I've heard how a big EMP would wreck all of our computers, and make our cars stop working. But what about older cars that don't have transistors in their ignition systems? If you had, say, a '66 Impala or F100, would it still work? Pre-computer diesels should be OK, are the 6.9 and 7.3 IDI, for example, computerless?
Electro-magnetic pulse
- Thread starter Stelth
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Stelth
I've heard how a big EMP would wreck all of our computers, and make our cars stop working. But what about older cars that don't have transistors in their ignition systems? If you had, say, a '66 Impala or F100, would it still work? Pre-computer diesels should be OK, are the 6.9 and 7.3 IDI, for example, computerless?
Yes, they are computerless (at least the manual transmission ones are)-but I think alternator diodes wouldn't make it, & there would be a FEW other problems besides.
I've heard how a big EMP would wreck all of our computers, and make our cars stop working. But what about older cars that don't have transistors in their ignition systems? If you had, say, a '66 Impala or F100, would it still work? Pre-computer diesels should be OK, are the 6.9 and 7.3 IDI, for example, computerless?
Yes, they are computerless (at least the manual transmission ones are)-but I think alternator diodes wouldn't make it, & there would be a FEW other problems besides.
I had to come back to add though not scientific. The EMP needs a long run or wire to generate the voltage needed for damage I had a near hit by lightening several years ago. The house light up blinding bright , the chain link rattled and the thunder I thought would rip the house off the foundation. Everything went dark, I called the power company And the power company came by and replaced the fuses in the transformer and said if that didn't fix it a crew would come out the next day to replace the transformer. The fuses did the trick and this computer was the one I was on during the close lightening strike.
I had an e-machines computer launch a capacitor like a little missle out one of the vent holes during a distant thunderstorm and "lightweight" power surge.
"They" just have to kill facebook, twitter, and instagram for a day and there'll be marauding hordes, even if the cars still work.
And my w123 300d will suddenly become more relevant.
Even if its alternator goes kablooey, it'll roll-start without electricity.
"They" just have to kill facebook, twitter, and instagram for a day and there'll be marauding hordes, even if the cars still work.
And my w123 300d will suddenly become more relevant.
Get an old motorcycle with points ignition, a kickstart, and a magneto. About as EMP proof as you are going to get.
Unless you find yourself a Model T with a handcrank.
Unless you find yourself a Model T with a handcrank.
Originally Posted By: eljefino
"They" just have to kill facebook, twitter, and instagram for a day and there'll be marauding hordes, even if the cars still work.
.
But not BITOG?
"They" just have to kill facebook, twitter, and instagram for a day and there'll be marauding hordes, even if the cars still work.
.
But not BITOG?
I don't believe in emp. If a nuke is close enough to generate that much magnetism, you'll also feel enough blast to take your head off. The metal body of the car and metal case on the computer is a pretty good shield.
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
I don't believe in emp. If a nuke is close enough to generate that much magnetism, you'll also feel enough blast to take your head off. The metal body of the car and metal case on the computer is a pretty good shield.
The laws of physic don't care what you believe turtlevette, the laws of physics go on regardless.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...adio-beams.html
I don't believe in emp. If a nuke is close enough to generate that much magnetism, you'll also feel enough blast to take your head off. The metal body of the car and metal case on the computer is a pretty good shield.
The laws of physic don't care what you believe turtlevette, the laws of physics go on regardless.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...adio-beams.html
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
I don't believe in emp. If a nuke is close enough to generate that much magnetism, you'll also feel enough blast to take your head off. The metal body of the car and metal case on the computer is a pretty good shield.
The laws of physic don't care what you believe turtlevette, the laws of physics go on regardless.
[video:youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aj54FcI7_dE
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...sing-radio-beam
s.html
It takes a lot of power to do that. In the case of a nuke going off I stand by my belief.
That being said I have been saving my old non computer suburban for the zomby apocalypse.
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
I don't believe in emp. If a nuke is close enough to generate that much magnetism, you'll also feel enough blast to take your head off. The metal body of the car and metal case on the computer is a pretty good shield.
The laws of physic don't care what you believe turtlevette, the laws of physics go on regardless.
[video:youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aj54FcI7_dE
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a...sing-radio-beam
s.html
It takes a lot of power to do that. In the case of a nuke going off I stand by my belief.
That being said I have been saving my old non computer suburban for the zomby apocalypse.
Last edited:
You do realize the EMP is actually more effective when done at a significant altitude, as in orbital altitudes, do you not? You sure as heck wouldn't get your head taken off, but any semi-modern electronics would be finished, including any vehicle from the last several decades.
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
I don't believe in emp. If a nuke is close enough to generate that much magnetism, you'll also feel enough blast to take your head off. The metal body of the car and metal case on the computer is a pretty good shield.
Actually, a nuke does not cause EMP by itself. A nuke has to be detonated in the ionosphere, which causes the charged particles in the ionosphere to move, and that movement of charge causes the EMP.
The ionosphere is 37 miles to 620 miles up, so you'll never be near a nuclear blast that would cause EMP.
I don't believe in emp. If a nuke is close enough to generate that much magnetism, you'll also feel enough blast to take your head off. The metal body of the car and metal case on the computer is a pretty good shield.
Actually, a nuke does not cause EMP by itself. A nuke has to be detonated in the ionosphere, which causes the charged particles in the ionosphere to move, and that movement of charge causes the EMP.
The ionosphere is 37 miles to 620 miles up, so you'll never be near a nuclear blast that would cause EMP.
Originally Posted By: Garak
You do realize the EMP is actually more effective when done at a significant altitude, as in orbital altitudes, do you not? You sure as heck wouldn't get your head taken off, but any semi-modern electronics would be finished, including any vehicle from the last several decades.
You guys watch too many doomsday movies. The power needed to create magnetic fields that strong is tremendous.
You do realize the EMP is actually more effective when done at a significant altitude, as in orbital altitudes, do you not? You sure as heck wouldn't get your head taken off, but any semi-modern electronics would be finished, including any vehicle from the last several decades.
You guys watch too many doomsday movies. The power needed to create magnetic fields that strong is tremendous.
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: Garak
You do realize the EMP is actually more effective when done at a significant altitude, as in orbital altitudes, do you not? You sure as heck wouldn't get your head taken off, but any semi-modern electronics would be finished, including any vehicle from the last several decades.
You guys watch too many doomsday movies. The power needed to create magnetic fields that strong is tremendous.
http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/us-air-force-confirms-boeings-electromagnetic-pulse-weapon/
http://www.active-duty.com/MI_FCG_FluxCompressionGenerator.htm
Originally Posted By: Garak
You do realize the EMP is actually more effective when done at a significant altitude, as in orbital altitudes, do you not? You sure as heck wouldn't get your head taken off, but any semi-modern electronics would be finished, including any vehicle from the last several decades.
You guys watch too many doomsday movies. The power needed to create magnetic fields that strong is tremendous.
http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/us-air-force-confirms-boeings-electromagnetic-pulse-weapon/
http://www.active-duty.com/MI_FCG_FluxCompressionGenerator.htm
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
You guys watch too many doomsday movies. The power needed to create magnetic fields that strong is tremendous.
And nuclear blasts have that power. You're an engineer. The physics and math shouldn't be beyond you. The stuff has been in the literature for decades, and you can handle Maxwell's equations fine on your own.
Then again, to paraphrase Sheldon Cooper: You know how we're always having to stop and solve differential equations.... Howard doesn't; he's only an engineer.
You guys watch too many doomsday movies. The power needed to create magnetic fields that strong is tremendous.
And nuclear blasts have that power. You're an engineer. The physics and math shouldn't be beyond you. The stuff has been in the literature for decades, and you can handle Maxwell's equations fine on your own.
Then again, to paraphrase Sheldon Cooper: You know how we're always having to stop and solve differential equations.... Howard doesn't; he's only an engineer.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
You guys watch too many doomsday movies. The power needed to create magnetic fields that strong is tremendous.
And nuclear blasts have that power. You're an engineer. The physics and math shouldn't be beyond you. The stuff has been in the literature for decades, and you can handle Maxwell's equations fine on your own.
Then again, to paraphrase Sheldon Cooper: You know how we're always having to stop and solve differential equations.... Howard doesn't; he's only an engineer.
And between you and shannow, which is Sheldon?
These effects diminish as approximately the square of the distance. In a transformer the primary and secondary conductors are very close together and an iron core is needed to support the flux. Thru air the field falls off very quickly. Two wires a few feet apart have a very small effect. Take them 100 feet away and its negligible.
I still maintain if the emp kills your computer, the blast kills you. Its amazing how many nuclear scientists we have here.
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
You guys watch too many doomsday movies. The power needed to create magnetic fields that strong is tremendous.
And nuclear blasts have that power. You're an engineer. The physics and math shouldn't be beyond you. The stuff has been in the literature for decades, and you can handle Maxwell's equations fine on your own.
Then again, to paraphrase Sheldon Cooper: You know how we're always having to stop and solve differential equations.... Howard doesn't; he's only an engineer.
And between you and shannow, which is Sheldon?
These effects diminish as approximately the square of the distance. In a transformer the primary and secondary conductors are very close together and an iron core is needed to support the flux. Thru air the field falls off very quickly. Two wires a few feet apart have a very small effect. Take them 100 feet away and its negligible.
I still maintain if the emp kills your computer, the blast kills you. Its amazing how many nuclear scientists we have here.
The show Mythbusters tested several modern cars on a military base with a emp pulse generator, the worst thing that happened was one car had a CEL come on but they were all drivable.
I'm not a physicist but I know that most modern cars form a Farriday cage, would this be sufficient to protect electronic components?
It seems to protect from lightning quote well..
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ve6XGKZxYxA
It seems to protect from lightning quote well..
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ve6XGKZxYxA
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
I still maintain if the emp kills your computer, the blast kills you. Its amazing how many nuclear scientists we have here.
That's already been demonstrated to be hogwash. You don't get a large N-EMP in a normal airburst. The altitude is crucial for a high energy pulse, and very low-yield devices can generate extremely powerful N-EMPs, particularly if the casing material is thin enough to not absorb too much of the gamma radiation; the peak will be very high, the duration not so much. Your mention of inverse square doesn't mean a lot when well over 90% of the gamma radiation is absorbed by a thick case at the outset and we're surprised that a 1 megaton device doesn't produce a peak burst even twice as powerful as a 10 kiloton device.
A fission device is much more efficient as a N-EMP device than a fusion device. Additionally, you had better brush up on your Maxwell's equations, not to mention the data. According to Glasstone, in his work from the late 1950s and early 1960s, you'll see significantly different rates of drop off depending upon weapon yield and design, not to mention effects due to differences in local magnetic field. The pulse is generated outside the device, not within it, and not necessarily anywhere near it. As has already been alluded to by Skid, it's not the device itself generating the pulse, it's the interaction of the gamma radiation with Earth's magnetic field.
Much of the data from the pre-test-ban early 1960s testing has been declassified. It's out there if you want to look at it, though there is some redacting still evident. Damaging effects on the electronics of that age were noted hundreds of kilometers away from the detonations.
R2d2: That's not quite the same thing, but the point is well taken. We wouldn't necessarily see every vehicle on the road stop in its tracks and us revert to a Stone Age lifestyle. But, the more sensitive the electronic on the car, the worse a time it's likely to have.
Olas: The effectiveness of a Faraday cage depends upon what wavelength it's designed to protect from, and what wavelengths are actually received. But, you are right. The electronics in a car would fare much better inside the car, as they are now, than, say, if all the stuff were concentrated on the roof for some reason, in such a scenario.
I still maintain if the emp kills your computer, the blast kills you. Its amazing how many nuclear scientists we have here.
That's already been demonstrated to be hogwash. You don't get a large N-EMP in a normal airburst. The altitude is crucial for a high energy pulse, and very low-yield devices can generate extremely powerful N-EMPs, particularly if the casing material is thin enough to not absorb too much of the gamma radiation; the peak will be very high, the duration not so much. Your mention of inverse square doesn't mean a lot when well over 90% of the gamma radiation is absorbed by a thick case at the outset and we're surprised that a 1 megaton device doesn't produce a peak burst even twice as powerful as a 10 kiloton device.
A fission device is much more efficient as a N-EMP device than a fusion device. Additionally, you had better brush up on your Maxwell's equations, not to mention the data. According to Glasstone, in his work from the late 1950s and early 1960s, you'll see significantly different rates of drop off depending upon weapon yield and design, not to mention effects due to differences in local magnetic field. The pulse is generated outside the device, not within it, and not necessarily anywhere near it. As has already been alluded to by Skid, it's not the device itself generating the pulse, it's the interaction of the gamma radiation with Earth's magnetic field.
Much of the data from the pre-test-ban early 1960s testing has been declassified. It's out there if you want to look at it, though there is some redacting still evident. Damaging effects on the electronics of that age were noted hundreds of kilometers away from the detonations.
R2d2: That's not quite the same thing, but the point is well taken. We wouldn't necessarily see every vehicle on the road stop in its tracks and us revert to a Stone Age lifestyle. But, the more sensitive the electronic on the car, the worse a time it's likely to have.
Olas: The effectiveness of a Faraday cage depends upon what wavelength it's designed to protect from, and what wavelengths are actually received. But, you are right. The electronics in a car would fare much better inside the car, as they are now, than, say, if all the stuff were concentrated on the roof for some reason, in such a scenario.
I have my bike in the garage...got new tires
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky
