How Long Can You Tread Water?

June 28, 2010 | Tom Seaward

[Star Traveler]

Actually this article is not datelined 1962 ... LOL ... take a look again, it’s 2008. Now, the original situation that it’s reporting on is 1962, but that’s not a “dateline” for an article.

AND..., I sure do hope that the “science” has not changed since that detonation in 1962 ...

BUT, as far as Obama’s birth certificate... with all the stories I’ve heard on it... I think that story definitely qualifies for an Art Bell show ... LOL ...

[barb-tex]

The incident reported was in 1961, reprinting it nearly a half century later doesn’t make it current. Yes, Science has changed since 1961, it’s called COMPUTERS. Was there an “electrical grid” in 1961? Control instrumentation was still pneumatic and not electronic as it is today, so it wouldn’t be affected by a EMP.
Maybe Art Bell could find the missing BC. No one else seems be able to. I still like to blame the EMP, as that is as good an explanation as any

[Star Traveler]

For your information, then ... :-)

Dateline

A dateline is a brief piece of text included in news articles that describes where and when the story occurred, or was written or filed, though the date is often omitted. In the case of articles reprinted from wire services, the distributing organization is also included (though the originating one is not). Datelines are traditionally placed on the first line of the text of the article, before the first sentence. Datelines are not an extremely important component of any paper, but they are usually used if the news isn't local.

---

From Merriam-Webster ....

dateline

Main Entry: date·line
Function: noun
Date: 1888

1 : a line in a written document or a printed publication giving
    the date and place of composition or issue

2 : usually date line : international date line

[Star Traveler]

Oh..., and one more thing ... you were saying ...

The incident reported was in 1961, reprinting it nearly a half century later doesn’t make it current.

Ummmm..., yes it does make it current, considering we haven't been blowing up nuclear weapons in the air since back then ... :-)

A blurb on the matter from Wikipedia ...

In 1963, all nuclear and many non-nuclear states signed the Limited Test Ban Treaty, pledging to refrain from testing nuclear weapons in the atmosphere, underwater, or in outer space. The treaty permitted underground nuclear testing.

[GonzoGOP]

Oh come on. A diesel not in operation, especially an older one one that doesn't have electronic fuel control, is darn near immune. Almost all farm equipment is diesel so the farms would be hurt, but not completely incapacitated.

Military vehicles are hardened so most would survive completely unscathed. There will be organized people with some communication and transportation. A M977 HEMMET can move a crap load of food from farm to elevator if you get desperate.

As for how to get the food to the people. Every railroad engineer and dispatcher is trained to operate by paper train orders in case of emergency. They may not do it often, but hey all know how. While some of the newer locomotives with their computer controls would be knocked out, many older diesels would come through just fine. And you can always empty out the railroad museums. Sure the capacity of the railroads would be cut drastically, but one or two trains a day would bring in enough food to prevent starvation. It would be bowl of porridge kind of survival until things got fixed, but hundreds of millions of dead just isn't going to happen from a single EMP burst.

[I Buried My Guns]

A diesel not in operation, especially an older one one that doesn't have electronic fuel control, is darn near immune.

Absolutely correct.

Almost all farm equipment is diesel so the farms would be hurt, but not completely incapacitated.

Not true, exactly. While many farm implements are diesel, they are also mostly electronic nowadays (fuel control). The idea that farmers are lovingly maintaining their 35-year-old tractors is delusional.

Military vehicles are hardened so most would survive completely unscathed.

Not true, for the most part, and the article restates that fact. Hardening is cost-prohibitive. I don't know where you got that idea. Most military vehicles ARE NOT hardened.

[barb-tex]

And your point is, There have NOT been any Nuc explosions since the test ban treaty and there never will be as long as the Sun doth shine and the rivers flow.
OK you are right. I concede the point.
barbra ann

[barb-tex]

I guess I forgot about the Clever Chinese who exploded a Nuc on 1971. But they are King’s X since the test ban treaty since they didn’t sign.
But I am sorry and I did concede the point.
barbra ann

[GonzoGOP]

The HMETT, the vehicle I specifically mentioned, is hardened. Oshkosh has also received a multimillion dollar contract to harden other, non-Oshkosh vehicles such as line haul trucks and support vehicles. They may lose some of their radios and secondary stuff, but the drive components, specifically the black box and power distribution to the 8 wheel drive are shielded.

As are the M1s and Bradley and other equipment expected to operate in an NBC situation is also hardened.

[I Buried My Guns]

That is good to know; thank you for that info. It lowers my cynicism and stress level a tad.

[GonzoGOP]

That is good to know; thank you for that info. It lowers my cynicism and stress level a tad.

The other thing to remember is that there are different levels of hardening. For example the M1 MBTs are fully hardened because they were expected to operate on a nuked out battlefield against the Soviets. It also helps to have a hermetically sealed all metal vehicle that acts as a primary EMP shield for everything inside it. That kind of hardening will break the bank.

However it is possible to harden key systems. For example using wire that has a double layer of insulation with a foil layer between will create a Faraday cage and EMP harden the wire. Putting a car's black box inside a aluminum case will also harden it so long as the wires leading into it have been hardened. Where the problem comes in is where those systems have to talk to the outside world. For example it is nearly impossible to harden radar and radio equipment as its entire purpose is to receive and amplify radio waves. And if you put them in a Faraday cage they don't work. Now on the Patriot they use multiple redundant systems only one of which is active at any time. Fry one and the other turns on and keeps running. For something less second to second critical than a SAM system you isolate those hard to harden systems and design in components that will fail and save the rest of the system. Then after the pulse has passed you swap out the component designed to fail and you are back in action. That is how the trucks are being hardened. The engine will run long enough to get you back to the garage and replace the radio and tail lights.

[SiGeek]

I agree all these horrible things could happen if this happened to all electrically fed societies simultaneously.

However if and when we get nuked, EMP or otherwise, I think the US would get resupplied by other countries faster than the 3 yr time frame.

Good for business like a natural disaster is for construction trades and supplies for 100s of miles around.

Still would need to be prepared, but for how long? Longer than Katrina aftermath but less than 3 yrs is my SWAG.

Oh yeah, I guess a solar flare affects the whole electrified world. Well maybe we’ll just get a light touch first — blow out just enough for us to get serious!