Is it still a 'tin foil hat fantasy' if the ex-CIA Director warns about EMP risk?

[stinkyDrunk]

With all the electronics in my new truck, I'm surprised it survived the 4th of July.

[Abraham]

Redstate,

Thank you!

I appreciate your response.

[Redstate]

You are very welcome, Abraham.

[Straight Shooter]

Since I know next to nothing about EMP strikes: If your vehicle battery is disconnected will it survive EMP?

Also, if it's simply not running is it immune?

Thanks!

Let me give a LITTLE I know having read up on about this subject, after first seeing the author of ONE SECOND AFTER on C-SPAN, then reading the book, his website which is CHOCK FULL of info and I highly, highly recommend it, btw.
MANY tests have been performed to see what all will/wont be running after an EMP. Redstate is 100% right...it just depends on the type, where you are located from the attack, if its natural or manmade. SOME will be affected. As for the power grid...THATS what many/most are worried about, apparently with good reason. It seems to be our weakest point. Other machines and computers would be affected also. No, a car, machine or computer does not have to be running in order to be damaged, from my reading & understanding. Obviously the less electronics a vehicle has, the better.
After reading and studying on this subject now for a few years..Im REALLY surprised we haven't been hit with this yet. WE..our U.S. intelligence...KNOWS that our enemies know about this, and how to do it. The surprising thing I found out was, the smaller the bomb, the more EMP damage it does. A suitcased sized nuke that popped right over mid America would be devasting. I really do suggest going to author William R. Forstchen's website, as he is considered the eminent word on EMP, having testified in front of Congress and others begging them to harden the power grid.

[Redstate]

Straight Shooter, thanks for the suggestion to visit Forstchen's website. Good information.

[nova3930]

A Carrington Event is far more likely than an EMP nuke because to do that would be suicide.

I hadn't even thought about a solar storm of that magnitude but the coronal mass ejection in 1859 knocked out Telegraph service to varying degrees all over the country.


Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

[nova3930]

Since I know next to nothing about EMP strikes: If your vehicle battery is disconnected will it survive EMP?

Also, if it's simply not running is it immune?

Thanks!

No. The issue is the magnetic field Flux induces currents in the circuits that exceed their capacity. The smaller the wires in the circuits, the more vulnerable they are due to less current capacity. Since modern microchips are collections of extremely small wires they're generally very vulnerable unless appropriately shielded. Conversely old tech like vacuum tubes is pretty resilient.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

[nova3930]

Let me give a LITTLE I know having read up on about this subject, after first seeing the author of ONE SECOND AFTER on C-SPAN, then reading the book, his website which is CHOCK FULL of info and I highly, highly recommend it, btw.
MANY tests have been performed to see what all will/wont be running after an EMP. Redstate is 100% right...it just depends on the type, where you are located from the attack, if its natural or manmade. SOME will be affected. As for the power grid...THATS what many/most are worried about, apparently with good reason. It seems to be our weakest point. Other machines and computers would be affected also. No, a car, machine or computer does not have to be running in order to be damaged, from my reading & understanding. Obviously the less electronics a vehicle has, the better.
After reading and studying on this subject now for a few years..Im REALLY surprised we haven't been hit with this yet. WE..our U.S. intelligence...KNOWS that our enemies know about this, and how to do it. The surprising thing I found out was, the smaller the bomb, the more EMP damage it does. A suitcased sized nuke that popped right over mid America would be devasting. I really do suggest going to author William R. Forstchen's website, as he is considered the eminent word on EMP, having testified in front of Congress and others begging them to harden the power grid.

I think the only thing that has saved us is that at the moment it's damn hard to generate an EMP of any size short of lighting off a nuke at altitude.

You can use what are called Flux compression generators but one would have to be massive to cause much more than a localized effect.

That being said I'm surprised we havn't seen one lit off at some strategic point, say a communications node for the financial markets or something similar. Some place that could cause chaos via the secondary effects.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

[Straight Shooter]

Straight Shooter, thanks for the suggestion to visit Forstchen's website. Good information.

My pleasure sir! He is considered THE expert/go-to -guy on the subject of EMP.

[Koshinn]

The surprising thing I found out was, the smaller the bomb, the more EMP damage it does.

That's only sort of true.

Small (10ish kt) fission weapons are more efficient at emp generation, but produce less overall emp than larger fission weapons. Fission/fusion weapons are very inefficient because of the reaction used, but still produce more emp.

It's basically diminishing returns in emp vs warhead yield, but a smaller weapon is not "better" on a 1 to 1 comparison.

That being said I'm surprised we havn't seen one lit off at some strategic point, say a communications node for the financial markets or something similar. Some place that could cause chaos via the secondary effects.

Because of weapons grade nuclear material were easy to produce, a nation state like Iran would have a whole lot of it by now.

And even if you make a simple nuclear device, rocket science is literally rocket science. The world saw the first nuclear weapons around the time it saw its first ballistic missiles. Missiles are complex and expensive.

And finally, if you were a terrorist that had a nuclear warhead AND a missile capable of going from the coast to some place over the middle of the USA... don't you think you'd use it to directly strike the DC area instead?

Basically, terrorist goals are better served by actually destroying a city and causing millions of casualties while also skipping the steps of acquiring a missile, launching it correctly, and hoping it doesn't get shot down.

And it's not like you need nukes nor emp to take down the US power grid.