Electro-Magnetic Pulse

[will]

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.

 

[William Sommerwerck]

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.

Months before publication, One Second After has already been cited
on the floor of Congress as a book all Americans should read...

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

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.

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.

 

[Jim Yanik]

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:h51l8n$6fo$1@news.eternal-september.org:

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.

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.

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.


Months before publication, One Second After has already been cited
on the floor of Congress as a book all Americans should read...

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


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.

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

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.

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
at
kua.net

 

[William Sommerwerck]

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.

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

The higher up, the greater the area affected.

And the less-intense the EMP at ground level.

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

What would the defense be, other than shielding?

 

[Robert Macy]

On Aug 1, 8:38 am, "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net>
wrote:

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.

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

The higher up, the greater the area affected.

And the less-intense the EMP at ground level.

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

What would the defense be, other than shielding?

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

 

[Jim Yanik]

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:h51nif$la4$1@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.

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse

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]

The higher up, the greater the area affected.

And the less-intense the EMP at ground level.

not true.

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

What would the defense be, other than shielding?

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
at
kua.net

 

[William Sommerwerck]

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse

has nice pics of the EMP footprint and field strengths.

Thanks for the reference.

The higher up, the greater the area affected.

And the less-intense the EMP at ground level.

not true.

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

 

[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.

 

[Jim Yanik]

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:h52del$7as$1@news.eternal-september.org:

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.

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
at
kua.net

 

[will]

On Aug 1, 7:21 pm, Jim Yanik <jya...@abuse.gov> wrote:

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote innews:h52del$7as$1@news.eternal-september.org:

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.

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
at
kua.net

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?

 

On 1 Aug 2009 20:49:22 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:h51nif$la4$1@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.

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse

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]




The higher up, the greater the area affected.

And the less-intense the EMP at ground level.

not true.

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

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

What would the defense be, other than shielding?

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.)
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

 

[William Sommerwerck]

EMP doesn't follow the inverse square law?

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

 

[Jim Yanik]

PlainBill47@yahoo.com wrote in
news:29pb755uk6vtknfd25riti0b9ocpi5050n@4ax.com:

On 1 Aug 2009 20:49:22 GMT, Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote:

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in
news:h51nif$la4$1@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.

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse

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]




The higher up, the greater the area affected.

And the less-intense the EMP at ground level.

not true.

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

check the EMP maps at Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse

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.

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

What would the defense be, other than shielding?

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.)
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.

And then programming and aligning the guidance system.

It would fit nicely inside a standard
cargo container.

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.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iran/missile/Shahab-3a.jpg

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

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

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
at
kua.net