Zone1 Can the US Survive an EMP Strike?

We are far more vulnerable than most people know.

Scary thought. Detecting and stopping an EMP then might depend on being able to detect a vehicle launched by a foreign power traveling into our airspace and destroy it. Once again, mankind has shown his propensity for not only painting himself into technological corners, but his thirst for destruction.
 
Wrong! It takes a minimum of a 1 MT device. You are simply making shit up that is not true.
Wrong. This is a fission reaction. The EMP is generated when the reaction propagates in the atmosphere as the components (molecules) are ripped apart at the molecular level and the protons and neutrons are thrown outward.


There is a reason we tested aircraft and vehicles in the remote desert. Distance from critical infrastructure. A modulated wave form can do extensive damage. That is how these small devices can cause so much damage.
 
Last edited:
Wrong. This is a fission reaction. The EMP is generated when the reaction propagates in the atmosphere as the components (molecules) are ripped apart at the molecular level and the protons and neutrons are thrown outward.


There is a reason we tested aircraft and vehicles in the remote desert. Distance from critical infrastructure. A modulated wave form can do extensive damage. That is how these small devices can cause so much damage.
You were at a lower altitude and the thicker atmosphere prevented the EMP pulse from spreading. I suggest rereading your link.
 
You were at a lower altitude and the thicker atmosphere prevented the EMP pulse from spreading. I suggest rereading your link.
You're forgetting the type of detonation. Newer tech allows us to have rapid detonations (milliseconds apart) causing waves. The first wave breaks down so far, the second a bit further, the third much further. By employing these rapid detonations, you are altering the wave form.

30 years ago, it was a single detonation. Today we can do it in multiple smaller detonations causing much greater damage.
 
You're forgetting the type of detonation. Newer tech allows us to have rapid detonations (milliseconds apart) causing waves. The first wave breaks down so far, the second a bit further, the third much further. By employing these rapid detonations, you are altering the wave form.

30 years ago, it was a single detonation. Today we can do it in multiple smaller detonations causing much greater damage.
You did not reread your link did you?

I hate having discussions with amateurs and people discussing what they did in the old days. You have a nice day. I am very tired of you making shit up.
 
Today we can do it in multiple smaller detonations causing much greater damage.
Theoretically I think modulating the wave like that could possibly quadruple the effectiveness of a given blast size if phased right making it 4X as effective at a given distance or allowing you to double the usable range! Interesting.

I hate having discussions with amateurs and people discussing what they did in the old days. You have a nice day.
Looks like you wore the Admiral down again, Bob. Tory ran out of "You're wrongs" while never proving he was right until he simply had no answers left at all.
 
You did not reread your link did you?

I hate having discussions with amateurs and people discussing what they did in the old days. You have a nice day. I am very tired of you making shit up.
I'm sorry if you do not understand the physics behind this tech. Think of this like shooting a bullet into the same hole 3 or four times. Pretty soon what's there doesn't matter. Have a nice day.
 
Theoretically I think modulating the wave like that could possibly quadruple the effectiveness of a given blast size if phased right making it 4X as effective at a given distance or allowing you to double the usable range! Interesting.
That is what they don't understand. WE can use a much smaller bomb to do the same amount of damage today.

You want a limited strike. Go lower in the atmosphere but high enough to keep from irradiating the land so that it is unusable. You want to create Kaos, go high and use a modulated wave device. IF you disable the larger unprotected areas the populace will kill each other for the resources left.

Either way the populace does the work for you.. Taking control is then much easier. You can bet that Putin is weighing his options today as his front line has been breached.
 
Theoretically I think modulating the wave like that could possibly quadruple the effectiveness of a given blast size if phased right making it 4X as effective at a given distance or allowing you to double the usable range! Interesting.


Looks like you wore the Admiral down again, Bob. Tory ran out of "You're wrongs" while never proving he was right until he simply had no answers left at all.
tory just did that in another thread as well
 
That is what they don't understand. WE can use a much smaller bomb to do the same amount of damage today.
This may sound strange, but I was contemplating the issue of creating an EMP earlier and thought that perhaps it might be useful in thinking of how earthquakes destroy buildings: it isn't always just raw linear force or total instantaneous force but the QUALITY of the force and the duration that does the worst damage by resonating with a weakened structure much as an EMP could be tuned to do more harm per given output by being designed sympathetically with the target grid. Likewise being an audio nut and thinking in terms of audio and acoustics, I thought of one type of EMP as conventionally done as though much like a serial DC load where great power was expended then realized that this was the least efficient and that the damage done with an EMP might better be thought of in terms of WORK DONE at the load rather than just that outputted at the source, so, there might not be a LINEAR relationship in destructive force to the POWER of the EMP detonation as much as relating to the QUALITY of the detonation in terms of perhaps being better thought as a PARALLEL AC load where far more damage could be effected by more quickly overloading the material properties of the conductors of the power grid in a shorter time with less energy expended simply because the EFFECT of conducting a complex-shaped wavefront EMP might actually do more damage yet need lower instantaneous yield EMP generators.

Along that vein I thought of how an AC field can propagate power farther more efficiently or how a properly tuned frequency of generation can transmit farther through air or ground if matched to the impedance of the load. I'm starting to think that perhaps a similar thinking might be applied to create more widespread or easier damage by more efficiently conveying the power of the EMP pulses to the load material REACTIVELY! Does any of that make any sense?

You want to create Kaos, go high and use a modulated wave device.
Now you are making me wonder if, rather than a spherical EMP wavefront sent out in all directions whether an EMP could be SHAPED and DIRECTED just to hit a given target area?! That way it could be greatly intensified or accomplished with far less power.

IF you disable the larger unprotected areas the populace will kill each other for the resources left. Either way the populace does the work for you.. Taking control is then much easier.
There is always that. And of course, the less educated the crowd the easier they become to control.

You can bet that Putin is weighing his options today as his front line has been breached.
Don't you think I thank my lucky stars that I don't live close to a likely primary russian nuke or EMP target? Just earlier I was listening to an expert from Harvard saying to the shock of his host that after careful analysis of all available data, he was convinced that:
  1. The USA likely destroyed the Nord Stream pipes and had the most to gain by their destruction.
  2. That the USA and NATO are playing with fire here and underestimate the danger of backing Putin into a corner making Ukraine a must win for them while Putin considers the region a 'Cannot Lose' vital territory to Russia.
 
Last edited:
Now you are making me wonder if, rather than a spherical EMP wavefront sent out in all directions whether an EMP could be SHAPED and DIRECTED just to hit a given target area?!
You can shape a charge by its design. I can't go further into this for obvious reasons. Think about creating a penetrating IED. You form the explosives and then put them in a specific formation. Any explosion can be shaped just as any emitted wave can be directed.

Obvious points to stop a cascade failure in our power grid is the point where it is converted to DC and then realigned in AC with the receiving grid sections cycle. These DC/AC cross overs are the most at risk in our system. You destroy them and you can isolate a region. That is what a pulsed wave form can do very effectively. IF you can't stop the cascading failure you can break the grid up into millions of small sections that will be almost impossible to restore for decades.

This is why such a small device can be so destructive. You're targeting the point of resonation, much like a crystal glass. Once you find the point (frequency) of resonance it will shatter into millions of pieces. Electric devices are no different.
 
You can shape a charge by its design. That is what a pulsed wave form can do very effectively. You're targeting the point of resonation, Electric devices are no different.

I totally get it, I think. Not only do I understand antenna and waveguide design, but I've also studied how demolition teams shape charges to bring down buildings effectively; what you are suggesting sounds similar to the action of a resonant tank circuit, where not only is energy stored, but the tuning of it allows it to commit a limited amount of power from itself to induce the tank to convert some of its own potential energy into a contributing kinetic force.
 
I totally get it, I think. Not only do I understand antenna and waveguide design, but I've also studied how demolition teams shape charges to bring down buildings effectively; what you are suggesting sounds similar to the action of a resonant tank circuit, where not only is energy stored, but the tuning of it allows it to commit a limited amount of power from itself to induce the tank to convert some of its own potential energy into a contributing kinetic force.
Think of this as wave after wave of energy, by the third or fourth wave there is nothing left in resistance.
 
Nothing would melt. Silly talk. EMP is a pulse. Anything with a magnetic chip would cease to operate. Until the chip or part was replaced. The pulse doesn't keep pulsing. It doesn't keep shutting things down. It's repairable. The danger is, once everything is inoperable the nation is open to an unstoppable conventional or nuclear attack.
 
This thread is my OPINON.

Can the US Survive an EMP Strike?

An Electro-Magnetic-Pulse much the same as a solar flare will be devastating to all things in America and abroad. This pulse will melt transformers into huge piles of molten metal and melt transmission lines. The devastation will be massive. Power generation in the United States will suddenly be taken back to the 1850's.

Food production will stop. Storages will quickly spoil. Our ability to communicate will be gone as cell towers and above ground lines will melt or be irreparably destroyed. The lasers for our fiberoptics will be destroyed rendering all of our networks useless. Water purification will stop for our towns and cities as will sewage treatment plants.

One fifty kiloton nuclear device detonated high in our atmosphere above the US would create a cascading collapse of our power grids. Vehicle electronics would be melted and make most forms of transportation useless. Areas that are under sea level would again be inundated with water as pumping would cease.

The mass kaos will rip cities apart. Only rural areas will survive the mass destruction.

How do you think America can survive without electronics today?

Judging from the way some people cannot function without an Apple or Samsung device at the current point in time? No.


They will implode without that Android or IOS connection to reality, probably.
 
Nothing would melt. Silly talk. EMP is a pulse.

It's more than that. It is a wave over a predetermind band of frequencies. More specifically, a military EMP does more than just create an EM burst when it explodes, it's real damage comes from the effect this has on the surrounding atmosphere over a far wider area than the actual burst itself--- it absorbs the impact energy of the burst which then sets into motion a rebound energy which is actually the real EMP that does the damage on the ground! That is the whole reason for exploding it high up in the atmosphere.
 
Nothing would melt. Silly talk. EMP is a pulse. Anything with a magnetic chip would cease to operate. Until the chip or part was replaced. The pulse doesn't keep pulsing. It doesn't keep shutting things down. It's repairable. The danger is, once everything is inoperable the nation is open to an unstoppable conventional or nuclear attack.
Tell that to the fires of 1859 with a simple pulse from the sun.. I suggest you read up on how the western US was set ablaze by that event. It's called a Carrington Event.
 
It's more than that. It is a wave over a predetermind band of frequencies. More specifically, a military EMP does more than just create an EM burst when it explodes, it's real damage comes from the effect this has on the surrounding atmosphere over a far wider area than the actual burst itself--- it absorbs the impact energy of the burst which then sets into motion a rebound energy which is actually the real EMP that does the damage on the ground! That is the whole reason for exploding it high up in the atmosphere.
And when it's over. It's over.
 

Forum List

Back
Top