EMP blast - what would happen really?

No shit. Most people who 'survive being struck by lightning' actually were hit by induced current - sort of like the difference between standing NEAR the tracks and standing ON the tracks.

-- _____ _ _ |_ _| | | | | | | __ _ _ __ ___ | |__| | ___ _ __ ___ ___ _ __ | | / _` | '_ ` _ \\ | __ |/ _ \\| '_ ` _ \\ / _ \\ '__| _| |_ | (_| | | | | | | | | | | (_) | | | | | | __/ | |_____| \\__,_|_| |_| |_| |_| |_|\\___/|_| |_| |_|\\___|_| __ ____ / _| | _ \\ ___ | |_ | |_) | ___ _ __ __ _ / _ \\| _| | _ < / _ \\| '__/ _` | | (_) | | | |_) | (_) | | | (_| |_ \\___/|_| |____/ \\___/|_| \\__, (_) __/ | |___/

On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 18:26:05 GMT, "Homer J Simpson" Gave us:

The whole reason that an ESD smock is used is for abatement of any field a charged individual carries. There are components that are so sensitive that even local electrical fields can damage them.

Otherwise all we would need is a simple wrist strap or heel strap.

The smock also reduces the amount of charge one builds as one walks through the air in a room.

I have seen real demonstrations of the differences. It is quite significant. Raw components that have not yet been installed are the most vulnerable.

This is also why there are differences in the types of ESD packaging "bags". The black, fully dissipative types are the best for most purposes.

They really suck for carrying real-time-clock chips with built-in batteries.

"Tim Williams" wrote in news:gnvEg.587$ snipped-for-privacy@newsfe02.lga:

Not true. i worked on the F/A-18 at McDonnell Douglas for nearly 20 years. The Flight Control System was a quad redundant GE designed fly-by-wire system. If that failed, the pilot had a hydraulic backup. If that failed; time to eject

As I recall it, the F-14 has two hydraulic systems attached to each critical control surface, one powered by each of the engines, and a backup electric pump to provide power for critical things like getting the landing gear down. F-14 #1 crashed early in the testing process due to total hydraulic failure

No, um, electronics in the ejection mechanism, right?

Hoo boy... Grab sledgehammer, break canopy, crawl out of cockpit?

Michael

I worked for Racal on military radio systems. A typical MoD spec. that we worked to stated that the system had to carry on working after a nuclear event, albeit at reduced performance.

Leon

In article , wrote: [....]

There wouldn't have to be. It could be made purely mechanical. The mechanical workings would have to have a few springs and dashpots. You want the canopy flung out of the way before the rocket under the seat is fired.

There may have to be a gyro under the seat that gets spun up before launch too. I don't think you can expect the pilots weight to be centered over the thrust. Doing it all mechinically would technically be "rocket science" but it wouldn't be out of the question.

snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@d34g2000cwd.googlegroups.com:

Nope. Purely mechanical tied to explosive bolts. Can shoot the pilot right thru the canopy if needed.

On 10 Oct 2006 19:45:23 GMT, Chris Foster Gave us:

Yes, explosive bolts actuated by a mechanical force, as well as an explosive propellant to actually facilitate the ejection process.

I've seen this, except it was a maintenance man, and it not only shot him and the seat through the canopy, but through the corrugated steel roof of the hangar. The seat stayed on top of the roof, next to the hole, and his body fell back down splat on the wing of the airplane.

A couple of months later the base safety officer went around to all of the shops to give the summary of the accident report, and in a nutshell, he said, "It's a bitch when you have to tell a young wife with a new kid that her husband has just killed himself by his own stupidity."

Thanks, Rich

On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 00:06:26 GMT, Rich Grise Gave us:

He wasn't strapped in, nor at altitude, idiot. He was servicing the craft. Not only that, but it may not have been "his stupidity". It may have been accidentally initiated.