EMP environments under both engine turned off and engine turned on conditions. No effects were subsequently observed in those automobiles that were not turned on during EMP exposure. The most serious effect observed on run- ning automobiles was that the motors in three cars stopped at field strengths of approxi- mately 30 kV/m or above. In an actual EMP exposure, these vehicles would glide to a stop and require the driver to restart them. Electronics in the dashboard of one automobile were damaged and required repair. Other effects were relatively minor. Twenty-five automobiles exhibited malfunctions that could be considered only a nuisance (e.g., blinking dashboard lights) and did not require driver intervention to correct. Eight of the 37 cars tested did not exhibit any anomalous response. http://www.empcommission.org/docs/A2473-EMP_Commission-7MB.pdf |
|
Quoted: After starting to read "Light's Out" I began to wonder how real an EMP can be. So that brings me to the question.... True or False: Can an EMP affect todays modern vehicle's electrical systems and render them useless or un-drivable? Maybe - a few seconds before the blast vaporizes them... EMP as a weapon is sci-fi fiction stuff, with the POSSIBLE exception of something delivred by a Russian ICBM, launched from... Russia... If a book talks about a SCUD or similar missile being used to 'EMP' the USA... Launched from a ship 'straight up'... Put it down, it's rubbish... |
|
Quoted:
The EMP commission tested 30+ cars and most survived, or had quirks. Read around page 115 of the EMP commission report. We tested a sample of 37 cars in an EMP simulation laboratory, with automobile vin-
tages ranging from 1986 through 2002. Automobiles of these vintages include extensive electronics and represent a significant fraction of automobiles on the road today. The testing was conducted by exposing running and nonrunning automobiles to sequentially increasing EMP field intensities. If anomalous response (either temporary or permanent) was observed, the testing of that particular automobile was stopped. If no anomalous response was observed, the testing was continued up to the field intensity limits of the simulation capability (approximately 50 kV/m). Automobiles were subjected to EMP environments under both engine turned off and engine turned on conditions. No effects were subsequently observed in those automobiles that were not turned on during EMP exposure. The most serious effect observed on run- ning automobiles was that the motors in three cars stopped at field strengths of approxi- mately 30 kV/m or above. In an actual EMP exposure, these vehicles would glide to a stop and require the driver to restart them. Electronics in the dashboard of one automobile were damaged and required repair. Other effects were relatively minor. Twenty-five automobiles exhibited malfunctions that could be considered only a nuisance (e.g., blinking dashboard lights) and did not require driver intervention to correct. Eight of the 37 cars tested did not exhibit any anomalous response. http://www.empcommission.org/docs/A2473-EMP_Commission-7MB.pdf The problem with that report (to me anyway), is that it was written after it was decided by the gov-ment that they didn't want to deal with the original report. A sort of "Nothing to see here" cover up. It's my understanding that the Soviets did an above ground test in the 60's to evaluate EMP as a weapon. The burst took down 50's era diesel generators. |
| EMP will certainly affect the electrical grid. The EMP report suggests that many cars would likely still run; but, I don't know why it would matter other than maybe being able to get home from work. Once the grid is down, there won't be any refineries running or gas pumping. So, you'll have the range of what remains in your gas tank. I have no reason to believe there won't be problems getting water/sewage services, and I'd expect us to miss our harvest. As for organized cannibals like the book suggests, not so sure. America is a pretty well armed country. If you see an organized cannibal horde heading your way, are you going to lay down or are you going to take as many as you can with you? When everyone with a gun shoots back, pretty soon there's plenty of food for the cannibals to eat among there own. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
^^^^^ yep, i hear the guy whom wrote that work is a real hack!..
K. Fo sho!
Love "Lights Out". And I believe there is a lot of good insight into human nature and interaction in there. It's also REALLY good for getting non-preppers into prepping. But I don't lose any sleep at all over the prospect of EMP. At this point in our country, we're in MUCH greater danger of economic meltdown or some other meltdown that may or may not be initiated by terrorist activity. I believe they are much more likely to use chem/bio weapons or a few nukes in large cities. Very little chance of EMP knocking-out a large chunk of America IMO... It defintely got me moving. All that and an EMP thrown in for good measure...we're fuck'd. If I'm not mistaken don't all nuclear detonations produce an EMP? Obviously a space based or high altituted blast would effect a larger area since EMP is line of sight. IIRC . |
|
Basically, the answer is : maybe. Some testing has been done. These may/may not replicate actual EMP effects. Some show, like the EMP commission report, that basically very few would be affected. Others show that running vehicles would be fried, while non-running ones would be ok. Basically its a crap shoot. From a prep standpoint, be prepared for the **possibility** of having to hoof it. I know its something I think about... how would I make it home WITHOUT my vehicle. |
|
Quoted:
True or False: Can an EMP affect todays modern vehicle's electrical systems and render them useless or un-drivable? True, but there is a 99% chance the vehicle will not have a mission critical failure (the radio may be fried, the computer memory may be corrupted (rough engine until it relearns the operating parameters)) Quoted:
well now, there is the possibility of an emp bomb. which would be the emp effect of a nuclear bomb, without all the nasty death side-affects. that very well could fry all the electronics. An EMP bomb would be severly limited in range. Power falls off as the square of distance. Even with near unlimited power, you still can't propigate much of the energy past the radio horizion. Across the streat from the NYSE exchange, or a major internet carrier hotel, it might be deadly, but not a statewide threat, Quoted:
EMP as a weapon is sci-fi fiction stuff, with the POSSIBLE exception of something delivred by a Russian ICBM, launched from... Russia... If a book talks about a SCUD or similar missile being used to 'EMP' the USA... Launched from a ship 'straight up'... Put it down, it's rubbish... Somebody repeal the laws of physics last week? Or are you assuming Chinese ICBM come from Harbor Freight, and can be dismissed. Or Russian SLBMs won't work. Any missle that can put a nuclear device 30 miles above the earth will generate EMP, though not the nationwide coverage that comes with higher altitude. A Scud will put a warhead just high enough to cause NEMP. What no one has done yet, is fit a nuclear warhead into the space and weight allowed by the Scud. Launching a Scud off a marine platfrom has been done and isn't a quantam leap in ability. |
|
Wasn't there a TV show a few years back where they tested this? Future Weapons or something?
They host drove a car under an EMP generator during a burst. The car failed died and would not start, yet the simpler systems like the power windows still worked. Quick search.... Videos on youtube to check it out. www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fvu08Y9XJ0U www.youtube.com/watch?v=0odJKYTzXg8 It seems 'plausable' at least. My solution was to buy a older '92 dodge truck with a mechanically injected Cummins diesel. It only takes power to run the starter and to shut the fuel off, both of which are very simple circuits. It will keep running with ZERO electricity. The ability to run alternative fuels is another bonus. |
|
Maybe - a few seconds before the blast vaporizes them...
EMP as a weapon is sci-fi fiction stuff, with the POSSIBLE exception of something delivred by a Russian ICBM, launched from... Russia... If a book talks about a SCUD or similar missile being used to 'EMP' the USA... Launched from a ship 'straight up'... Put it down, it's rubbish... There has to be a hundred threads on this site about EMP, and in every one there are a couple of people that like to totally dismiss it as a thread. Where in the world do you get the impression that EMP is sci-fi stuff? If you have read any of the two EMP commission reports you couldn't come to that conclusion. If you spend 10 min and read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse you couldn't come to that conclusion. If you have listened to any credible scientist or expert talk about the subject you couldn't come to that conclusion, so I would like to know where you get information that makes so sure its nothing to worry about. First of all, an attack with the purpose of creating an EMP would be high in the atmosphere (200 mile range) and would have no blast effect, so would not vaporize anything. Second, the EMP commission and many leading experts believe that an attack with crude, SCUD type missile launched from an ship or barge in the gulf is a likely scenario. Before dismissing the threat, listen to Michael Medved interview Dr. Peter Vincent Pry (head of EMPACT America, and member of the former EMP comission) http://www.mediafly.com/Podcasts/Feeds/Michael_Medveds_MedHeads#The_Michael_Medved_Show_8282009_Hour_2. I live away from any major city, so I am not near a likely terrorist target. I don't loose sleep over anything, but barring some kind of economic collapse, I think EMP is the greatest threat to our county. People who know much about it seem to believe that. When you read the information by the commission and listen to respectable people like Newt Gingrich and Congressman Bartlett express serious concern about it, and then look at how the recent activity by North Korea and Iran tie into the picture, you begin to understand how serious it is. It is just recently that it has become a serious issue. It wasn't a real issue even back in the cold war, because MAD kept us safe from it just as it did a conventional nuclear attack. Now with rogue nations developing suitable weapons, our dependence on susceptible techonology, and the fact that a single well placed attack could bring this country to its knees, why wouldn't these terrorist states be actively trying to accomplish this? |
|
^^^^
Now I hate to speculate but do you think that a rogue state like said Iran, N. Korea, etc. would rather send a nuke for a direct hit towards a major city? Or would they be more inclined for a high atmostphereic blast (EMP)? I wonder how capable our missle defense systems are against threats like these. Again, I hate speculating 
|
|
Quoted:
^^^^ Now I hate to speculate but do you think that a rogue state like said Iran, N. Korea, etc. would rather send a nuke for a direct hit towards a major city? Or would they be more inclined for a high atmostphereic blast (EMP)? I wonder how capable our missle defense systems are against threats like these. Again, I hate speculating Iran hatred for America is compounded by the fact that they don't care to die for opportunity to kill us. Ahmadinejad's recent speeches are very disturbing because he talks about awaiting the return of the "Twelfth Imam". It is their belief that this figure won't return until there is mass chaos in the world. Iran is under Shi’ite Islam which, unlike Sunni believes that this chaos can be stirred up by humans. They have an interest in causing as much worldwide chaos as possible. NK and Iran (either now or soon) only have the capability to build somewhat crude (and low yield) fission nukes, but these happen to be the best kind for creating an EMP effect. Couple this with the fact that we have intel that tells us Iran has already been studying EMP and have plans for how to carry out such an attack. They are developing their missiles and have fused these missiles at high altitude in recent tests (just as you would in an EMP blast). They have also practiced shooting missiles off barges in the Caspian Sea. Tell me, why would they need to practice this? There are no countries nearby (within the range of their missiles) that would require them to shoot off the water to hit. North Korea probably isn't as suicidal is Iran is (although some suggest Kim Jong Il could try something if his death becomes imminent), but they do seem to indicate they would like the destruction of America. We know however that NK does have nuclear weapons and the missile technology to carry out an attack like this right now. The best part of an EMP attack (for NK or Iran) is they could simply give the weapons and instructions to a terrorist group which would carry out the attack. We would have almost no way to trace the attack back to Iran or NK with enough certainty to launch a nuclear counter attack, so the MAD principal does nothing to prevent this from happening. Looking at this from the perspective of NK or Iran, they could attack us with a blast in a major city, killing many people and shaking our country pretty badly... or they could possibly take our country out permanently with an EMP strike. They know about all of this, and we know they are working on it... |
|
While EMP doesn't have the "shock and awe totally awesome mushroom cloud over the city while Jack Bauer watches in horror" angle to it, it would kill far more. And the funny thing is, we'd be killing ourselves. Our enemies would love that. You guys in Texas better watch out for the Mexican drug gangs during such an event.... |
|
Quoted:
Can an EMP affect todays modern vehicle's electrical systems and render them useless or un-drivable? Best answer I have arrived at for that question is "Maybe, but probably not". Our newer cars with their electronic engine, ignition, and drivetrain controls will probably work. If not, I know for certain that my old Dodge with it's 12 valve Cummins and manual transmission will. |
|
I attended a conference a couple years ago in which high ranking Homeland Security officials discussed EMP very frankly. The general consensus was that it would be very bad for our economy by shutting us down for awhile. Think what 9/11 did to the airline industry and then multiply it by 100. There would of course be a significant spike in communications, power, information related deaths as well. However, we would be back up and running in months if not weeks and it would be worse for whoever did it to us. We would turn them into radioactive wasteland.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Can an EMP affect todays modern vehicle's electrical systems and render them useless or un-drivable? Best answer I have arrived at for that question is "Maybe, but probably not". Our newer cars with their electronic engine, ignition, and drivetrain controls will probably work. If not, I know for certain that my old Dodge with it's 12 valve Cummins and manual transmission will. I'm vehicle shopping for a "older" van or pickup with no computer electronics etc. My reason being not just EMP prep but recently my 2000 chevy S10 quit running. It would crank but not run. So being simple minded about automobiles, I think fire or fuel. WRONG Body control module. look it up I'm not going to waste your time but in summary it cuts the electrical signal to the fuel injectors if it doesn't recognise the resistance of your key in the ignition. 
Something I didn't have the equipment to work on. I want a basic vehicle that you can repair with hand tools and no need for "diagnostic computers" to troubleshoot and repair. . |
|
Quoted:
After starting to read "Light's Out" I began to wonder how real an EMP can be. So that brings me to the question.... True or False: Can an EMP affect todays modern vehicle's electrical systems and render them useless or un-drivable? The truthful answer is maybe. The electronics under your hood exists in an electrical environment that is fairly severe, so it is pretty well hardened. OTOH, there is really no way to know for sure short of some kind of experimental data. And I really don't want to explode a nuke to find out. My guess is that most cars and a surprising amount of other things would survive, but a random number of electronic items (including the brains for cars) would be damaged. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: ^^^^^ yep, i hear the guy whom wrote that work is a real hack!.. K. Fo sho! Love "Lights Out". And I believe there is a lot of good insight into human nature and interaction in there. It's also REALLY good for getting non-preppers into prepping. But I don't lose any sleep at all over the prospect of EMP. At this point in our country, we're in MUCH greater danger of economic meltdown or some other meltdown that may or may not be initiated by terrorist activity. I believe they are much more likely to use chem/bio weapons or a few nukes in large cities. Very little chance of EMP knocking-out a large chunk of America IMO... It defintely got me moving. All that and an EMP thrown in for good measure...we're fuck'd. If I'm not mistaken don't all nuclear detonations produce an EMP? Obviously a space based or high altituted blast would effect a larger area since EMP is line of sight. IIRC . All nuclear detonations produce an EMP, but low-altitude ones produce an EMP that is equal to or less than the blast radius... The higher up in the atmosphere you are, the more EMP you get... The generally accepted requirement -> You would have to get a ~10MT warhead to 30mi above the earth, over the middle of the US, to EMP the whole US.... Right now, the US, Russia, and the UK are the only ones capable of doing this -the Chinese *might* be... |
|
Quoted: Quoted: EMP as a weapon is sci-fi fiction stuff, with the POSSIBLE exception of something delivred by a Russian ICBM, launched from... Russia... If a book talks about a SCUD or similar missile being used to 'EMP' the USA... Launched from a ship 'straight up'... Put it down, it's rubbish... Somebody repeal the laws of physics last week? Or are you assuming Chinese ICBM come from Harbor Freight, and can be dismissed. Or Russian SLBMs won't work. Any missle that can put a nuclear device 30 miles above the earth will generate EMP, though not the nationwide coverage that comes with higher altitude. A Scud will put a warhead just high enough to cause NEMP. What no one has done yet, is fit a nuclear warhead into the space and weight allowed by the Scud. Launching a Scud off a marine platfrom has been done and isn't a quantam leap in ability. Yield is also an important factor - most SLBMs are in the high-KT range... The Chinese have 24 aging ICBMs.... And *might* be able to do it - but we don't know for sure... Scuds are a no-go for 2 reasons: 1) The things have a 300km effective range - no way to 'fire from a ship' and actually reach the interior of the US. 2) The one noted 'test fire from a ship' was Iranian, which leads to the possibility that (a) it was staged, and (b) they claimed sucess after the missile went 90-degrees off target and blew up at the wrong altitude... The Iranians are not exactly 'reliable' as to admitting the true ability of their weapons systems... Although SCUDs can carry nukes, they can only carry tactical nukes -way too small... The fact remains, that 'EMP attack' is something only major nuclear powers are capable of... All this 'survival fiction' about some terror group doing it is pure rubbish |
|
Quoted: ^^^^ Now I hate to speculate but do you think that a rogue state like said Iran, N. Korea, etc. would rather send a nuke for a direct hit towards a major city? Or would they be more inclined for a high atmostphereic blast (EMP)? I wonder how capable our missle defense systems are against threats like these. Again, I hate speculating They lack the delivery systems for a high atmospheric deployment, and 1st-gen nukes are generally too large to mount on missiles... Shipping container to a major port is the most logical method of attack... Use a GPS for a detonator, with a timer backup.... |
|
Quoted: Maybe - a few seconds before the blast vaporizes them... EMP as a weapon is sci-fi fiction stuff, with the POSSIBLE exception of something delivred by a Russian ICBM, launched from... Russia... If a book talks about a SCUD or similar missile being used to 'EMP' the USA... Launched from a ship 'straight up'... Put it down, it's rubbish... There has to be a hundred threads on this site about EMP, and in every one there are a couple of people that like to totally dismiss it as a thread. Where in the world do you get the impression that EMP is sci-fi stuff? If you have read any of the two EMP commission reports you couldn't come to that conclusion. If you spend 10 min and read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse you couldn't come to that conclusion. If you have listened to any credible scientist or expert talk about the subject you couldn't come to that conclusion, so I would like to know where you get information that makes so sure its nothing to worry about. The physical concept of EMP is real... The notion that it is a viable vector for a terror attack, is the sci-fi crap First of all, an attack with the purpose of creating an EMP would be high in the atmosphere (200 mile range) and would have no blast effect, so would not vaporize anything. Second, the EMP commission and many leading experts believe that an attack with crude, SCUD type missile launched from an ship or barge in the gulf is a likely scenario. Before dismissing the threat, listen to Michael Medved interview Dr. Peter Vincent Pry (head of EMPACT America, and member of the former EMP comission) http://www.mediafly.com/Podcasts/Feeds/Michael_Medveds_MedHeads#The_Michael_Medved_Show_8282009_Hour_2. It's impossible to do it with a SCUD... The missile doesn't have the range, nor the lifting capacity to put a large enough bomb high enough... You not only have to get it 30mi up, you have to get it inland quite a ways... The only practical way to do this, is with an intercontinental missile, not a 1950s-vintage tactical one.... ICBMs cannot be launched from ships (hell, I'm skeptical of the Iranians and their SCUDS, given how Iran has been caught faking weapons tests so many times).... I live away from any major city, so I am not near a likely terrorist target. I don't loose sleep over anything, but barring some kind of economic collapse, I think EMP is the greatest threat to our county. People who know much about it seem to believe that. When you read the information by the commission and listen to respectable people like Newt Gingrich and Congressman Bartlett express serious concern about it, and then look at how the recent activity by North Korea and Iran tie into the picture, you begin to understand how serious it is. You have no idea how much I do or do not know about the subject... The vast majority of studies on EMP conclude that it is NOT a viable terror weapon, and that only major nuclear powers have the capability to mount an EMP attack It is just recently that it has become a serious issue. It wasn't a real issue even back in the cold war, because MAD kept us safe from it just as it did a conventional nuclear attack. Now with rogue nations developing suitable weapons, our dependence on susceptible techonology, and the fact that a single well placed attack could bring this country to its knees, why wouldn't these terrorist states be actively trying to accomplish this? None of the rogue nations are anywhere near a 'suitable weapon'... It's not as simple as 'stick a Little Boy on the top of a SCUD'.... |
|
Quoted:
Yield is also an important factor - most SLBMs are in the high-KT range... The Chinese have 24 aging ICBMs.... And *might* be able to do it - but we don't know for sure... Scuds are a no-go for 2 reasons: 1) The things have a 300km effective range - no way to 'fire from a ship' and actually reach the interior of the US. 2) The one noted 'test fire from a ship' was Iranian, which leads to the possibility that (a) it was staged, and (b) they claimed sucess after the missile went 90-degrees off target and blew up at the wrong altitude... The Iranians are not exactly 'reliable' as to admitting the true ability of their weapons systems... Although SCUDs can carry nukes, they can only carry tactical nukes -way too small... The fact remains, that 'EMP attack' is something only major nuclear powers are capable of... All this 'survival fiction' about some terror group doing it is pure rubbish It's true that a Scud would have to be fired straight up, but with so much of the critical government, communications, and economic infrastructure in the Boston/New York/Philly/DC Corridor, it's close enough to the ocean. Ditto for the oil, gas, and chemical industry in the TX/LA/AL gulf coast or the many west coast cities on the ocean. Whats not in reach- Atlanta (maybe), Chicago, Denver, Kansas City, Salt Lake City Memphis, and a few others. Yield isn't that big of a deal for EMP. I forget the exponent, but it's less than 1/2 (square root), plus their is a great yield form a non thermonuclear device (more gamma rays). Any Ballistic missle should be able to generate EMP. I can't imagine you could have a ballistic missle and not get 30 miles of altitude. The Scud isn't a balistic missle, and thus would have to be fired nearly straight up. |
|
Quoted:
well now, there is the possibility of an emp bomb. which would be the emp effect of a nuclear bomb, without all the nasty death side-affects. that very well could fry all the electronics. when electricity flows, it creates a magnetic field around the wires, (put an extension cord on the floor of a shop covered with meta shavings and run something, watch the distubance of the metal parts) this theory goes both ways, the street light signals are basically a coil of wire in the ground and when your vehicle passes over them it creates a small electric charge telling the sigal computer that there is a vehicle at the light. emp works by generating a very large magnetic pulse that in turn creates a very large electric pulse that can fry the sensitive electrical components, and also, less sensitive components can be affected by the high energy electrical pulse burng off the solder connectios, and melting wires. the emp bomb in oceans 11 is not a fictional device one could in theory make a device that would have a similar affect. (but it wouldt look like that one..) there are also other ways to generate emp. but that stuff is......complicated. Conventional explosive EMP devices would have a very, very limited range. The reason nukes have such an effect is a lot of energy is pumping them. You just dont get that with conventional explosives and you never will. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
well now, there is the possibility of an emp bomb. which would be the emp effect of a nuclear bomb, without all the nasty death side-affects. that very well could fry all the electronics. when electricity flows, it creates a magnetic field around the wires, (put an extension cord on the floor of a shop covered with meta shavings and run something, watch the distubance of the metal parts) this theory goes both ways, the street light signals are basically a coil of wire in the ground and when your vehicle passes over them it creates a small electric charge telling the sigal computer that there is a vehicle at the light. emp works by generating a very large magnetic pulse that in turn creates a very large electric pulse that can fry the sensitive electrical components, and also, less sensitive components can be affected by the high energy electrical pulse burng off the solder connectios, and melting wires. the emp bomb in oceans 11 is not a fictional device one could in theory make a device that would have a similar affect. (but it wouldt look like that one..) there are also other ways to generate emp. but that stuff is......complicated. Conventional explosive EMP devices would have a very, very limited range. The reason nukes have such an effect is a lot of energy is pumping them. You just dont get that with conventional explosives and you never will. there are such devices that will have a range equal to that of a nuclear device. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yield is also an important factor - most SLBMs are in the high-KT range... The Chinese have 24 aging ICBMs.... And *might* be able to do it - but we don't know for sure... Scuds are a no-go for 2 reasons: 1) The things have a 300km effective range - no way to 'fire from a ship' and actually reach the interior of the US. 2) The one noted 'test fire from a ship' was Iranian, which leads to the possibility that (a) it was staged, and (b) they claimed sucess after the missile went 90-degrees off target and blew up at the wrong altitude... The Iranians are not exactly 'reliable' as to admitting the true ability of their weapons systems... Although SCUDs can carry nukes, they can only carry tactical nukes -way too small... The fact remains, that 'EMP attack' is something only major nuclear powers are capable of... All this 'survival fiction' about some terror group doing it is pure rubbish It's true that a Scud would have to be fired straight up, but with so much of the critical government, communications, and economic infrastructure in the Boston/New York/Philly/DC Corridor, it's close enough to the ocean. Ditto for the oil, gas, and chemical industry in the TX/LA/AL gulf coast or the many west coast cities on the ocean. Whats not in reach- Atlanta (maybe), Chicago, Denver, Kansas City, Salt Lake City Memphis, and a few others. Yield isn't that big of a deal for EMP. I forget the exponent, but it's less than 1/2 (square root), plus their is a great yield form a non thermonuclear device (more gamma rays). Any Ballistic missle should be able to generate EMP. I can't imagine you could have a ballistic missle and not get 30 miles of altitude. The Scud isn't a balistic missle, and thus would have to be fired nearly straight up. Yield is a huge deal, In fact, you have it backwards. Cut the yield in half and the affected area goes down by 75%. A 5MT weapon has a footprint 25% that of a 10. A 2.5MT warhead has a footprint 6.25% that of the 10MT warhead. A Scudable Tactical warhead would have an area of effect measured in tens of miles at best. Remember that a 10MT warhead is more powerful than 700 Hiroshima sized bombs that would be the upper limit on what a Scud could be expected to carry. Like Dave A said, it would take a multi-megaton hydrogen weapon to affect anything over a large area. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
well now, there is the possibility of an emp bomb. which would be the emp effect of a nuclear bomb, without all the nasty death side-affects. that very well could fry all the electronics. when electricity flows, it creates a magnetic field around the wires, (put an extension cord on the floor of a shop covered with meta shavings and run something, watch the distubance of the metal parts) this theory goes both ways, the street light signals are basically a coil of wire in the ground and when your vehicle passes over them it creates a small electric charge telling the sigal computer that there is a vehicle at the light. emp works by generating a very large magnetic pulse that in turn creates a very large electric pulse that can fry the sensitive electrical components, and also, less sensitive components can be affected by the high energy electrical pulse burng off the solder connectios, and melting wires. the emp bomb in oceans 11 is not a fictional device one could in theory make a device that would have a similar affect. (but it wouldt look like that one..) there are also other ways to generate emp. but that stuff is......complicated. Conventional explosive EMP devices would have a very, very limited range. The reason nukes have such an effect is a lot of energy is pumping them. You just dont get that with conventional explosives and you never will. there are such devices that will have a range equal to that of a nuclear device. Pure unadulterated tooth-fairy nonsense and fantasy. Scientifically and physically impossible. That is as nonsensical as saying you could make a chemical explosive as powerful as a hydrogen bomb. E=MC^2. Tell me what conventional explosive can approach that. Conventional EMP bombs affect city blocks, not countries. Conventional EMP bombs turn chemical energy into electromagnetic energy. A Hydrogen bomb converts matter itself into electromagnetic energy. It is like comparing a squirt gun to Niagra Falls. They both have water and the similarity ends there. The only possible device that could exceed a Hydrogen Bomb is an anti-matter warhead. That wold give you 100 percent matter to energy conversion. |
| It will take out random stuff. Normal nukes don't produce a huge EMP even in the upper atmosphere. I don't remember which test the US did out in the Pacific but they set off a regular nuke in the upper atmosphere and it did disrupt power and communication lines back in the late '60's early 70's if my memory is working correclty. The US, probably Russia too, built some radiation enhanced nukes. Most people believe they were the "neutron bombs" that were the buzz word at one time but they were specifically designed to be used in the upper atmosphere/space to produce a huge X-ray/EMP burst to destroy a large number of incoming nukes and enemy satillites with one shot. I don't recall them ever testing it full scale or at its usfull altitude. Started making space the new war zone, star wars, as it was later called by the media. Russia did and the US planned to put military personel in space for spying, early detection, and counter attach. It all died out due to high cost, treaties, and new technology. |
|
Quoted:
It will take out random stuff. Normal nukes don't produce a huge EMP even in the upper atmosphere. I don't remember which test the US did out in the Pacific but they set off a regular nuke in the upper atmosphere and it did disrupt power and communication lines back in the late '60's early 70's if my memory is working correclty. The US, probably Russia too, built some radiation enhanced nukes. Most people believe they were the "neutron bombs" that were the buzz word at one time but they were specifically designed to be used in the upper atmosphere/space to produce a huge X-ray/EMP burst to destroy a large number of incoming nukes and enemy satillites with one shot. I don't recall them ever testing it full scale or at its usfull altitude. Started making space the new war zone, star wars, as it was later called by the media. Russia did and the US planned to put military personel in space for spying, early detection, and counter attach. It all died out due to high cost, treaties, and new technology. Early 60's, Starfish Prime. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
well now, there is the possibility of an emp bomb. which would be the emp effect of a nuclear bomb, without all the nasty death side-affects. that very well could fry all the electronics. when electricity flows, it creates a magnetic field around the wires, (put an extension cord on the floor of a shop covered with meta shavings and run something, watch the distubance of the metal parts) this theory goes both ways, the street light signals are basically a coil of wire in the ground and when your vehicle passes over them it creates a small electric charge telling the sigal computer that there is a vehicle at the light. emp works by generating a very large magnetic pulse that in turn creates a very large electric pulse that can fry the sensitive electrical components, and also, less sensitive components can be affected by the high energy electrical pulse burng off the solder connectios, and melting wires. the emp bomb in oceans 11 is not a fictional device one could in theory make a device that would have a similar affect. (but it wouldt look like that one..) there are also other ways to generate emp. but that stuff is......complicated. Conventional explosive EMP devices would have a very, very limited range. The reason nukes have such an effect is a lot of energy is pumping them. You just dont get that with conventional explosives and you never will. there are such devices that will have a range equal to that of a nuclear device. Pure unadulterated tooth-fairy nonsense and fantasy. Scientifically and physically impossible. That is as nonsensical as saying you could make a chemical explosive as powerful as a hydrogen bomb. E=MC^2. Tell me what conventional explosive can approach that. Conventional EMP bombs affect city blocks, not countries. i'm sorry, i dont recall ever saying anything about conventional explosives. i said there are devices, that will yeild an emp blast radius equal to that of a nuclear device. i did not say that you can use conventional explsives to generate an emp blast equal to a nuclear device. but obviously you know more than i do. i guess my complete knowledge of every weapon system in the US arsenal must be wrong hmph. i probably got that TS for nothin. damn. CNWDI must've been wrong too. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
well now, there is the possibility of an emp bomb. which would be the emp effect of a nuclear bomb, without all the nasty death side-affects. that very well could fry all the electronics. when electricity flows, it creates a magnetic field around the wires, (put an extension cord on the floor of a shop covered with meta shavings and run something, watch the distubance of the metal parts) this theory goes both ways, the street light signals are basically a coil of wire in the ground and when your vehicle passes over them it creates a small electric charge telling the sigal computer that there is a vehicle at the light. emp works by generating a very large magnetic pulse that in turn creates a very large electric pulse that can fry the sensitive electrical components, and also, less sensitive components can be affected by the high energy electrical pulse burng off the solder connectios, and melting wires. the emp bomb in oceans 11 is not a fictional device one could in theory make a device that would have a similar affect. (but it wouldt look like that one..) there are also other ways to generate emp. but that stuff is......complicated. Conventional explosive EMP devices would have a very, very limited range. The reason nukes have such an effect is a lot of energy is pumping them. You just dont get that with conventional explosives and you never will. there are such devices that will have a range equal to that of a nuclear device. Pure unadulterated tooth-fairy nonsense and fantasy. Scientifically and physically impossible. That is as nonsensical as saying you could make a chemical explosive as powerful as a hydrogen bomb. E=MC^2. Tell me what conventional explosive can approach that. Conventional EMP bombs affect city blocks, not countries. i'm sorry, i dont recall ever saying anything about conventional explosives. i said there are devices, that will yeild an emp blast radius equal to that of a nuclear device. i did not say that you can use conventional explsives to generate an emp blast equal to a nuclear device. What is this fantasy, non-nuclear reaction you seem to hold so much stock in? If you can't describe it, as far as I am conerned, you are trying to paint your way out of a corner. There is nothing that would produce the effects you describe that is not some type of nuclear device. If it involves fission or fusion, it is a nuclear device. An anti-matter bomb would be a nuclear device. There are two types. Nuclear and chemical. Take your pick. I really am not worried about Iran putting a photon torpedo(anti-matter) on a Scud anytime soon. |
|
but obviously you know more than i do. i guess my complete knowledge of every weapon system in the US arsenal must be wrong hmph.
i probably got that TS for nothin. damn. CNWDI must've been wrong too. I didn't know they gave out TS clearance to people who can't capatalize their sentences and go braggin' on the internet about it on a website that I can assure you is monitored by the federal government and I don't mean the BATFe. You are full of shit. Just admit it before you are made a total laughing-stock. |
|
Quoted:
but obviously you know more than i do. i guess my complete knowledge of every weapon system in the US arsenal must be wrong hmph.
i probably got that TS for nothin. damn. CNWDI must've been wrong too. I didn't know they gave out TS clearance to people who can't capatalize their sentences and go braggin' on the internet about it on a website that I can assure you is monitored by the federal government and I don't mean the BATFe. You are full of shit. Just admit it before you are made a total laughing-stock. none of what i have said has any classification level. i am sorry i didnt know you were the grammar police. i do not appreciate the disrespect you are showing towards me, when i offered no disrespect towards you. you know nothing about my background therefore your assumptions are as full of shit as you think that i am. |
|
Please describe this uber-powerful non-nuclear effect then if you know so much.
You say it isn't classified and yet you have not attempted to offer any explanation nor any defense of your extraordinary claim other than a self-appeal to authority. If it isn't classified as you claim, then tell us how your postulate is feasable. What non-nuclear energy source do you use to generate the Terrawatts of power needed to generate a continental-wide EMP effect? |
|
Quoted:
Please describe this uber-powerful non-nuclear effect then if you know so much. You say it isn't classified and yet you have not attempted to offer any explanation nor any defense of your extraordinary claim other than a self-appeal to authority. If it isn't classified as you claim, then tell us how your postulate is feasable. i said "nothing i have said is classified" not nothing i am talking about is classified, your reading comprehension could use a little work. goodnight. its late. |
|
you know nothing about my background therefore your assumptions are as full of shit as you think that i am.
I don't give a flying crap about your background. As long as you can provide the extraordinary evidence to support your extraordinary claim, you can be the Pope. |