Electro-Magnetic Pulse

This guy was on C-span Books today. Fascinating concept, It is Semi Fiction. EMP is real, the story is fiction, set 1 second after a nuclear device sends out an electro-magnetic pulse....and the world goes quiet...

New York Times best selling author William R. Forstchen now brings us a story which can be all too terrifyingly real...a story in which one man struggles to save his family and his small North Carolina town after America loses a war, in one second, a war that will send America back to the Dark Ages...A war based upon a weapon, an Electro Magnetic Pulse (EMP). A weapon that may already be in the hands of our enemies.

Months before publication, One Second After has already been cited on the floor of Congress as a book all Americans should read, a book already being discussed in the corridors of the Pentagon as a truly realistic look at a weapon and its awesome power to destroy the entire United States, literally within one second. It is a weapon that the Wall Street Journal warns could shatter America. In the tradition of On the Beach, Fail Safe and Testament, this book, set in a typical American town, is a dire warning of what might be our future...and our end.

Reply to
will
Loading thread data ...

Who posts this garbage? The publishers?

A nuclear explosion generates an electromagnetic pulse that can damage electronic equipment. Tube equipment is relatively immune from damage. Unshielded solid-state equipment is easily burned out.

A single pulse strong enough to destroy all (or most of) the electronic equipment in the US would likely be difficult to generate, and would probably have to come from a huge nuclear explosion high in the atmosphere. It is theoretically possible, but probably not practical.

Commercial and consumer devices and products are generally not shielded against EMP. I don't know how well the armed forces have shielded their equipment.

... and we're all aware of the perceptiveness and foresight of the members of Congress...

I'm sure the Pentagon has been paying serious attention to this problem for at least the last two decades.

I'm more worried that the US will, within the next 20 years, become a subsidiary of Red China, Inc.

Reply to
William Sommerwerck

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in news:h51l8n$6fo$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-september.org:

a Hiroshima size nuke detonated 100-300 miles over the CONUS would take out much of the US electronic and electrical equipment,and orbiting satellites. The higher up,the greater the area affected.

Not "destroy" the US,just put us back to 19th century living conditions. People would starve;no food distribution,no refrigeration,no functional hospitals.

Iran has been testing SCUD launches from containerships,with *high altitude detonations*,that are only useful for EMP attacks.(yet they claim to not be developing nuclear weapons...)

They could sail a containership to the Gulf of Mexico,launch from outside US waters,scuttle the ship to destroy any evidence. Or do an East Coast attack.

We do not have any defenses against this type of surprise attack.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Yanik

I don't buy that. The Hiroshima blast (15kilotons) is a "burp" as such things go. Please give a reference.

And the less-intense the EMP at ground level.

What would the defense be, other than shielding?

Reply to
William Sommerwerck

Years ago when the silo missiles were silently waiting to be launched as counter attack, a nuclear blast only had to hit within five miles of the silo's site to completely disable the control computers. In other words, the emp took out the computers, didn't even harm/touch the missiles.

It is my understanding that, a relatively small nuclear blast slightly above the ionsphere creates an 'umbrella' of EMP charge that has a VERY wide diameter range 5, 10, + miles of over 20,000 to 50,000 volts per meter that then showers down to the surface. Now as comparison, consider the very stringent automotive EMC spec that the electronics survive/operate in up to 300 V/m to frequencies of 1GHz [this is an incredibly difficult spec to meet] and you have some comparison for how damaging a REAL EMP could be.

Robert

Reply to
Robert Macy

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in news:h51nif$la4$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-september.org:

formatting link

has nice pics of the EMP footprint and field strengths.

excerpt; The EMP at a fixed distance from a nuclear weapon does not depend directly on the yield but at most only increases as the square root of the yield (see illustration above). This means that although a 10 kiloton weapon has only 0.7% of the total energy release of the 1.44 megaton Starfish Prime test, the EMP will be at least 8% as powerful. Since the E1 component of nuclear EMP depends on the prompt gamma ray output, which was only 0.1% of yield in Starfish Prime but can be 0.5% of yield in pure fission weapons of low yield, a 10 kiloton bomb can easily be 5 x 8% = 40% as powerful as the

1.44 megaton Starfish Prime at producing EMP.[20]

not true.

anti-missile defenses,to prevent the missile from detonating over the US. Insufficient air defenses that could destroy the containership before launch.(it takes some time to erect and launch a SCUD.)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Yanik

Thanks for the reference.

I'm still not sure I follow that, but I'll read the piece.

Reply to
William Sommerwerck

I read the article. I still don't quite understand the mechanism (nor do I understand how explosives can block gamma rays), but it was a fascinating read.

Apparently, it would be quite possible for a rogue state to do serious damage to the US with a single small weapon.

Reply to
William Sommerwerck

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in news:h52del$7as$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-september.org:

AND Iran has been testing SCUD launches from containerships in the Caspian Sea,with hi-altitude detonations,useful only for EMP attack.

Yet they claim to not be seeking nuclear weapons. (but were discovered to have detailed construction plans for a nuclear bomb.Plus,they are close with N.Korea,Syria,and Communist China.)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Yanik

s$ snipped-for-privacy@news.eternal-september.org:

n

AND Iran has been testing SCUD launches from container ships in the Caspian Sea,with high -altitude detonations,useful only for EMP attack.

Can you give a source?

Reply to
will

Oh? EMP doesn't follow the inverse square law?

It seems you would need SUFFICIENT air defenses. Which would be a rather large number. The latest variants of the Iranian Shahab-3 use a solid fuel engine, so it becomes only a matter of raising the missile to launch position. It would fit nicely inside a standard cargo container. Worst case, the launch control systems would be in a second cargo container adjacent to the first.

So essentially you are talking about having sufficient air defenses to shadow every cargo ship within 500 miles of the US. Not likely.

PlainBill

Reply to
PlainBill47

It apparently doesn't, because the pulse is generated in a fraction of a second over a wide area. See the article.

Reply to
William Sommerwerck

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

check the EMP maps at Wikipedia.

formatting link

Then consider at what level today's commercial and consumer electronics is degraded or destroyed.Also consider that our electrical grid is near full capacity and vulnerable to collapse from load dropouts.

And then programming and aligning the guidance system.

Oh? where did you get that data? my brief research shows the cargo container at 39ft/13.55m long inside,and the Shahab-3 at 15.8meters.That does not include the TEL.

formatting link

but,there's no need to put it in a container,it could be between two rows of containers,and covered by tarps.

No,radar that would detect a launch from the coastal area,and ABM batteries to respond.Maybe make it part of the Coast Guard.

Or an orbital ABM system.(Brilliant Pebbles?)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jim Yanik

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.