Congress examines EMP threat

Not to hijack the thread, but does any know(Or confirm) if an EMP blast will destroy electronics that are not "on" at the time of the blast? Will my EOTech work after a EMP blast if it was off?
Click to expand...

Having devices off would make them less succeptible, but by no means immune. An EMP destroys electronic components by causing arcs between circuits. When the device is on, there is already a large number of electrons flowing through the circuits, usually near their max capacity. The additional electromagnetic impulse from an EMP would have far less work to do in a hot circuit than in a circuit that was off. In other words, the pulse doesn't need to be as strong to destroy a device that is on. Since we have very limited data on EMPs being used as weapons there is very little data to go on for this.

Small items can generally be shielded, but by no means made immune, by placing them in something like a file cabinet (gun safe in the case of most people here) which would act as a pretty decent faraday cage. It's the same concept as to why you are safe in a lightning storm in your car.
 
I reccomend that any with pacemakers should dress in tinfoil from head to toe now. Yeah, You look like a baked potato. but, So what?

I will also be wearing a double layered tin foil hat from now on. One layer to stop emp and the other to keep those government black helicopter alien types from beaming those voices and thoughts into my head, again.
 
seanc said:
Everything that is not electric is dependant on something(s) that is/are electric. The economy of the world is all electronic and intertwined. Knock out one important link and the world economy could grind to a crawl or halt for a long while.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I must have missed that when I was getting my masters degree in electrical engineering.

Just how big do you all think this doomsday device is, hmm? Are you actually afraid that if the nuts in Iran can somehow manage to deliver one low yield device somewhere over US airspace that the whole country will be in shambles? Get some perspective, people.
 
So, instead of wringing my hands and feeling doomed to a campfire life without electronics if this happens, I did some PRELIMINARY looking at what I could learn about EMPs and what could be done to protect equipment from them:

http://www.aussurvivalist.com/nuclear/empprotection.htm

Apparently, a Faraday box is necessary - about half-way down the article. A metal grounded box that has a layer of electronic insulating material (plastic or rubber) to protect the electronics. The box takes the hit and the components inside the insulation are untouched by EMPs. An ammo can was suggested as a possibility. Hmmmm - I wonder where we could get a few large ammo cans?

More on constructing a Faraday Box is here:

http://books.google.com/books?id=GS...X&oi=book_result&resnum=2&ct=result#PPA148,M1

So, perhaps in addition to a BOB, we need a Faraday box, too for some of our most precious electronics.

My thoughts only.

Bob
 
P-14 said:
Apparently, a Faraday box is necessary - about half-way down the article. A metal grounded box that has a layer of electronic insulating material (plastic or rubber) to protect the electronics. The box takes the hit and the components inside the insulation are untouched by EMPs. An ammo can was suggested as a possibility. Hmmmm - I wonder where we could get a few large ammo cans?

More on constructing a Faraday Box is here:

http://books.google.com/books?id=GS...X&oi=book_result&resnum=2&ct=result#PPA148,M1

So, perhaps in addition to a BOB, we need a Faraday box, too for some of our most precious electronics.

My thoughts only.

Bob
Click to expand...

For a reliable shielding you will need to meet a shielding attenuation of 80dB or more following the Mil-Std-188-125 document.

Measurements can be executed as described in Mil-Std-285 or EN50147-1.
 
KilgoreTrout said:
Thanks. I must have missed that when I was getting my masters degree in electrical engineering.

Just how big do you all think this doomsday device is, hmm? Are you actually afraid that if the nuts in Iran can somehow manage to deliver one low yield device somewhere over US airspace that the whole country will be in shambles? Get some perspective, people.
Click to expand...

If they hit the right spot in the US you mine as well have the whole country in shambles. For example if they target the northeast they would make a huge dent in our financial sector. The stock market is in New York which would be gone as everything is now done on computers there. You would say bye bye to all of your IRA's, 401K's, and other investment accounts.
 
drumenigma said:
If they hit the right spot in the US you mine as well have the whole country in shambles. For example if they target the northeast they would make a huge dent in our financial sector. The stock market is in New York which would be gone as everything is now done on computers there. You would say bye bye to all of your IRA's, 401K's, and other investment accounts.
Click to expand...

drum, you have to think about this at all its angles.
in order for iran to do this;
-they would have to have a high yeild nuclear blast at high altitude over the US. currently, iran cant even make a kiliton blast, never mind a blast in the megatons.
-according to this article, Iran is supposedly trying to modify SCUD missiles. iraq tried to do this, and the program was mostly a failure. modify scud missiles isnt easy.
-iran would have to get a ship that can launch this missile close to the US in order to be effective. iran does not have a blue water navy at the moment, it would be considered green water at best.
-iran would be devastated by the US if they pulled this off.
its not going to happen anytime soon, if ever.
it would take a incredible amount of technology, money and luck to pull that off. i dont even think the russians could do that right now and pull it off without getting destroyed in the process.
 
According to this CNN article, Iran is quoted as having a maximum range of 2000km with their longest range surface to surface missile equipped with a 1 ton conventional warhead.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/07/09/iran.missiles/index.html

This puts Israel within range of the Shahab 3, but US soil is well beyond its reach. Hitting Israel with such a missile would be pretty much the same as committing suicide. I seriously doubt Iran's resolve, though find it disturbing that such a rogue nation has this kind of technology.
 
I guess the real question is, is a country like Iran afraid of retaliation? If they were capable to taking out a big chunk of Isreal and maybe at the same time delivering a good hit to the US (maybe a simultaneous attack) would they do it? Would the prospect of wiping Israel off the map and dealing a deadly blow to the Great Satan enough for them to feel justified in a grand act of martyrdom?

I think the big difference vs USSR is that we knew they did not want do something nuts as they really did not want to be killed in retaliation. Can the same be said for Iran?
 
seanc said:
I guess the real question is, is a country like Iran afraid of retaliation? If they were capable to taking out a big chunk of Isreal and maybe at the same time delivering a good hit to the US (maybe a simultaneous attack) would they do it? Would the prospect of wiping Israel off the map and dealing a deadly blow to the Great Satan enough for them to feel justified in a grand act of martyrdom?

I think the big difference vs USSR is that we knew they did not want do something nuts as they really did not want to be killed in retaliation. Can the same be said for Iran?
Click to expand...

Martyrdom of a state is an interesting possible problem. Since Iran has essentially moved from a secular government to an Islamic republic, I guess fanaticism might be enough to put them over the edge.

Still, I think it's unlikely. Realistically speaking, an attack on Israel would be the death-knell of the aggressor even if such an attack could cripple Israel (and that would take something more significant than Iran's arsenal I'd wager). I would guess that such an attack on Israel would only strengthen the resolve of Israel's allies (and there are many) and bring a world of hurt down on Iran and others.

My best guess is that Iran will continue to posture with these tests, while it slowly circles the economic drain. My biggest concern would be if the current regime was ousted by one more militarily minded, or that the current Iranian government might sell materials for creating dirty bombs to Al-Quaeda and its allies.
 
Last edited:
Dench said:
drum, you have to think about this at all its angles.
in order for iran to do this;
-they would have to have a high yeild nuclear blast at high altitude over the US. currently, iran cant even make a kiliton blast, never mind a blast in the megatons.
-according to this article, Iran is supposedly trying to modify SCUD missiles. iraq tried to do this, and the program was mostly a failure. modify scud missiles isnt easy.
-iran would have to get a ship that can launch this missile close to the US in order to be effective. iran does not have a blue water navy at the moment, it would be considered green water at best.
-iran would be devastated by the US if they pulled this off.
its not going to happen anytime soon, if ever.
it would take a incredible amount of technology, money and luck to pull that off. i dont even think the russians could do that right now and pull it off without getting destroyed in the process.
Click to expand...

Sometimes I think America is a little overconfident though how we think we're untouchable. I think 9/11 proved that we can be attacked it just takes massive amounts of planning and resources which, if you're a country, you likely have. And all I hear about in the news is how much other countries hate us. I wouldn't be surprised if a couple teamed up together or if one somehow supported another to acheive the desired result. Your assumption runs on the fact that Iran would act alone.
 
drumenigma said:
Sometimes I think America is a little overconfident though how we think we're untouchable. I think 9/11 proved that we can be attacked it just takes massive amounts of planning and resources which, if you're a country, you likely have. And all I hear about in the news is how much other countries hate us. I wouldn't be surprised if a couple teamed up together or if one somehow supported another to acheive the desired result. Your assumption runs on the fact that Iran would act alone.
Click to expand...


i never assumed iran would act alone. in my first post in this thread i said a that iran could sell a atomic weapon to a random organization and they could set it off in a bay such as seattle. americas biggest threat is individual attacks by small terrorist organizations, not high atmospheric EMP attacks.
 
Just the latest sensationalistic fear-mongering, prepping the sheep for more surveillance and more lost rights. You have to justify the police state somehow. I'm more afraid right now of what our own government is going to do next than what the Iranians are going to do.

I ran across this article:


and these pictures:


a while back and they give a different perspective on Iran than I think a lot of people have.
 
dsm said:
Just the latest sensationalistic fear-mongering, prepping the sheep for more surveillance and more lost rights. You have to justify the police state somehow. I'm more afraid right now of what our own government is going to do next than what the Iranians are going to do.

I ran across this article:


and these pictures:


a while back and they give a different perspective on Iran than I think a lot of people have.
Click to expand...

Whats your point?

Its does nothing to remove the fact that they support a government that constantly blathers about destroying most of the world, including us. If they don't want to get nuked, maybe they should over throw their government.

I wonder why they don't?


"EMP offers a bigger bang for the buck," he said. He also suggested such an attack makes a U.S. nuclear response against a suspected enemy less likely than would the detonation of a nuclear bomb in a major U.S. city."

Eh, I'm not so sure of this. Its certainly a nuclear attack in the first place, and considering an EMP is more likely to damage our conventional abilities, getting nuked in return seems very high.
 
derek said:
I couldn't imagine the mess a high altitude high yield nuke would make.
Click to expand...

Unless electronic and electrical systems are hardened ( i.e. shielded against EMP) – and the hardened systems are all military, I think, the entire infrastructure of the country would stop in an instant. Internet commerce ( including eBanking ), radio and telecommunications, computers, cell networks…everything we take for granted in today’s world would be gone in an instant. Circuit boards fried, no electricity, no water pumping, hospital system, police and emergency response systems all gone. Society would break down in a hurry and with one high altitude nuke, The US would grind to a halt. What stuns me is that we have know about this threat for decades. Iran or any other terror group would not need to put a bomb on Wall Street to totally cripple the country. They wouldn’t even need to launch the rocket AT us…

Makes me so happy that Congress are going to talk about this now.
 
The other scenario is that the EMP threat has been overblown, and only a few critical systems would go down. Then Iran would be in the embarassing position of getting vaporized for
an ineffective strike. I would think that would be an enormous consideration. The USA was very worried that the first A-bomb would not detonate at all.
 
FunYun said:
Whats your point?

Its does nothing to remove the fact that they support a government that constantly blathers about destroying most of the world, including us. If they don't want to get nuked, maybe they should over throw their government.

I wonder why they don't?
Click to expand...

Why don't they overthrow their government? That's easy; a rate of gun ownership that's lower than even the UK.

Iran isn't going to attack anyone. It's just a bluff to foster an us-against-them mentality in the younger generation that cares less about an Islamic theocracy than they do about the high unemployment and inflation. They just want to squeeze economic concessions from the West to prop up their lousy regime. It worked for North Korea, why not them?
 
I have some thoughts on this.

My first reaction is that 9/11 has us all running around thinking the bad guys are going to destroy us eventually. Sure, there are plenty of bad guys out there with very dangerous weapons. I also know that Iran is clearly a VERY bad guy. All that being said, my (very very) limited knowledge of the way nuclear detonations have behaved in history has me wondering....why haven't, with all the test detonations of the past (many which were above ground tests), is there no data suggesting any has taken out large areas of the local infrastructure because of an EMP?

My first thought is, at most, a single detonation would only affect a local area, not the entire country. Yet, this article suggests (perhaps I'm wrong here) that a single (or very few of these) device(s) will bring the country to its knees. I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around that.

Sure threats from these idiots (Iranians, N. Koreans, Al Quuckie, etc.) is very real and our guard should be way way up....but lets not shiver at every little prediction that any scientist throws out there without some careful consideration of the facts.

Just my .02
 
geekman33 said:
I have some thoughts on this.

My first reaction is that 9/11 has us all running around thinking the bad guys are going to destroy us eventually. Sure, there are plenty of bad guys out there with very dangerous weapons. I also know that Iran is clearly a VERY bad guy. All that being said, my (very very) limited knowledge of the way nuclear detonations have behaved in history has me wondering....why haven't, with all the test detonations of the past (many which were above ground tests), is there no data suggesting any has taken out large areas of the local infrastructure because of an EMP?

My first thought is, at most, a single detonation would only affect a local area, not the entire country. Yet, this article suggests (perhaps I'm wrong here) that a single (or very few of these) device(s) will bring the country to its knees. I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around that.

Sure threats from these idiots (Iranians, N. Koreans, Al Quuckie, etc.) is very real and our guard should be way way up....but lets not shiver at every little prediction that any scientist throws out there without some careful consideration of the facts.

Just my .02
Click to expand...

if you look for it hard enough, the US damaged a bunch of electronics on Hawaii during one test in particular (i cant remember which test it was so im having difficulty finding it).

the article acts like a typical nuclear weapon is going to wipe out the entire country. it would take a weapon in my best guesstimate over 100 megatons thats basically in low orbit to take out the entire countrys electronics. no country in the world currently has the capability to do it in a single strike.
 
geekman33 said:
All that being said, my (very very) limited knowledge of the way nuclear detonations have behaved in history has me wondering....why haven't, with all the test detonations of the past (many which were above ground tests), is there no data suggesting any has taken out large areas of the local infrastructure because of an EMP?
Click to expand...

Nuke testing stopped in the 1960s by the US and Soviets. There were barely 4-function electronic calculators, 8-transistor AM "pocket" radios, and most calculations were done on slide rules! TVs had tubes in them, too. Phones were "rotory dial" and had no circuit boards in them.

Cars had no computers and I could tune up my '64 Barracuda myself with points, plugs, and filters - no solid state ignitions back then! Computers typically had tubes in them and not chips until the late 1960s - and each computer filled a large room, not like the small PCs towers or laptops we have today. The space program started by President Kennedy (at least that is my recollection) launched the drive to miniturize electronics that has us where we are today. (pun intended)

So, there weren't many electronics around during the nuke testing and those electronics that were around did not run our lives like they do today. Thus, not much EMP data.

This personal historical flashback brought to you by:

Bob [smile]
 

Similar threads

VT Man Arrested For Threatening Drug Store Employees With An "Assault Rifle"
Replies
9
Views
445
Lank
Lank
Iran attacks Israel.
Replies
26
Views
2K
hunt4riches
H
We need 200 people like this in congress. NH residents, you need this woman in congress.
Replies
14
Views
628
Broc Tuah
Broc Tuah
CT: Southington gun shop employee accidentally shoots himself, causing self-inflicted wounds
Replies
7
Views
476
Sf Becket
Sf Becket
Maine gun store hires 'udderly' adorable employee, a baby cow
Replies
10
Views
399
MisterHappy
MisterHappy
Back
Top Bottom