# A little myth busting on EMP.



## FrankW

A)
Automotive ECU's are semi hardened. So don't expect all modern vehicles to be knocked out.
As for those who were shut off expect near total survival, of those running during the event, you cna still expect many to still work just fine.

Why are automotive ECU's hardened?
because of the activity of alternator and radios and ignition systems , they act like a constant EMP on the cars computer systems.

To offer the reliability modern cars have, ECU's are hardened to a certain extent.
(This does *not *mean that roads in vicitinty of an EMP wont be in a traffic jams for days, as even , for example, only 5% stopped cars due to EMP will cause a nearly uncurable traffic jam that will last long enough for many people to have to leave their cars..... for bathroom and drink and etc etc, and this will self perpetuate the traffic jam nearly indefinetly)

B) Don't expect Terrorists to be able to set off an EMP device that will blanket hundreds of miles of the US with EMP.

To accomplish this, altitudes and explosive yields are needed that can only be accomplished by a nation state level design <and> employment.
So if you fear EMP due to "the terrorists" scratch that.

Cheers,

Eric


----------



## Tweto

BlueZ said:


> A)
> Automotive ECU's are semi hardened. So don't expect all modern vehicles to be knocked out.
> As for those who were shut off expect near total survival, of those running during the event, you cna still expect many to still work just fine.
> 
> Why are automotive ECU's hardened?
> because of the activity of alternator and radios and ignition systems , they act like a constant EMP on the cars computer systems.
> 
> To offer the reliability modern cars do ECU's are hardened to a certain extent.
> (This does *not *mean that roads in vicitinty fo an EMP wont be in a traffic jams for days as even a 5% stopped cars due to EMP will cause a nearly uncurable traffic jam that will last long enough for many people to have to leave their cars..... for bathroom and drink and etc etc, which will self perpetuate the traffic jam nearly indefinetly)
> 
> B) Don't expect Terrorists to be able to set off an EMP device that will blanket hundreds of miles of the US with EMP.
> 
> To accomplish this, altitudes and explosive syeilds are needed that can only be accomplished by a nation state level design <and> employment.
> So if you fear EMP due to "the terrorists" scratch that.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Eric


BlueZ;

I have been looking for trust worthy info on the EMP issue and have not been that successful. Where did you get your information? The best that I can come up with is that no one is sure what will happen.:dunno:


----------



## FrankW

Tweto said:


> . Where did you get your information? :


Until recently I made my living researching and answering these kind of questions for senior descion makers on the state level..


----------



## Padre

*Think your wrong Newbe*



BlueZ said:


> Until recently I made my living researching and answering these kind of questions for senior descion makers on the state level..


I used to sit next to the intel and mil affairs people at my office at the federal level and they seemed to think the issue was more pressing....

Sadly, I don't think you are correct. I read the study that it seems everyone wants to quote, which ITSELF notes that: "The field strengths of such weapons may be much higher than those used by the Commission for testing threshold failure levels of electrical system components and subsystems."

Its nice to know that a 50kv/m field won't effect modern cars, if you are talking about a strategic weapon or the SUN 100 to 200 kv/m could be reached. That's why the Army tests at 100kv/m. The results:


----------



## FrankW

Padre,

your observation is entirely correct and this <is> a concern when dealing with nation states capabilities as we are all well aware, _however please read the closing paragraph of the post,_ I believe it was clarified that this was aimed at the popular fear mongering regarding "the terrorists" using EMP on any scale.


----------



## Tirediron

BlueZ said:


> Until recently I made my living researching and answering these kind of questions for senior descion makers on the state level..


With this kind of information everybody is screwed, I have had personal experience with ECU major malfunction from just a few volts over or under charge, maybe you should do a bit more research. :scratch


----------



## FrankW

Tirediron said:


> With this kind of information everybody is screwed, I have had personal experience with ECU major malfunction from just a few volts over or under charge, maybe you should do a bit more research. :scratch


Nothing is absolute and ECU's do break..
when you re-read the post I think you will find that is exactly what was stated.

Nowhere is it said that an ECU will never get "fried"

When we deal with complicated subjects I think it is important we use language as exactly as possible and also pay attention to the exact meaning that is being conveyed.

Having said that, absolute certainty is always difficult to come by but by-and-large the widespread "angst" that the popular press created on this subject is decidedly misplaced.


----------



## horseman1946

I tend to disagree with BlueZ, based on my experience in the military. EMP is not often discussed by the military, reason being most military vehicles, aircraft, and other electronics are not hardened. Reason: expense.

I do think we have a reason to fear EMP, and I agree it won't come from a terrorist group, it will come from a terrorist nation state such as Iran or North Korea. Also, if we keep pulling Putin's chain, he just might help someone out with the task of taking the Great Satan down.

We might have some people out there as well, such as Pakistan and India, as well as Turkey, that we think are our friends, but would be willing to take us down. As usual, there are a lot more governments on this planet that dislike us than there are that like us.

Finally, does countries like South Africa have nukes? Also, EU countries such as France are prone to a Muslim takeover of their government due to the numbers of immigrants they have accepted. I realize that France is a far out idea, but who knows what groups could get assistance if the major players in a government are Muslims?

I read too much.


----------



## FrankW

Actually what you wrote doesnt disagree with what I wrote 
So I wont reply too much..



BTW South Africa gave up its Nukes.
And Russia is more capitalist that then USA, the only conflict we have with them is what we choose to create.


----------



## Magus

So wiring a Faraday cage into my Mazda is useless then? <_<


----------



## FrankW

There is scant need for it (and its effectiveness is dubious) 
Spend those resources on something more down-to-earth



PS: I know EMP is a fun subject to think bout though..


----------



## Padre

BlueZ said:


> Padre,
> 
> your observation is entirely correct and this <is> a concern when dealing with nation states capabilities as we are all well aware, _however please read the closing paragraph of the post,_ I believe it was clarified that this was aimed at the popular fear mongering regarding "the terrorists" using EMP on any scale.


I did in fact read it and I do take some issue with even that consideration. While I agree that concern with state sponsored attacks (OR naturally occurring EMP events) are most SERIOUS, page 18 of the EMP commission report notes that the info is readily available about how to make these weapons, and has been for over 25 years, AND that today's yields could greatly exceed the parameters of their testing. Granted most terrorist would not be able to position a true HEMP at a high-altitude, but given their recent use of air planes they could get a device high enough to do some broad spread damage provided their bomb had a high enough field strength.

And, lets not forget the very real specter of state sponsored terrorism. What technologically they might not be able to do on their own, with support and/or financing who is to say they can't detonate a modern HEMP?


----------



## FrankW

padre:

I appreciate your willingness to really sink your teeth into the subject.
But the more time you spend with this subject and the more you learn about it, you will realize how much of a stretch a terrorist ever doing that is.:beercheer:


----------



## Zanazaz

First of all I encourage everyone on the forum to do their own research regarding EMP and HEMP, and how well automobiles are protected. What did President Reagon used to say? Trust but verify. I'm sure BlueZ means well, but the research I'm doing suggests that the ECU ( Engine Control Unit ), and the TCU, ABS etc. is primarily hardened against EMI ( Electromagnetic Interference ), which can come from many different sources and not just the engine itself. EMP/HEMP will be much worse.

Here's some info from wikipedia...



> *Electromagnetic interference *(or EMI, also called radio frequency interference or RFI when in high frequency or radio frequency) is disturbance that affects an electrical circuit due to either electromagnetic induction or electromagnetic radiation emitted from an external source.[1] *The disturbance may interrupt, obstruct, or otherwise degrade or limit the effective performance of the circuit. These effects can range from a simple degradation of data to a total loss of data.* [2] The source may be any object, artificial or natural, that carries rapidly changing electrical currents, such as an electrical circuit, the Sun or the Northern Lights.





> An *electromagnetic pulse *(sometimes abbreviated EMP) is a burst of electromagnetic radiation. The abrupt pulse of electromagnetic radiation usually results from certain types of high energy explosions, especially a nuclear explosion, or from a suddenly fluctuating magnetic field. The resulting rapidly-changing electric fields and magnetic fields may couple with electrical/electronic systems to *produce damaging current and voltage surges*.


So in my opinion there is a big difference between EMI and EMP.

This is from a PDF I found online, EMP Mitigation - Protecting Land Mobile Vehicles from HEMP Threat Environment. It's written by Mark Hendricks, Engineering Program Manager
Transtector | PolyPhaser, Protection Technology Group.



> However, with sensitive computer systems being scattered around the vehicle, each of them needing it's own Faraday construct and rigorous filtering of all wire penetrations, the sheer complexity of the protection design challenges the practicality of EMP hardening of land mobile vehicles.


Does anyone here really think that the major automotives companies want the expense of manufacturing vehicles that are hardened against EMP/HEMP? Are you willing to pay for that expense? The ECU, etc. has to be protected from EMI, for one reason it's required, and the second reason the computers would go out at inconvenient times. If your going downhill near a radio broadcast tower you don't want your brakes going out!

I'm not worried about terrorists detonating a HEMP. They would have to be some really skilled and well supplied terrorists to pull that off. It just ain't happening. However, one of our "frenemies" can, and when push comes to shove it's a good way to do a lot of damage to the USA. One, or multiple HEMP strikes will do a lot of infrastructure damage. Add some terrorists detonating dirty bombs, and using bioweapons, and can you say OUCH?

The general consensus is that it takes 40,000 hours to become an expert at something. I'm by no means an expert when it comes to EMP/HEMP, but I have done quite a bit of research, and I'm still learning. Every here needs to do their own research, at least to level they are satisfied with. Me? I'm not trusting the automotive companies to have my best interest at heart.


----------



## Padre

I sank my teeth into it a long time ago, back when I first started prepping.

I spent 10 years involved with issues Homeland Security related before we called it Homeland Security and did a lot of work on NBC preparedness for the Federal Government back in the 90s when everyone thought I was crazy to be worried about that stuff. I proposed those NBC respirators that we all got after the Anthrax incident four years before they stuffed a bag full of them into every federal office. Never once did I tell them, "I told you so." My claim to fame was three months spent trying to convince the Congress that the Department of Homeland Security was a bad idea. I never did understand how 8 new layers of bureaucracy and a new government rent-a-cop agency was going to make us safer. Anyway I left soon after I lost that fight and haven't done much research in the area in ten years now.

Technologically it seems like if anything it has become easier to make a EMP device--and our war-mongering the world over isn't winning us any popularity contests--so if anything it seems like its now more likely that terrorist use an EMP. Clearly state sponsors of terrorism would be more likely to give a terrorist an EMP or two (or the materials to make them) that could wipe out half our infrastructural and deal a death blow to American Empire than a bomb no matter how big that could wipe out only a city and serve to only wake the angry beast. 

So unless your suggesting that our safe-guards at the boarder and at our ports are now so much better than they were 10 years ago, and they were pretty bad back then, then I can't agree that its any more a stretch than terrorists flying planes into buildings.


----------



## Zanazaz

I'm still researching this so there may be some inaccuracies and outright mistakes...



Padre said:


> I sank my teeth into it a long time ago, back when I first started prepping.
> 
> I spent 10 years involved with issues Homeland Security related before we called it Homeland Security and did a lot of work on NBC preparedness for the Federal Government back in the 90s when everyone thought I was crazy to be worried about that stuff. I proposed those NBC respirators that we all got after the Anthrax incident four years before they stuffed a bag full of them into every federal office. Never once did I tell them, "I told you so." My claim to fame was three months spent trying to convince the Congress that the Department of Homeland Security was a bad idea. I left soon after I lost that fight and have done much research in the area in ten years now.
> 
> Technologically it seems like if anything it has become easier to make a EMP device--and our war-mongering the world over isn't winning us any popularity contests--so if anything it seems like its now more likely that terrorist use an EMP. Clearly state sponsors of terrorism would be more likely to give a terrorist an EMP or two (or the materials to make them) that could wipe out half our infrastructural and deal a death blow to American Empire than a bomb no matter how big that could wipe out only a city and serve to only wake the angry beast.
> 
> So unless your suggesting that our safe-guards at the boarder and at our ports are now so much better than they were 10 years ago, and they were pretty bad back then, then I can't agree that its any more a stretch than terrorists flying planes into buildings.


Padre, I'm not sure who you were responding to, but I did a little research and this is what I found concerning EMP/HEMP and nukes dropped from airplanes. The gist of it is, that most planes can't fly high enough to cause EMP and definitely not a HEMP, at least not one affecting a large area.

Many nuclear detonations have taken place using bombs dropped by aircraft.


> The B-29 aircraft that delivered the nuclear weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not lose power due to damage to their electrical or electronic systems. This is simply because electrons (ejected from the air by gamma rays) are stopped quickly in normal air for bursts below roughly 10 km (about 6 miles), so they do not get a chance to be significantly deflected by the Earth's magnetic field (the deflection causes the powerful EMP seen in high altitude bursts), thus the limited use of smaller burst altitudes for widespread EMP.[26]
> 
> If the aircraft carrying the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs had been within the intense nuclear radiation zone when the bombs exploded over those cities, then they would have suffered effects from the charge separation (radial) EMP. But this only occurs within the severe blast radius for detonations below about 10 km altitude.


 -wikipedia

The nuclear weapon has to be detonated 250 to 312 miles above the Earth's surface to cause a continent wide EMP.

So, while a nuke dropped from a plane or jet, or even detonated in flight, will do a lot of damage it won't cause much, if any EMP. And thats what the OP was talking about. ( Unless I am mistaken? ). A terrorist caused EMP event.


----------



## TheVillageFarmer

Wow. I joined this forum partly to educate myself on many different subjects at different levels. This has been very informative. The troubling thing I realize is the more I learn the more I don't KNOW! Thanks for a lot of good info.


----------



## FrankW

Zanass: Good points all and great references thank you.

No one is arguing that a civilian car is properly EMP hardened .. 
but that the inherent hardening that you do against EMI 
Make no mistake an ECU is not certified EMP harded or any such thing. It is just that we are trying to put theses effects into perspective and it is not as easy and far reaching as made out in the popular press especially if your concern is a terrorist device..


----------



## FrankW

Padre said:


> I sank my teeth into it a long time ago, back when I first started prepping.
> 
> I spent 10 years involved with issues Homeland Security related before we called it Homeland Security and did a lot of work on NBC preparedness for the Federal Government back in the 90s when everyone thought I was crazy to be worried about that stuff. I proposed those NBC respirators that we all got after the Anthrax incident four years before they stuffed a bag full of them into every federal office. Never once did I tell them, "I told you so." My claim to fame was three months spent trying to convince the Congress that the Department of Homeland Security was a bad idea. I never did understand how 8 new layers of bureaucracy and a new government rent-a-cop agency was going to make us safer. Anyway I left soon after I lost that fight and haven't done much research in the area in ten years now.
> 
> Technologically it seems like if anything it has become easier to make a EMP device--and our war-mongering the world over isn't winning us any popularity contests--so if anything it seems like its now more likely that terrorist use an EMP. Clearly state sponsors of terrorism would be more likely to give a terrorist an EMP or two (or the materials to make them) that could wipe out half our infrastructural and deal a death blow to American Empire than a bomb no matter how big that could wipe out only a city and serve to only wake the angry beast.
> 
> So unless your suggesting that our safe-guards at the boarder and at our ports are now so much better than they were 10 years ago, and they were pretty bad back then, then I can't agree that its any more a stretch than terrorists flying planes into buildings.


Padre I appreciate your input and on many CBRN subjects I suspect you will make a fine SME.
And I agree that our war mongering as you so accurately stated it. makes us no frinds in the world.

But you clearly don't understand the Physics needed to make large scale EMP work properly and the resources needed to make such a device and then the challenges in its deployment.

For a nation state to hand such a multi multi million dollar device that would have taken years and some of their best minds to design and build to a poorly controlled loose cannon terrorist group may be the subject of fun novels but it is not realistic and is not human nature.

Also there are things you need to do to properly use such a deivce w/ regards to altitude of employment that a terrorist group even simply would havent access to, even if such a device magically appeared in their grubby little hands.

this is all I will write on this subject anything further will be just repletion.
And I apologize if it comes across as arrogant it is certainly not intended to.

Cheers:beercheer:


----------



## pawpaw

Good Lawd! What an exchange!
With all the EMPhasis on just the vehicle's ecu, let's not forget that dozens of electronic components that report to it as well. Most are sensors (MAF,MAP,VSS, and on and on).
Who cares if the ECU is hardened? These components dictate if the vehicle runs, & how well.
Never mind that there are diodes in your alternator, and even electronics INSIDE many transmissions.... :surrender:
Hmmm... I think I WILL refurbish that lemon yellow 1972 pinto that a relative is giving to me. If nothing else, it'll freak out all the young 'uns in their Hondas & Acuras, eh?


----------



## Padre

*I think you misunderstand*

As I have noted before, I am not a scientist. My involvement was more on the funding side of the issue, but I have read a good deal about it and sort of understand the basics of the science, I think....



Zanazaz said:


> concerning EMP/HEMP and nukes dropped from airplanes. The gist of it is, that most planes can't fly high enough to cause EMP and definitely not a HEMP, at least not one affecting a large area.
> 
> Many nuclear detonations have taken place using bombs dropped by aircraft. -wikipedia
> 
> The nuclear weapon has to be detonated 250 to 312 miles above the Earth's surface to cause a continent wide EMP.
> 
> So, while a nuke dropped from a plane or jet, or even detonated in flight, will do a lot of damage it won't cause much, if any EMP. And thats what the OP was talking about. ( Unless I am mistaken? ). A terrorist caused EMP event.


I think you aren't understanding the issue, altitude doesn't cause EMP, EMP happens whenever you have a nuclear blast (always and everywhere). It can also be caused by other things. On the ground EMP is limited by the curve of the earth, that's why to be effective on a mass scale it might be detonated higher up. Even an EMP (read nuke) detonated at ground level would knock out the electronics in a 10 sq mile area, although thats not such a big issue given the explosive properties of such a blast.

HEMP is a technical designation of a EMP device (usually a Nuclear Warhead) designed to be detonated a couple hundred miles up so as to not create ANY fallout, with all the nasty side effects, and to create the widest possible effect (due to the curve of the earth and the effects of our magnetic field).

It is unlikely without a state sponsor that terrorists could develop a sophisticated enough missile to launch a device high enough into the stratosphere to technically be called a HEMP.

But, as any nuclear blast has an EMP effect, and the higher you go the further that effect will be felt, detonating a bomb within the atmosphere, though not technically a HEMP would cause wide spread, read hundreds of miles rather than a thousand miles, EMP effects--and have the added effect of radioactive fall out. So in a sense a real HEMP is a better scenario than a EMP detonated in a plane.

BlueZ who I was responding to, made the claim that a terrorist EMP is a non-issue for cars. Given the fact that the only testing out there for cars is based on the observed EMP field of a bomb dropped in 1962 which had a 50,000 v/m effect, and the fact that the field of atomic weapons has come a long way since the 1960s, my point is that its not a trivial issue.


----------



## FrankW

Padre said:


> 1) altitude doesn't cause EMP, EMP happens whenever you have a nuclear blast (always and everywhere). It can also be caused by other things.
> 
> 2)On the ground EMP is limited by the curve of the earth, that's why to be effective on a mass scale it might be detonated higher up.
> 
> 3)HEMP is a technical designation of a EMP device (usually a Nuclear Warhead) designed to be detonated a couple hundred miles up so as to not create ANY fallout, with all the nasty side effects, and to create the widest possible effect (due to the curve of the earth and the effects of our magnetic field).
> 
> 4)t is unlikely without a state sponsor that terrorists could develop a sophisticated enough missile to launch a device high enough into the stratosphere to technically be called a HEMP.
> 
> 5)But, as any nuclear blast has an EMP effect, and the higher you go the further that effect will be felt, detonating a bomb within the atmosphere, though not technically a HEMP would cause wide spread, read hundreds of miles rather than a thousand miles, EMP effects--and have the added effect of radioactive fall out.
> 
> 6)BlueZ who I was responding to, made the claim that a terrorist EMP is a non-issue for cars. Given the fact that the only testing out there for cars is based on the observed EMP field of a bomb dropped in 1962 which had a 50,000 v/m effect, and the fact that the field of atomic weapons has come a long way since the 1960s, my point is that its not a trivial issue.


1) true

2) that's 30-50 % of the reason.

3) true

4) yes that's been my point all along and this is what this discussion was limited to IAW the opening post. (except I will replace "unlikely" with nearly impossible for the device and "unlikely" with "impossible" for its proper employment).

5) partially true: there is a specific optimum altitude in which the greatest possible arc of the atmosphere will be ionized and contribute greatly to the effect and will multiply EMP. This specific altitude is why only competent nation States with robust programs can do this.

6) Almost true. Its not a < significant > issue for cars in a terrorist device which will be much smaller and of course not at the correct altitude and therefore unless your truck is running fairly close to the device you will not likely be affected..

The misconception we need to fight is where the popular press sensationalizes the EMP threat by "the terrorists" which when talking about large area coverage is an essentially non existent threat .

Save your preps for more meaningful+realistic threats : eep:


----------



## Padre

Are you saying that altitude INCREASES voltage and not just range of effectiveness? I have never come across that claim, or perhaps I haven't understood it. If not, if what you are really saying is that an EMP with "large area coverage" is not an issue then I would say, OK, but who cares?



BlueZ said:


> there is a specific optimum altitude in which the greatest possible arc of the atmosphere will be ionized and contribute greatly to the effect and will multiply EMP. This specific altitude is why only competent nation States with robust programs can do this.
> 
> 6) Almost true. Its not a < significant > issue for cars in a terrorist device which will be much smaller and of course not at the correct altitude and therefore unless your truck is running fairly close to the device you will not likely be affected..
> 
> The misconception we need to fight is where the popular press sensationalizes the EMP threat by "the terrorists" which when talking about large area coverage is an essentially non existent threat .
> 
> Save your preps for more meaningful+realistic threats : eep:


Of course you are completely ignoring the possibility that a state provides terrorists with a HEMP, including a small missile system to laungh it to the proper height.

but secondly even granting that HEMP is not a possibility--I don't care if it doesn't effect a "large area" if it does effect me!

The army can produce an EMP --> ON THE GROUND <-- strong enough to fry a car for good. Obviously a non-nuke EMP. I understand that altitude increases range, because of curve of the earth and interaction with the Earth's magnetic field, BUT RANGE a) doesn't matter if it happens in my back yard, and b) can be augmented by multiple devices not just altitude...

"For example, a nuclear explosion at an altitude of 100 kilometers would expose 4 million square kilometers, about 1.5 million square miles, of Earth surface beneath the burst to a range of EMP field intensities." But what about at 10km, whether the exposure decreases proportionately to 400,000 km2 or even exponentially to 40,000, 4,000, or even 400 km2 doesn't really matter if you are in that zone, what matters is how strong a field intensity will be, which is determined by the yield and type of device, and what will be the effects for your own survival. In fact because the distance from the device to the perimeter of the effected area would be significantly less, in the smaller "kill" zone of a low altitude detonation you might expect greater impact per capita on those effected than in the much larger area effected by a HEMP.

Plus, since a low altitude detonation by a terrorist really means A-Bomb, fall out will compound the problem and make bug out much more urgent.

I am not worried about living off the grid, I am worried about getting to my off grid house with my group and my preps, away from most threats. EMP and NBC attack/Plague are the only two scenarios that scare me--I feel pretty well prepped for most other things. So, respectfully, EMP--solar, state sponsored, or terrorist--is something I feel people should consider and spend a little money prepping for.

As I've said before I would feel pretty stupid having a fully stocked Bug out location and dying because I couldn't get to it.

AND yes, I know I should live there, the problem is the things that make it a GREAT bug out spot also make it a lousy spot to find work.


----------



## Magus

For anybody that's still scared, cut a slot in the side of a 50 cal can and bolt it over the sensitive area of your car's ignition and use a 3/16ths" naked copper wire and ground it to the fire wall.Might interfere with some radio signals however.might boost others.depends on the radio.


----------



## HozayBuck

*That's it..the steel shoes are coming off my horse!! all I need is for him to fall over.. *


----------



## Zanazaz

Well... that's frustrating. A post I wrote earlier disappeared. Oh well... Really not feeling up to rewriting it, but I will say this...

The most difficult thing about prepping for EMP is the fact you CAN'T TEST anything you do.

Everything else we can prepare for, we can verify, test, and retest. You can inventory your food and water storage. You can build a sturdy home that can withstand the elements. You can go offgrid, and supply your own power. You can prepare for bioterrorism, and nuclear war. You can train, and learn. You can practice bugging out, or bugging in...

I could go on, but I think everyone understands what I'm saying. The military has the facilities to test their vehicles and how EMP proof they are. We as civilians don't have that option. We can't test our vehicles or our Faraday Cages.

Read up on Faraday Cages. Any "weak point" and everything inside is toast. Most people think anything electronic with vacuum tubes is safe. They are not, they can be affected, but it does take about 100 times the energy that would affect circuits. Interesting note: The smaller the circuitry, the greater it's susceptibilty to EMP.

Am I saying it's not worth doing anything? No. Like I mentioned before, do your own research, and decide what you need to do.


----------



## BillM

*BlueZ*

I appreciate you posting .

I can tell the diffrence between a scientist and a guy who stayed at the "Holiday Inn".

Keep posting !:wave:


----------



## Tweto

I spent a good majority of my adult life working for and with engineering PHD's and the one thing that I learned was that they make mistakes. They all had mountain size ego's and were never wrong (according to them). I was always finding errors in their work and when I pointed it out to them they handled it like an 8 year old.

So I developed a real mistrust of any "expert" on any subject. I have always used multiple independent sources for information and then look for consistant concluesions.

When it comes to the EMP issue, all of the technical papers agree in the general direction that this will be bad. All of the papers disagree on some small technical issues, but none have said that there is nothing to worry about.

Until multiple independant technical papers come out and state that EMP is not an issue will I believe it.


----------



## FrankW

Bill: Thanks! 

Tweto and others:

One of the problems for the general public looking at "different technical papers" is that those are neither written <for> them and are not written for thier exact area of concern.

but I'll provide some examples on what I mean:

a)
I was once called in to assist in a response where the Incident Commander had found a couple 55 Gallon Drums of a substance that when he looked it up int he NIOSH Handbook and it was listed as "Toxic".
So he was really worried and checking to wind direction to see if he wanted to evacuate a nearby development.

He was an intelligent and competent guy.. but as a non chemist he dindt have what I call "proportional judgment"..
The substance was pretty harmless but listed as toxic because when ingested in a certain quantify it could cause injury or be even lethal..

but for this concern it was hamrless enough..

b) Our shop was once working on integrating a chemical sesnor called a GCMS into a environmental analytically lab.
The customer's decsion makers in this gov't organization were laymen and not sure what the sensitive would be.
I told him what a realistic set of numbers would be.

A week later we get a triumphant call. " I called subject matter X and he says your GCMS should have this sensityt of c mg/cubic meter. Not your much higher number!"

However what he failed to do is to properly word his question and then not understand the answer:

He was shopping for a sensor to give to a team that would look at "unknowns" but when he asked his technical experts they told him Otherwise.
Why?
He was asking a Forensic Lab!

They generally know what they are looking for an just want to find out if it there and if so how much.
So they know to set the instrument to the specific mass they were looking for.
You see this is very different to what they were shopping for.. So they didnt know what exact question to ask and when hearing the answer didnt understand what they were told.

(details of the preceding example were changed to not make my idendity too obvious just in case one of my bosses ever reads this)

What was the point of my exmaples?

if you are a layman of a subject it is very easy t fool yourself into thinking you understand something based on a piece of information that may come from a good source but may not be applicable to your exact requirement.

What I have attempted to do with my "myth busting" is to put things into perspective in how it applies to what your requirements challenge

.


----------



## Tirediron

BlueZ said:


> Bill: Thanks!
> 
> Tweto and others:
> 
> One of the problems for the general public looking at "different technical papers" is that those are neither written <for> them and are not written for thier exact area of concern.
> 
> but I'll provide some examples on what I mean:
> 
> a)
> I was once called in to assist in a response where the Incident Commander had found a couple 55 Gallon Drums of a substance that when he looked it up int he NIOSH Handbook and it was listed as "Toxic".
> So he was really worried and checking to wind direction to see if he wanted to evacuate a nearby development.
> 
> He was an intelligent and competent guy.. but as a non chemist he dindt have what I call "proportional judgment"..
> The substance was pretty harmless but listed as toxic because when ingested in a certain quantify it could cause injury or be even lethal..
> 
> but for this concern it was hamrless enough..
> 
> b) Our shop was once working on integrating a chemical sesnor called a GCMS into a environmental analytically lab.
> The customer's decsion makers in this gov't organization were laymen and not sure what the sensitive would be.
> I told him what a realistic set of numbers would be.
> 
> A week later we get a triumphant call. " I called subject amtter X and he says your GCMS should ahve this sensityt of c mg/cubic meter. Not your number!"
> 
> However what he failed to do is to properly formulate his question and then not undertsand the answer:
> He was shopping for a sensor to give to a yet to be stood up team that would look at "unknowns" but when he asked his technical experts they told him Otherwise.
> Why?
> He was asking a Forensic Lab!.
> They generally know what they are looking for an just want to find out if it there and if so how much.
> So they know to set the instrument to the specific mass they were looking for.
> You see this is very different to what they were shopping for.. So they didnt know what exact question to ask and when hearing the answer didnt understand what they were told.
> 
> (details of the preceding example were changed to not make my idendity too obvious just in case one of my bosses ever reads this)
> 
> What was the point of my exmaples?
> 
> if you are a layman of a subject it is very easy t fool yourself into thinking you understand something based on a piece of information that may come from a good source but may not be applicable to your exact requirement.
> 
> What I have attempted to do with my "myth busting" is to put things into perspective in how it applies to what your requirements challenge
> 
> .


You degree(s) is definately not in keyboard manipulation . 
And have you done any real EMP tests on ECU and related sensors / servos or is this all highly educated guess work. 
Were the reports from starfish prime just made up ?? A loaded capacitor drains off, a fried transistor is fried.


----------



## FrankW

Sorry about the typos
I have not done those tests but I have spoken in person to some of the people who have about this subject.

remember I am not saying its a zero problem.

I am just trying to get same proportion into it.
I think most would agree that the majority of us worry about a terrorist IND not an attack by a large well resourced first world nation state (and there are only a very few who are competent to do this).

For the reasons I outlined above such an IND will not produce more than a localized EMP.
And in any event commercial automotive ECU'S are a bit more robust in that respect than many believe.. as discussed further up in the thread.


----------



## Tirediron

I gotta wonder if there are many self driven terrorists, as in not sponsored by a large nation state. Personally I think that we have more to worry about from our sun, the blast from a powerfull solar flare would exceed a nuke effect emp by several magnitudes.


----------



## ntxtrooper

I worked on Mainframe Computers when I was in the AF and they were EMP protected but now I doubt it since most of the computer they use are off the shelve systems.


----------



## sidewinder

The question I've had is the effect of ANY EMP on a system which is not active at the time of occurance/detonation. Would an electronic system which is not ON suffer the same damage as one which is? Judging from previous posts I'm sure no one really has a definitive answer but I'd like to know what you all think.


----------



## Tirediron

sidewinder said:


> The question I've had is the effect of ANY EMP on a system which is not active at the time of occurance/detonation. Would an electronic system which is not ON suffer the same damage as one which is? Judging from previous posts I'm sure no one really has a definitive answer but I'd like to know what you all think.


It is my opinion that if there is voltage high enough to jump a switch gap that it would fry any way, But I am also of the opinion that any length of ground cable could also act as an antenna . the danger of a emp type wave front os that it lasts longer .ie high power over an extended perion unlike lightening which is just a short blast and is concentrated in an arc. "testing" is not really possible unless some one pops the specific type and frequency that would be involved in an attack which is pretty hard to predict. Electronics fail due to power line surges of +20 vac so the chances of them surviving 50,000 volts is pretty slim in my opinion.


----------



## sidewinder

Ok, I can see how that makes sense. Now for the sake of consideration I saw a test, I believe it was on "Future Weapons", in which a car was driven directly under an EMP generator. The running systems of the car were killed instantly but afterwards other systems in the car, power windows and air conditioning, which were not active at the time worked fine. Now, I realize that this had to have been a low power test so as not to reveal/expose too much or cause panic in the viewing public but it raises questions.
Depending on the intensity of the "blast", how much of modern infrastructure would be affected, other than electronics? Does an EMP cause damage to ANY material which electronic circuitry can be made of, even if it is an "inert" state? Will jewelry or zippers become charged momentarily? Wouldn't a Faraday cage become charged, even if grounded?


----------



## Tirediron

A large degree of confusion has been generated by not seperating electrical systems and electronic systems, the car in the documentry was prolly old enough to have had simple contact switch power windows and a similar blower fan control. the fan may have blown air but the A/C didn't work without the engine driving the compressor. 

power surge blows out diodes and transistors unless it is big enough to burn actual wires.

The idea that a point ignition engine would run during an emp blast is also in question because the surge should load up the condenser and render the ignition temporarily inoperative.


----------



## BillM

*Holy Cow !*



sidewinder said:


> Ok, I can see how that makes sense. Now for the sake of consideration I saw a test, I believe it was on "Future Weapons", in which a car was driven directly under an EMP generator. The running systems of the car were killed instantly but afterwards other systems in the car, power windows and air conditioning, which were not active at the time worked fine. Now, I realize that this had to have been a low power test so as not to reveal/expose too much or cause panic in the viewing public but it raises questions.
> Depending on the intensity of the "blast", how much of modern infrastructure would be affected, other than electronics? Does an EMP cause damage to ANY material which electronic circuitry can be made of, even if it is an "inert" state? Will jewelry or zippers become charged momentarily? Wouldn't a Faraday cage become charged, even if grounded?


Holy Cow !

I'm keeping my Hot Pants in the Microwave oven ! :surrender:


----------



## d_saum

BlueZ said:


> Sorry about the typos
> I have not done those tests but I have spoken in person to some of the people who have about this subject.
> 
> remember I am not saying its a zero problem.
> 
> I am just trying to get same proportion into it.
> I think most would agree that the majority of us worry about a terrorist IND not an attack by a large well resourced first world nation state (and there are only a very few who are competent to do this).
> 
> For the reasons I outlined above such an IND will not produce more than a localized EMP.
> And in any event commercial automotive ECU'S are a bit more robust in that respect than many believe.. as discussed further up in the thread.


Ever hear that saying "You don't know, what you don't know"?

Sorry man... but you kind of come off as a snob about this stuff when in actuality, you have no idea what terrorists are actually up to.. and no real idea of exactly what can be purchased on the black market. In the book "One Second After", the author basically lays out how easy it would be to accomplish an EMP attack. You keep talking about it being only a "localized" event, but yet, with even some crappy rockets that only go, say.. 1200 miles or so..ya know what.. scratch that, let's say they only go 600 miles.. They could effectively shut down down over a third of the continental US.. with just one launched off of a container ship right off our coast. A few hundred miles up, and a few hundred miles inland, and it's lights out for a big chunk of the good old USA..

So.. when I take into account that you are not omnipotent, and cannot be absolutely certain what's floating around out there, what the terrorists are really up to, AND.. have not run EMP tests on vehicles... your "myth busting" is not really "busting" anything at all... it's more like a little "EMP guessing and hoping".

You don't know, what you don't know......


----------



## FrankW

The only way you can make decisions is by making a risk analysis based on accurate and widely available information and then apply some basic logic to it.

I showed you a correct risk analysis using accurate information to save you from prepping for one of the least likely scenarios.
It cost me a significant amount of time typing (and editing since it needs to be above reproach accurate) and also extra time answering all sorts of "what iffing" by folks with incomplete information.
This despite no tangible benefit for myself.

Before I went back into gov't I think my company charged $120-200/hr (depending on the SoW) for every hour of my time to explain these kind of things to senior descion makers

If you don't want to use what I am giving you for free , it's up to you.


----------



## BillM

*I apreciate you*



BlueZ said:


> The only way you can make decisions is by making a risk analysis based on accurate and widely available information and then apply some basic logic to it.
> 
> I showed you a correct risk analysis using accurate information to save you from prepping for one of the least likely scenarios.
> It cost me a significant amount of time typing (and editing since it needs to be above reproach accurate) and also extra time answering all sorts of "what iffing" by folks with incomplete information.
> This despite no tangible benefit for myself.
> 
> Before I went back into gov't I think my company charged $120-200/hr (depending on the SoW) for every hour of my time to explain these kind of things to senior descion makers
> 
> If you don't want to use what I am giving you for free , it's up to you.


I apreciate your analistic expertise. No one can prepair for everything that is possable. I only want to prepair for what is probable.

You have made a living doing probability studys in the scientific field and your expertise is appreciated by myself and many others.

There are always people who will argue with you and you won't ever convince them diffrently.


----------



## FrankW

Thanks Bill!:wave:


----------



## JoKing

d_saum said:


> So.. when I take into account that you are not omnipotent......


Heh Heh. You said "potent". Heh Heh.


----------



## SixGun

Thank you Bluez and Padre for your opinions. I am very interested in EMP's and the reason I even joined this forum.
Everyone has an opinion and I like reading them.

However, in 1940-41 the US Navy said Pearl Harbor could never be torpedo'ed because of the depth....Big difference between a torpedo in the water and a EMP, but the reasons are one of the same...It could never happen.


----------



## d_saum

SixGun said:


> Thank you Bluez and Padre for your opinions. I am very interested in EMP's and the reason I even joined this forum.
> Everyone has an opinion and I like reading them.
> 
> However, in 1940-41 the US Navy said Pearl Harbor could never be torpedo'ed because of the depth....Big difference between a torpedo in the water and a EMP, but the reasons are one of the same...It could never happen.


Exactly... Prepare for the worst, hope for the best! :beercheer:


----------



## Ezmerelda

HozayBuck said:


> *That's it..the steel shoes are coming off my horse!! all I need is for him to fall over.. *


Oh, Hozay, you are SOOOO funny! :lolsmash:


----------



## cqp33

I think the biggest problem is no one really knows for sure! If a few smaller ones were used in strategic positions throughout the country it could cause failure of the power grid all together. The effects would be staggering for those that were local to the "positions" but for the entire country the effects would only be days long until power would be flowing again (such that happened in great blackout in the northeast about 5-10 years ago)! Unless there were a few placed around that were not quite the 200 miles up but say there were 4 or 5 that were 55 miles up in "strategic" locations near the power hungry centers of the country! For a few crazy folks, they might be able to get some to that altitude but only a handful of countries could put one higher then that but then again who can we trust?


----------



## Autumnvicky

It could be a mass attack, first lights out, then foreign country ships landing/attacking during our moment of weakness. We wouldn't be able to properly fight back, or send warning to eachother. Taken by surprise. :surrender:


----------



## Tweto

cqp33 said:


> I think the biggest problem is no one really knows for sure! If a few smaller ones were used in strategic positions throughout the country it could cause failure of the power grid all together. The effects would be staggering for those that were local to the "positions" but for the entire country the effects would only be days long until power would be flowing again (such that happened in great blackout in the northeast about 5-10 years ago)! Unless there were a few placed around that were not quite the 200 miles up but say there were 4 or 5 that were 55 miles up in "strategic" locations near the power hungry centers of the country! For a few crazy folks, they might be able to get some to that altitude but only a handful of countries could put one higher then that but then again who can we trust?


I don't think that the enemy would need an EMP attack to bring down the power grid.

One, if the towers for a few high voltage power lines were brought down it could set off a cascade affect and shut down a large portion of the grid.

Two, on the news show 60 mins, they had a section (about 3-5 years ago)about the power grid and how a power company programer had found computer worms in most of the control systems that can be controlled from any PC to shut down the system. The power people had no idea how long the worms had been in the programing or if the worm they found was just a distraction to keep the them from finding the real virus. None of the computer worms had ever been activated and if they had the whole system would have went down. Some group or government had or has some really big plans ahead for the US.


----------



## FrankW

I finally read that book " One second after" now I understand why many folks are riled up.

I finally found an open source reference and I am not going to spend more time on educating folks w/ regards to EMP and the Angst w/ regards to vehicles.
yes EMP can be very bad IF somecould pull it off. 
BUT when it comes to vehicles or electronics that are swicthed off its NOT like in the book.

Here is a good source if you didnt believe my orignal summary above of what we know about EMP.... hopefully you are willing to do the actual reading..then you will be able to put your prepper money into more useful things than an "EMP proof" vehicle.
http://empcommission.org/


----------



## kejmack

BlueZ said:


> A)
> Automotive ECU's are semi hardened. So don't expect all modern vehicles to be knocked out.
> As for those who were shut off expect near total survival, of those running during the event, you cna still expect many to still work just fine.
> 
> Why are automotive ECU's hardened?
> because of the activity of alternator and radios and ignition systems , they act like a constant EMP on the cars computer systems.
> 
> To offer the reliability modern cars have, ECU's are hardened to a certain extent.
> (This does *not *mean that roads in vicitinty of an EMP wont be in a traffic jams for days, as even , for example, only 5% stopped cars due to EMP will cause a nearly uncurable traffic jam that will last long enough for many people to have to leave their cars..... for bathroom and drink and etc etc, and this will self perpetuate the traffic jam nearly indefinetly)
> 
> B) Don't expect Terrorists to be able to set off an EMP device that will blanket hundreds of miles of the US with EMP.
> 
> To accomplish this, altitudes and explosive yields are needed that can only be accomplished by a nation state level design <and> employment.
> So if you fear EMP due to "the terrorists" scratch that.


Unfortunately, the government, the EMP Commission, the military, and others contradict everything you say.

We have a NASA engineer in our MAG group and he considers it a very serious threat. Enough of a threat that he and his family have a BOL 5 hours from Houston.


----------



## FrankW

kejmack said:


> Unfortunately, the government, the EMP Commission, the military, and others contradict everything you say.
> 
> We have a NASA engineer in our MAG group and he considers it a very serious threat. Enough of a threat that he and his family have a BOL 5 hours from Houston.


Uhm no the "gov't", "the military" does not contradict what I say.
"The gov't" incidentally has paid me a lot of money back when I was a civlian to be a Science Advisor to major acquistion programs so lthe gov't acquisition folks, wouldnt get confused by asking imprecise questions of researchers and then promptly misunderstanding their correct answer.

This happens all the time even when both parties are fully scientifically literate.
And this is what happening here with all this bizzare pushback in this thread on 100% accucarate info.

And one of the co-authors of that empcommission study works only 3 floors below me!!!

I talked to him about this over a year ago when I conducted a study on another related subject to get a second opnion on something and EMP and vehicles came up as an aside.
I was unsure if the study wasn't classified so was leery to quote it but now that I know for sure its open source I dont worry about it.

if you bother to read and understand the open source reports on this subject yourself, have at it please.
http://empcommission.org/

Language means something and that is why it is important to be precise about what you say and also precise in what the answer actually says ,.. so lets try this again:

Is EMP a threat to our electronic infrastructure? Yes
Does EMP bust the ECUs of running vehicles? , very rarely.
Does EMP bust the ECU of shut off vehicles, emphatically no.

That's the way it is. 
No amount of myth quoting or wishing for a fun hobby of finding an "EMP Proof" vehicle will make it so.

PS: When I first discovered this forum I was going to write a few WMD articles here, but have decided not to bother, as frankly responses like yours are very discouraging.


----------



## Padre




----------



## FrankW

That link is very cute but not very meaningful as it is obvious some sensationalized popularized nonsense.

Being able to make this happen in one car for a show is meaningless.

If "Fred Levien" was a foremost world expert as the vid claims, why doesnt he work at DTRA or USANCA or the DNWS (BTW I work at one of the 3 and trained/studied at both others)

..or why isnt he a co author of the EMP commission? ?

it is a very very poor video with very low information content, that I couldnt get myself to watch more than the 1st 3rd of it........... was so obvious form the scary music.. the tone of the announcer..... the simple leading and open ended questions..


ok, I just went and watched some more, though it was painful:

The guy is obviously a crackpot, who will likely have a hard time finding a job where the grownups work, once the hiring authority sees this gibberish..
A can sized directed EMP weapon???

Though with a sensationlized misinforming (and misinformed) media like this, I cant blame you guys for getting excited about it . (sigh)


----------



## Padre

BlueZ said:


> I finally read that book " One second after" now I understand why many folks are riled up.
> 
> I finally found an open source reference and I am not going to spend more time on educating folks w/ regards to EMP and the Angst w/ regards to vehicles.
> yes EMP can be very bad IF somecould pull it off.
> BUT when it comes to vehicles or electronics that are swicthed off its NOT like in the book.
> 
> Here is a good source if you didnt believe my orignal summary above of what we know about EMP.... hopefully you are willing to do the actual reading..then you will be able to put your prepper money into more useful things than an "EMP proof" vehicle.
> http://empcommission.org/


For a science guy you continue to compare apples to orange's Dr. William Forstchen writes his fiction to inform readers about the threat of HEMP. His scenario is a HEMP releasing three times the amount of voltage per meter as the EMP commissions tests, meaning that their tests don't apply to the situation.

BTW I can't believe you are still at this...


----------



## FrankW

The study makes some pretty good assumptions and explantions.

I can only ask folks if you are really concerned about this to read it completely.

About Forstchen; I always enjoyed his books especially "the lost regiment series" and he is obviously a prepper and clearly an all around great guy.

But his degrees are in psychology and history, he is NOT a "USAF EMP Expert" though his point about EMP effects on an industrial society such as ours is well taken and largely correct.

What we need to correct however, is the mistaken notion about "all vehicles ECU will be fried even the ones that are shut off"

I dont want to add anything more or it would just be repition..

PS: Why am I "still" at it? I hate to see my fellow board members wasting valubale $$ on pursuing 'EMP proof" vehicles when this threat to vehicles is negligible and there are real fish to fry elsewhere.


----------



## kejmack

BlueZ said:


> Uhm no the "gov't", "the military" does not contradict what I say.
> "The gov't" incidentally has paid me a lot of money back when I was a civlian to be a Science Advisor to major acquistion programs so lthe gov't acquisition folks, wouldnt get confused by asking imprecise questions of researchers and then promptly misunderstanding their correct answer.
> 
> This happens all the time even when both parties are fully scientifically literate.
> And this is what happening here with all this bizzare pushback in this thread on 100% accucarate info.
> 
> And one of the co-authors of that empcommission study works only 3 floors below me!!!
> 
> I talked to him about this over a year ago when I conducted a study on another related subject to get a second opnion on something and EMP and vehicles came up as an aside.
> I was unsure if the study wasn't classified so was leery to quote it but now that I know for sure its open source I dont worry about it.
> 
> if you bother to read and understand the open source reports on this subject yourself, have at it please.
> http://empcommission.org/
> 
> Language means something and that is why it is important to be precise about what you say and also precise in what the answer actually says ,.. so lets try this again:
> 
> Is EMP a threat to our electronic infrastructure? Yes
> Does EMP bust the ECUs of running vehicles? , very rarely.
> Does EMP bust the ECU of shut off vehicles, emphatically no.
> 
> That's the way it is.
> No amount of myth quoting or wishing for a fun hobby of finding an "EMP Proof" vehicle will make it so.
> 
> PS: When I first discovered this forum I was going to write a few WMD articles here, but have decided not to bother, as frankly responses like yours are very discouraging.


*Touchy, aren't we?! *


----------



## kejmack

BlueZ, you joined this forum back in March and even in August when you answered a discussion about an EMP proof BOV you talked about using a bicycle... never once mentioned anything about being an alleged expert on EMPs. Now suddenly, you are an expert and posting that there is nothing to worry about. Just wondering why all the sudden?


----------



## FrankW

This thread is not about me but about EMP.
But it is true bicycles are great vehicles not only "EMP proof" but use no gas.

This thread about EMP was one of my very first ones and of courseEMP is not "nothing to worry about".
Thats whats I mean, when I say its important to be very specific in the use of language ... what I _am_ trying to clarify are the misconceptions here about EMP and vehicles.
This that has the potential of being a very expensive and uneeded form of prepping and as a public service I am trying to correct it.

As for not everday bringing this up, it is easier not to fight with folks.

Actually it would be a stretch to call me an EMP expert, I am merely EMP literate by the standards of my agency, and about previous discussions; I am generally very uncomfortable with advertising my professional background too specifically and prefer to let post-content stand for itself.

Maybe I already regret volunteering as much personal info as I did, but its done.


----------



## Tirediron

Governments have also had experts that assured them that gun control laws lowered the amount of gun related crimes, BlueZ, I hope that you are right about EMP s being less harmfull, but as I stated beroe I have seen the results of a few as in 5 volts higher line voltage confusing the crap out of class 8 truck ECM to the point that the engine died, and total brain failure on others, mostly newer than 2005 so about as modern as you will get.


----------



## seanallen

Yeah ive considered emp effects on modern vehicles. Been DELUGED with info by semi-crazy conspiracy nuts. Simple cure: my old 68 F100 that runs on points. Yep. Got five extra sets put up as spares.


----------



## Marcus

FWIW, I agree with you BlueZ.

The rocket example used in one of the previous posts was wrong too. The height a rocket achieves is *proportional* to its range as it traces a roughly elliptical path. But range doesn't equal height.

The biggest variant in the effects of an EMP besides distance/ earth curvature is angle of attack since the EMP will radiate out from the point of origin (such as a nuclear detonation.)
Let's postulate that I have a BOV sitting under a metal carport. If an EMP occurs directly overhead (90 degrees), the metal in the carport will provide some protection from the EMP. As the angle of attack decreases, so does the EMP protection offered by the carport. So how can you mitigate the danger? If you know the general direction of an expected EMP, it may be as simple as parking your BOV on the opposite side of the expected attack in a multi-stall carport since that will drastically reduce unfavorable angles of attack. Another option is a metal barn or similar structure. Or you may choose to enclose three sides of the carport. The assumption is that the metal structures will be normally grounded against lightning strikes.


----------



## FrankW

marcus all that works.
The ultimate defense however is to have it be swicthed off when it happens


----------



## labotomi

The effects of electromagnetic fields generated by the equipment in an automobile are not even close to the same as those generated by an emp.

If you limit your statement to a solar CME then I can see where you could make these comments. Suggesting that your car generates all 3 phases of an EMP is not close to accurate. In particular the E1 phase that begins virtually instantaneously with the blast and is the one that is the most likely to cause damage to an automotive system. 

There is nothing in your car that produces a pulse with a rise time of a few nanoseconds... nothing. Alternators can only produce pulses relative to their rotational speed and number of poles and this isn't even close to the nanosecond range. Ignition, while a large charge is built (slowly) and discharged rapidly, the actual current is small any magnetic field built in the ignition wiring is small as well.


I'm no expert and my knowledge of any EMP is cursory, but my career has taken me through 2 fields that overlap in this area... nuclear physics and electrical engineering. I understand the concepts of an EMP on both levels and also understand the workings of an automobile electrical system. 

I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one. I'm not saying that all cars will be damaged as I'm sure some will and some won't, but it's not due to the reasons you cite.


----------



## Startingout-Blair

BlueZ, thank you. I understand what you are trying to say. EMPs could be potentially devastating to the US Grid, but not as devastating to vehicles. Let me know if I understood correctly.


----------



## labotomi

BlueZ said:


> Is EMP a threat to our electronic infrastructure? Yes
> Does EMP bust the ECUs of running vehicles? , very rarely.
> Does EMP bust the ECU of shut off vehicles, emphatically no.


An EMP can produce voltages that will damage semiconductor devices that aren't powered up. An EMP does not need a power supply to augment it's effect.

Powered on or not won't matter significantly to the E1 phase.
It will affect some components during the E2 phase
Disconnecting equipment from the power grid and even your house wiring and is the best way to protect from the E3 phase. Simply turning electronic equipment off will only work if their is an actual physical switch and not just an electronic "standby" such as is on modern televisions, computers, etc.


----------



## FrankW

Startingout-Blair said:


> BlueZ, thank you. I understand what you are trying to say. EMPs could be potentially devastating to the US Grid, but not as devastating to vehicles. Let me know if I understood correctly.


Correct, Sir.


----------



## labotomi

sidewinder said:


> Ok, I can see how that makes sense. Now for the sake of consideration I saw a test, I believe it was on "Future Weapons", in which a car was driven directly under an EMP generator. The running systems of the car were killed instantly but afterwards other systems in the car, power windows and air conditioning, which were not active at the time worked fine. Now, I realize that this had to have been a low power test so as not to reveal/expose too much or cause panic in the viewing public but it raises questions.
> Depending on the intensity of the "blast", how much of modern infrastructure would be affected, other than electronics? Does an EMP cause damage to ANY material which electronic circuitry can be made of, even if it is an "inert" state? Will jewelry or zippers become charged momentarily? Wouldn't a Faraday cage become charged, even if grounded?


The air conditioner and power windows probably are controlled using switches and solenoid relays. Relays are very hardy devices with respect to EMP. The real issue is sensitive semiconductors and the voltages that exceed their maximum values. Many semiconductors will develop what's called pin-holing if the voltage is exceeded by a reasonable amount which causes the semiconductor to allow current to flow unregulated. If voltages are exceeded by a large amount, some semiconductors burst in a mini explosion. I've seen panel doors blown off due to an electrical spike causing damage to one of the SCRs in an industrial inverter.


----------



## d_saum

BlueZ said:


> That link is very cute but not very meaningful as it is obvious some sensationalized popularized nonsense.
> 
> Being able to make this happen in one car for a show is meaningless.
> 
> If "Fred Levien" was a foremost world expert as the vid claims, why doesnt he work at DTRA or USANCA or the DNWS (BTW I work at one of the 3 and trained/studied at both others)
> 
> ..or why isnt he a co author of the EMP commission? ?
> 
> it is a very very poor video with very low information content, that I couldnt get myself to watch more than the 1st 3rd of it........... was so obvious form the scary music.. the tone of the announcer..... the simple leading and open ended questions..
> 
> ok, I just went and watched some more, though it was painful:
> 
> The guy is obviously a crackpot, who will likely have a hard time finding a job where the grownups work, once the hiring authority sees this gibberish..
> A can sized directed EMP weapon???
> 
> Though with a sensationlized misinforming (and misinformed) media like this, I cant blame you guys for getting excited about it . (sigh)


Good grief.. You're such a condescending *expletive*.. 

Here's what I know... EMP is a threat. A very real one. IF we ever get hit with an EMP attack, I'm going to want my vehicle(s) to run. Will an EMP attack fry the electronics? Maybe... I personally believe that anything with a chip in it is toast, but hey.. I'm no expert. That being said, I'd rather have the extra parts stowed away somewhere and not need them, than not have them because some condescending *blank* on a forum said I shouldn't worry about it and spend my money on other things.

Now.. here's what I know that you DON'T know.. I know that you do NOT know WHEN an attack will occur. I also know that you do NOT know where the attack will be located (if not the entire country). You also do NOT know if the EMP attack will be a nuke detonated high up in the atmosphere, or if it will be a specialized EMP device (non-nuclear). You also DO NOT know what the yield will be. So.. with all that you don't know, why on Earth would I listen to you, some smarmy internet forum poster who thinks that he DOES know everything? 

Thanks for all your effort though.. It's fun reading your "Holier than thou" posts. :congrat:


----------



## Marcus

"The range of NNEMP weapons (non-nuclear electromagnetic pulse bombs) is severely limited compared to nuclear EMP."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_pulse#Non-nuclear_electromagnetic_pulse
Unless you live in a densely populated urban area (NYC or similar) or next to a high value target, you're probably safe from NNEMP weapons.

The type of nuclear weapon used also matters greatly. A modern thermonuclear weapon (fission-fusion or fission-fusion-fission) is not the ideal weapon for a HEMP since pre-ionisation can greatly reduce the effects of the E3. The largest fission bomb ever exploded by the US had a yield of 500 kt.


----------



## LincTex

d_saum said:


> I'd rather have the extra parts stowed away somewhere and not need them, than not have them


A typical 70's or 80' US made vehicle will have an electronic voltage regulator and an electronic ignition module. Both are as common as dirt and pretty darn cheap. If you have the proper tools, they are also not difficult to swap out, and easily store in a small ammo can.

A person who really wants to get running again in a hurry (provided the battery didn't get sapped somehow) can easily store a spare voltage regulator (or an entire spare alternator if GM Delco) and a spare distributor. With a few basic tools you can be running again in minutes.

I do not like points, and I see no reason for someone to go out of their way to find a points ignition vehicle when there is no reason to fear electronic ignition.

Good news on the relay hardiness, that means the starter should work fine. What about the ignition coil? They are super-cheap and it wouldn't hurt to have a spare one of those, either.


----------



## headhunter

BlueZ, thank you for posting.
Some time in the past there was a discussion of EMP caused by solar flares. I thought about it and asked about how worried I should be. I wondered if my vehicle was somewhat protected by its metal skin and the fact it is parked in a machine (metal) shed. I also had read that during the sandstorms during the great depression the only way some cars were kept running was by dragging a chain from their axles because the friction with the sand built up too much static and the cars electrical systems would overload. (I realize static is "surface electricity".) Would this mitigate an EMP? I thought about it some more and realized we have day and night and we were headed toward the winter solstice so wouldn't the rotation and revolution of the Earth and the angle of the axis mitigate the threat of solar flares and the resultant EMPs. Perhaps mitigate is incorrect, maybe it should be "reduce the chance a solar flare will affect any one person".
It seemed that was the end of that topic for nothing else was posted. Will the shed and grounding the axle/frame do any good?


----------



## labotomi

headhunter said:


> Some time in the past there was a discussion of EMP caused by solar flares. I thought about it and asked about how worried I should be. I wondered if my vehicle was somewhat protected by its metal skin and the fact it is parked in a machine (metal) shed.


A CME is comparable to the third part of an EMP which causes motion of the Earth's magnetic field. This motion causes voltage to be induced into conductors such as power lines and the longer the lines the more the effects of the magnetic field.

Your car isn't a large enough conductor for a slow moving magnetic field to build up voltages to damaging levels.

The amount of voltage generated is proportional to the strength of the magnetic field (Earths is very low) and speed at which the magnetic field and conductor cross paths (again very slow in this case).

In the Carrington event which everyone references when talking about a solar CME, the equipment was affected because it was connected to long power or telegraph lines.


----------



## Magus

You know, if some people in this thread would stop parroting old "survivalist wives" tales and out of date data[SHIT FROM THE 60'S!!!]AND GO READ THE CURRENT FM manuals or at least the ones newer than a decade, or at least hunt up scientific data that is current, a lot more of us will be alive after the big burn or airburst! go hunt it down and post it, save lives, be a hero behind the scenes and STOP POSTING ANTIQUE DATA THAT WILL GET YOU AND ANYONE WHO'S TOO LAZY TO GO LOOK KILLED!

What a device made in the early 90's would shrug off would melt the same device made today, GO READ!!

Don't look at me to do it,I'm just watching in bitter amusement at some of you old fogies.GO GET UP TO DATE DATA!

Start here:
http://www.greatdreams.com/EMP-protection.html


----------



## Padre

Startingout-Blair said:


> BlueZ, thank you. I understand what you are trying to say. EMPs could be potentially devastating to the US Grid, but not as devastating to vehicles. Let me know if I understood correctly.


My, apologies to BlueZ about one piece of information that I put up that was incorrect. Dr. William Forstchen was niether an EMP specialist nor a Col, I thought I had read that in his bio but seem to be wrong about that.

That minor factual error notwithstanding here is one of the authors of the EMP report explaining why this section of the report has been controversial and can be misleading. Essential he says the EMP test were not "devastating to vehicles" tested because the commission had to pay for any cars they broke and did not have the budget. Thus they purposefully stopped testing at the first sign of damage and rarely reached even the full power of the simulator.



> "The U.S. EMP Commission tested a number of cars and trucks. Although this was the most comprehensive set of tests on vehicles that has been done, *those tests were very poorly done because the Commission was financially responsible for the vehicles*, but did not have the funding to pay for any of the vehicles they tested. The vehicles were borrowed from other government agencies, most vehicles from the Department of Defense; and they had to be returned to those lending agencies in good condition.
> 
> Those vehicles were tested up to the level that some sort of upset occurred, then further testing was stopped on that vehicle. In most cases, after the initial upset occurred, the vehicle could be restarted. In most of the remaining cases where the vehicle could not be immediately restarted, a latch-up had occurred in the electronics, and the battery could be momentarily disconnected to "re-boot" the electronics, and the vehicle could then be restarted. This temporary electronic latch-up failure mode caused by EMP is something that almost never occurs in automobiles during a typical lifetime of operation.
> 
> Only one of the vehicles tested (a pickup) could not be restarted after some minor work, and it had to be towed to the shop for repairs.
> 
> Very few of the vehicles were tested up to the maximum level of the EMP simulator. There was considerable disagreement among Commission staff members about how to report on the testing that had been done. Some EMP Commission staff members believe that the wording of the paragraphs in the EMP Commission's Critical National Infrastructures Report about the effect of EMP on vehicles is quite misleading.
> 
> For an excellent audio discussion the testing done by the Commission on automobiles and trucks, listen to EMPact America Radio Program number 41, which contains a discussion of this matter between the Chairman of the EMP Commission and a prominent staff member of that Commission.
> 
> In particular, the discussion about the testing of vehicles was roughly between the 46 minute and 54 minute marks of this 96-minute program."


----------



## labotomi

Magus said:


> Don't look at me to do it,I'm just watching in bitter amusement at some of you old fogies.GO GET UP TO DATE DATA!
> 
> Start here:
> http://www.greatdreams.com/EMP-protection.html


No offense, but any source that cites "One Second After" as an incentive to protect against EMP (or anything else) is not on my list of sources to be taken seriously.


----------



## Turtle

labotomi said:


> No offense, but any source that cites "One Second After" as an incentive to protect against EMP (or anything else) is not on my list of sources to be taken seriously.


I don't see why the original motivation toward furthering one's knowledge should automatically discount anything learned thereafter. The story that raised my awareness beyond basic common-sense preparations was "Dies The Fire", which is very obviously a work of fiction, relying upon an as-yet undetermined (and likely magical) event to stop technology. I don't rank "magic" as a likely cause for a collapse (note: I did NOT say it is impossible!  who knows?), but that story opened my eyes to how bad things could get.


----------



## labotomi

Turtle said:


> I don't see why the original motivation toward furthering one's knowledge should automatically discount anything learned thereafter. The story that raised my awareness beyond basic common-sense preparations was "Dies The Fire", which is very obviously a work of fiction, relying upon an as-yet undetermined (and likely magical) event to stop technology. I don't rank "magic" as a likely cause for a collapse (note: I did NOT say it is impossible!  who knows?), but that story opened my eyes to how bad things could get.


The book is sensationalist and not close to being accurate with respect to an EMP. This presents it as what "WILL" happen.

Then if you get further into the link, the references cited are a newspaper articles, an text article from a author of gun, self sufficiency and survival books 
and 
Wikipedia

The portion about faraday cages is from a survival shop.

Then it goes on to put out many myths and half truths that Magus decries in the same post. The information contained on and linked to on that site are essentially the same as what is contained in this thread. Some good information and lots of speculation based on bad sources "One Second Beyond" type sensationalistic articles.

Now that I look into it more. I'm not sure if Magus was being serious or facetious.


----------



## FrankW

Labotomi:

Thanks for coming in here fighting the good fight.

Padre: thats an interesting point you raise about the limited number of cars.
Usually when gvot' run such tests one its of strenghts is that they have the resources to do it right.

I will talk to someone about this.

Until then it does seem everyone who I spoke to on this subject who is a bona fide researcher on such effects, seems confident in the conclusions of the commissons report, but perhaps it will bear some more investigating.

I will run your concerns on how far they actually took it, by someone who was involved.
Even so barring some unpredicted breakthough I am very confident w/ regards to switched off vehicles an di personally make no attempt to procure a "Emp proof" vehicles nor do I recommend others to spend resoruces on this that could buy food /water or education for more income (my personal collapse model is one of slow economic decline hence the need to be one of the "haves" via technical degrees)


----------



## Well_Driller

EMP technology is constantly evolving but I think most of the real facts are being kept out of reports. A real EMP attack could be more devastating than a nuclear attack because of the possible effects it could have on electronics, communications, power grids etc. but also nobody really wants to discuss the subject and too some extent, nobody really knows what the extent of damage is that could be done. I really don't think you need to worry about it damaging things like batteries, ignition coils, hard wiring, electric motors, electrical devices that don't have electronic circuit boards. Most modern electronic devices are however made up of components that are very sensitive more so today than a few years ago to even a static discharge. Some of the transistors and especially IC chips are very sensitive to this. They are shipped in anti-static packaging to protect them, and these components are being made smaller yet. I have done some experiments with EMP on a very small level, but it certainly damaging to these devices, and I mean very small and controlled level as I was afraid I of damaging things that I did not intend to fry if you know what I mean. What makes the power grid so vulnerable to it is all the overhead transmissions wires which act as an antenna and if you start inducing currents in thousands of miles of wires the voltage potential there could be enormous. It would also be a DC current and that is what would damage the transformers because they can't deal with such a large influx of DC current. Think of it as a large generator, the more windings you add to it, the more voltage it can produce. It would however take a pretty sophisticated EMP weapon to produce the field strength it would take over such a broad area to produce those effects but I don't think it would be impossible but I do think some of the real details are being kept from us.


----------



## BlueShoe

The terror attack you should worry about before EMP is the grid being taken down. IMO, that's going to happen first. I don't expect it to be that far down the road either.

I don't fear traditional terrorists perpetrating an EMP attack that would effect much of an area. I do fear small nation/states doing this. Iran is NOT one of them. There is a short list that I fear and a false flag is very high on my alert list.

I've read some posts for a couple years from someone on AR15 who claims to work in a lab that does these specific tests and his statement has always been that cars will usually start right back up and behave normally. Usually.


----------



## FrankW

tenOC said:


> I've read some posts for a couple years from someone on AR15 who claims to work in a lab that does these specific tests and his statement has always been that cars will usually start right back up and behave normally. Usually.


Exactly!


----------



## LincTex

tenOC said:


> his statement has always been that cars will usually start right back up and behave normally. Usually.


I don't have a lot of faith in modern ECU's.... I have seen them fry when a simple ground failed (due to corrosion, or the mech forgot to hook up). Another fried when the fuel pump relay burned up.


----------



## Tirediron

LincTex said:


> I don't have a lot of faith in modern ECU's.... I have seen them fry when a simple ground failed (due to corrosion, or the mech forgot to hook up). Another fried when the fuel pump relay burned up.


But what does our real world experience have to do with reality, when some one wrote a report based on information from another guy who is an "expert":scratch


----------



## BlueShoe

How much are you willing to spend on EMP proofing?
Do you think there's enough that you _could_ do in your scenario? 
Is the car operating all you're really worried about?

Having an old vehicle or means to operate one in your worst case event isn't much of an extra expense to me. I have more than 15 tons of those type of vehicles laying around.

Air bursting over the Eastern Seaboard would having the greatest impact over the most people. How many nations have that capability? So the threat is slim. We have to worry about what someone called "frenemies". Still a small risk.

I still say that launch 35 miles off the coast of Catalina was an intentional missile warning.


----------



## LincTex

BlueZ said:


> I appreciate your willingness to really sink your teeth into the subject.
> But the more time you spend with this subject and the more you learn about it, you will realize how much of a stretch a terrorist ever doing that is.:beercheer:


It's 5 years later, and North Korea is well-poised to do exactly such a thing.


----------



## Resto

THAAD has made all enemy ICBMs Null and Void. That's why China is Backing down BIG TIME right now. China is worried about Fatty 3, he has threatened them with a nuke strike. NK is too close and China is worried that USA forces wont shoot down an NK Missile directed North at them. Xi has introduced Intense Communist Programing into Elementary schools as a Survival Tactic. China now knows they cannot take over the World and they are going into "Survival Mode". Also China is being invaded by Islam from Pakistan. Whole Villages(Cities by American standard) have been converted. MSM has no idea of this because of Govt Controled Media. I have friends inside. If a Mild CME happens and your Vehicle doesn't start, unhook your Battery for 5 mins, then hook it back up and try to start it. Sometimes the ECU needs to reboot. I would be more concerned with the Grid going down than anything. WHEN, there is a "Nuclear Exchange" it WILL send Society back to the Stone age and this Planet will not be able to sustain Human Life for many years after. But that's why we "Prep".

PS. Things are worse than we think right now. That is all Im gonna say.


----------



## JayJay

Okay---I don't think like most here. Why would I want to have the only vehicle in town running??
Just put a target on my back!!


----------



## Resto

JayJay said:


> Okay---I don't think like most here. Why would I want to have the only vehicle in town running??
> Just put a target on my back!!


Good point. I wouldn't want to be "In Town" either. LOL Better Bug Out now with a running Vehicle.


----------



## LincTex

Resto said:


> THAAD has made all enemy ICBMs Null and Void.


Umm..... 
THAAD only blows up ICBM's once they are on their way down......

A H.E.M.P. occurs far up above... too early to deploy THAAD and too high for THAAD to have any effect.

So, it's still a serious threat.


----------



## LastOutlaw

I dont even know if my 76 K5 with an HEI distributor would still run. I do have an extra points distributor put away and an extra alternator in an old microwave but who knows if that is even EMP proof? The last time we experienced one was in the 60s and it knocked out things over a thousand miles away in Hawaii. That was before most electronics were even invented.


----------



## hiwall

Resto said:


> THAAD has made all enemy ICBMs Null and Void.


THAAD has a range of only about 120 miles. 
The truth is that No One has a sure ability to shoot down ICBM's, unless there is some super secret new weapon.
If, say Russia, launched many ICBM's against us most (or even almost all) would strike their targets.


----------



## Tirediron

LastOutlaw said:


> I dont even know if my 76 K5 with an HEI distributor would still run. I do have an extra points distributor put away and an extra alternator in an old microwave but who knows if that is even EMP proof? The last time we experienced one was in the 60s and it knocked out things over a thousand miles away in Hawaii. That was before most electronics were even invented.


the hei should be ok, It couldn't hurt to have a module or 2 wrapped in tinfoil stashed somewhere. Point distributors are a royal pain to keep maintained and plug wires would be a problem.


----------



## crabapple

Pakistan has never been our friend, only a fool (Congress & state department) has ever thought other wise!


----------



## hiwall

In case anyone is curious or wondering the USA does have very long range interceptor missiles that can supposedly take out ICBM's in mid-flight before they strike us. 
We have a total of 37 of these missiles which is supposed to be increased to 44 yet this year (seems unlikely at this late date though). These missiles have about a 50% hit rate in the very limited testing they have done. For a sure hit 2 or 3 of these would likely be fired at each incoming missile. Unfortunately These missiles are only located on the west coast and in Alaska. The rest of the USA is basically defenseless.


----------



## Tacitus

JayJay said:


> Okay---I don't think like most here. Why would I want to have the only vehicle in town running??
> Just put a target on my back!!


Agreed. My prep for EMP is not to have anything powered (except maybe some radio comms). Instead, my prep for EMP is to be able to live without anything powered.

It has occurred to me that having a working vehicle would be useful initially, to allow consolidation of preps from other family members to a single location, but I would expect it to be confiscated fairly quickly, so I have not put a lot of thought into it. Once I'm set being able to live without power and without working vehicles, I'll think about having a working vehicle.


----------



## headhunter

I can not pass as an authority on an EMP (electro Magnetic Pulse); I am sorta old and wonder about many things. There are frequent references to the Carrington Effect. It happened in the late 1800s It wiped out a lot of the telegraph communications. EMP relies on the production of electricity by induction. (Remember the experiment from elementary school where you produced an electric current in a coiled wire by moving a magnet in and out of the coil?) The telegraph wires were unshielded and were not protected by circuit breakers or fuses, but they ran for miles.

In the last century some parts of the Earth were struck by EMP s caused by electrons from corneal mass ejections (CMEs) from the sun, the Carrington Effect. Electricity was knocked out, especially hard hit were transformers; those wonderful things that step up or step down electrical charges. Because the electric companies don’t have sufficient spares of the very biggest ones and the fact that the turn around time for ordering and building new ones is measured in years - if too many of the big ones go down we are in deep deep “do”.

I’ve seen nothing published on what has happened inside the individual homes. Will we have all electrical appliances fried? Remember how many miles of wire it was from one telegraph station to another? We live in the country, there is about 25’ from our transformer to our main circuit breaker, there is another 2 to 3’ of wire to the circuit breakers that divide power to the garage, machine shed, and house. The wires from that circuit box go underground to their respective buildings where they enter the breaker box for that building. We have yet to address the individual circuits within the building and - - -. I’m saying it seems there are a lot of “firewalls”.

During the Great Depression (1930s) some areas of the country were hit by massive sand storms and the cars of that era lost electrical power because of the static electricity produced. It was found that dragging a chain grounded the vehicle and discharged the static electricity (even into the 1970s it was not uncommon to see a fuel truck dragging a chain).

What else do I know? Well, during winter the Earth is closer to the Sun and during summer although the most direct rays are striking the Northern Hemisphere the Earth is further from the Sun. I know that the Sun only lights up about 1/2 the Earth at a time so if it’s dark you don’ t have to worry about a CME.

As I said I’m not an expert. Will parking in my steel machine shed protect my vehicles from an EMP or CME? I don’t know? Steel doors, no windows,,steel walls, steel roof ,and grounded, sure do hope it helps.


----------



## SheepdogPRS

Head hunter,
You are right, you're no expert. I'm not either but I have taken a few years to learn what I can about both kinds of EMP. The solar events don't concern me because they only affect long transmission wires and big transformers and big generators. The ones that produce, carry and modify the power we use. There is nothing that will affect me because the destruction of the transformers keeps the big power surges out of our homes. The transformers act as fuses. You are right, if we are hit by a big flare or a coronal mass ejection we will be without power for decades. You are wrong about it only affecting the lit side of the earth though. It affects the entire hemisphere, north or south depending on the polarity of the charge and a big CME can effect both hemispheres. Remember that they wrap around the earth and push/pull on the earths magnetic field around the entire earth. The currents induced in the long lines travels to the big generators and the transformers and burn them out at the same time that the wires burst into flames. The Carrington event happened before there were transformers so the power traveled down the telegraph wires right into the tiny solenoids used to make the noise and punch the paper. The small coils burst into flames and it spread to the paper and the sheds that housed the equipment.

The same thing happens with a nuke detonated in space but that EMP (E3) is the last of three events caused by the bomb. The first one is not an EMP at all. The E1 pulse is a voltage of 50,000 or more volts generated in the air itself by gamma rays knocking the electrons off and away from the atoms in the atmosphere. The voltage goes from zero to 50,000 volts or more in half a nanosecond. .00000005 seconds or 1/2 of a millionth of a second. It covers the entire area visible from the bombs point of view. Anyplace there is air or a conduction path that voltage goes. Even the ground is charged to about 30 feet below the surface. Grounding a building just supplies another path for the voltage to flow. Because it is a DC charge it will transmit its power through metal boxes to the inside just like a capacitor charging. Then in less than a 1000th of a second it is gone. It carries enough power to burn the molecular junctions of diodes and transistors sitting in their static bags on the shelves of warehouses. It will burn up all the electronics that can be seen from the bombs point of view in less time than it takes us to see the flash.
The bomb is so high that there is no blast or radiation or even heat that reaches the ground. It won't hurt anyone directly but it will completely destroy the infrastructure. Without electricity there is no fuel, water natural gas, sewer, transportation or help. We are back to the 1800s in just a few nanoseconds.

No electronics that were made before the event will work unless they are protected by layers of plastic covered with highly conductive metal. It takes at least three layers to be effective. That means putting your electronics into an insulating plastic enclosure, covering it with a layer of gold, silver, copper or aluminum and placing that in a plastic enclosure and covering it and doing the process at least a third time leaving the last metal covering exposed to the air. All the seams need to be sealed. No other metals are good enough conductors to work in a capacitive reactance trap. You can't stop the voltage but the capacitive reactance slows it down to the point where it is gone before the protected gear is affected by it.


----------



## FrankW

LincTex said:


> It's 5 years later, and North Korea is well-poised to do exactly such a thing.


Its a bunch of hype..those 2 satellites were launched years before they had their thermonuclear test.
So there were no thermonuclear devices available to put on those satellites (assuming NoKo would have been willing to put what would be sure to be a huge chunk of its arsenal perhaps even the majority of it) on those rockets.
And basic Atom Bombs wont cut it for countrywide EMP no matter how well they are placed.
most of what deals with NoKo is similar conjecture, innuendo and source-poor speculation.

Listen, I get it. everyone has their favorite apocalypse.
each one of themis very improbable by itself.
Its the totality of all possible scenarios that adds up to a risk that's no longer negligible.


----------



## headhunter

SheepdogPRS said:


> Head hunter,
> You are right, you're no expert. I'm not either but I have taken a few years to learn what I can about both kinds of EMP. The solar events don't concern me because they only affect long transmission wires and big transformers and big generators. The ones that produce, carry and modify the power we use. There is nothing that will affect me because the destruction of the transformers keeps the big power surges out of our homes. The transformers act as fuses. You are right, if we are hit by a big flare or a coronal mass ejection we will be without power for decades. You are wrong about it only affecting the lit side of the earth though. It affects the entire hemisphere, north or south depending on the polarity of the charge and a big CME can effect both hemispheres. Remember that they wrap around the earth and push/pull on the earths magnetic field around the entire earth. The currents induced in the long lines travels to the big generators and the transformers and burn them out at the same time that the wires burst into flames. The Carrington event happened before there were transformers so the power traveled down the telegraph wires right into the tiny solenoids used to make the noise and pu
> 
> 
> SheepdogPRS said:
> 
> 
> 
> Head hunter,
> You are right, you're no expert. I'm not either but I have taken a few years to learn what I can about both kinds of EMP. The solar events don't concern me because they only affect long transmission wires and big transformers and big generators. The ones that produce, carry and modify the power we use. There is nothing that will affect me because the destruction of the transformers keeps the big power surges out of our homes. The transformers act as fuses. You are right, if we are hit by a big flare or a coronal mass ejection we will be without power for decades. You are wrong about it only affecting the lit side of the earth though. It affects the entire hemisphere, north or south depending on the polarity of the charge and a big CME can effect both hemispheres. Remember that they wrap around the earth and push/pull on the earths magnetic field around the entire earth. The currents induced in the long lines travels to the big generators and the transformers and burn them out at the same time that the wires burst into flames. The Carrington event happened before there were transformers so the power traveled down the telegraph wires right into the tiny solenoids used to make the noise and punch the paper. The small coils burst into flames and it spread to the paper and the sheds that housed the equipment.
> 
> The same thing happens with a nuke detonated in space but that EMP (E3) is the last of three events caused by the bomb. The first one is not an EMP at all. The E1 pulse is a voltage of 50,000 or more volts generated in the air itself by gamma rays knocking the electrons off and away from the atoms in the atmosphere. The voltage goes from zero to 50,000 volts or more in half a nanosecond. .00000005 seconds or 1/2 of a millionth of a second. It covers the entire area visible from the bombs point of view. Anyplace there is air or a conduction path that voltage goes. Even the ground is charged to about 30 feet below the surface. Grounding a building just supplies another path for the voltage to flow. Because it is a DC charge it will transmit its power through metal boxes to the inside just like a capacitor charging. Then in less than a 1000th of a second it is gone. It carries enough power to burn the molecular junctions of diodes and transistors sitting in their static bags on the shelves of warehouses. It will burn up all the electronics that can be seen from the bombs point of view in less time than it takes us to see the flash.
> The bomb is so high that there is no blast or radiation or even heat that reaches the ground. It won't hurt anyone directly but it will completely destroy the infrastructure. Without electricity there is no fuel, water natural gas, sewer, transportation or help. We are back to the 1800s in just a few nanoseconds.
> 
> No electronics that were made before the event will work unless they are protected by layers of plastic covered with highly conductive metal. It takes at least three layers to be effective. That means putting your electronics into an insulating plastic enclosure, covering it with a layer of gold, silver, copper or aluminum and placing that in a plastic enclosure and covering it and doing the process at least a third time leaving the last metal covering exposed to the air. All the seams need to be sealed. No other metals are good enough conductors to work in a capacitive reactance trap. You can't stop the voltage but the capacitive reactance slows it down to the point where it is gone before the protected gear is affected by it.
> 
> 
> 
> nch the paper. The small coils burst into flames and it spread to the paper and the sheds that housed the equipment.
> 
> The same thing happens with a nuke detonated in space but that EMP (E3) is the last of three events caused by the bomb. The first one is not an EMP at all. The E1 pulse is a voltage of 50,000 or more volts generated in the air itself by gamma rays knocking the electrons off and away from the atoms in the atmosphere. The voltage goes from zero to 50,000 volts or more in half a nanosecond. .00000005 seconds or 1/2 of a millionth of a second. It covers the entire area visible from the bombs point of view. Anyplace there is air or a conduction path that voltage goes. Even the ground is charged to about 30 feet below the surface. Grounding a building just supplies another path for the voltage to flow. Because it is a DC charge it will transmit its power through metal boxes to the inside just like a capacitor charging. Then in less than a 1000th of a second it is gone. It carries enough power to burn the molecular junctions of diodes and transistors sitting in their static bags on the shelves of warehouses. It will burn up all the electronics that can be seen from the bombs point of view in less time than it takes us to see the flash.
> The bomb is so high that there is no blast or radiation or even heat that reaches the ground. It won't hurt anyone directly but it will completely destroy the infrastructure. Without electricity there is no fuel, water natural gas, sewer, transportation or help. We are back to the 1800s in just a few nanoseconds.
> 
> No electronics that were made before the event will work unless they are protected by layers of plastic covered with highly conductive metal. It takes at least three layers to be effective. That means putting your electronics into an insulating plastic enclosure, covering it with a layer of gold, silver, copper or aluminum and placing that in a plastic enclosure and covering it and doing the process at least a third time leaving the last metal covering exposed to the air. All the seams need to be sealed. No other metals are good enough conductors to work in a capacitive reactance trap. You can't stop the voltage but the capacitive reactance slows it down to the point where it is gone before the protected gear is affected by it.
Click to expand...

Sheepdog, thanks for the reply. It sounds as if we're at home in the "woods" with our trees and wood stove, hand pump, bicycles and Coleman lanterns and stoves we'll be okay for a spell. If we're else where-"Lord love a duck"! We are sunk. Thanks again. Doug


----------



## headhunter

I apologize to one and all. I found I asked the same question twice. All I can say is senior moment. d


----------



## FrankW

headhunter said:


> As I said I'm not an expert. Will parking in my steel machine shed protect my vehicles from an EMP or CME? I don't know? Steel doors, no windows,,steel walls, steel roof ,and grounded, sure do hope it helps.


This helps quite a bit.
Also keep in mind your vehicles ECUs are shielded by their steel sleeves ( which serve as a shield against EMI) and by the body of the vehicle.
I wouldn't worry.


----------



## labotomi

Tirediron said:


> But what does our real world experience have to do with reality, when some one wrote a report based on information from another guy who is an "expert":scratch


I don't think anyone knew that your real world experience covered every known make and model of automobile currently being driven. It's good to know that we have such knowledgeable and wise members.


----------



## DM1791

One thing to consider also is that there are multiple points where modern vehicles could fail due to an EMP exposure, it doesn't all have to center on one component. For instance, the vehicle could fail from the possible damage to the alternator itself. One thing that the Soviet project-K experiment group showed is that even shielded wire coils of sufficient length can pick up the E3 component of an EMP. The soviets saw hardened military generators that had been designed to survive direct EMP exposure fail after 24-72 hours of operation post-emp hit. 

The reason was that thermal faults had been introduced to the copper wire coils in the generators themselves. The current spike from the ground-induced pulse heated those coils and at places where the thin wire overlapped several times, the heat was enough to cause small fractures in the wires. Over the course of operation those faults were exacerbated and the generators failed.

And again, these were military grade generators that had been theoretically hardened specifically to withstand emp exposure. So the alternators in modern cars would potentially be another source of failure for modern vehicles. And if the alternator goes out then you're not going to get very far, even with a brand new battery. Then you could have a mass blow-out of fuses that caused the electrical components of the vehicle not to function. There could be problems with the micro-circuit controls of the fuel pump system or the exhaust gas sensors. 

Given how integrated computers and circuitry have become, the more modern the vehicle the more potential points of failure there are. And, in the end, as far as I know there haven't been any direct experiments on anything we would consider "modern" vehicles to either prove or disprove any of the above, so it's mostly conjecture anyway.

Awesome thread, though, with a lot of good info.


----------



## BillM

BlueZ said:


> Nothing is absolute and ECU's do break..
> when you re-read the post I think you will find that is exactly what was stated.
> 
> Nowhere is it said that an ECU will never get "fried"
> 
> When we deal with complicated subjects I think it is important we use language as exactly as possible and also pay attention to the exact meaning that is being conveyed.
> 
> Having said that, absolute certainty is always difficult to come by but by-and-large the widespread "angst" that the popular press created on this subject is decidedly misplaced.


When I was 12 years old, the Cuban missile crises was happening. I attended a meeting at the local National guard Armory with my dad. They went into great detail on how to build a bomb shelter and stock it. On the way home I asked my dad what kind of bomb shelter we were going to build. He told me we aren't going to build one. He explained that nothing is ever as good or bad as predicted. He explained that if we built a bomb shelter , we would have to shoot our neighbors. He asked me if I would be able to do that. He told me he had seen the worst of human behavior during WWII. He told me that there were some things you would not want to survive. We can guess at what would happen but until it actually happens, there are no absolutes in an EMP event.


----------



## jimLE

Your dad made good points .that not only applies to emp's.but other wrose case situations as well.


----------

