Posted on 01/04/2005 12:43:49 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Although the risk of your house catching fire and burning to the ground is remote, are you willing to risk not having fire insurance?
That's a question that Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-MD) poses, and the answer that I think you and I would give without hesitation is "no."
Our country is unprepared to deal with a nuclear explosion at a high altitude. The danger would be more than merely life or limb. A nuclear explosion over Chicago, for example, could plunge a large portion of our country into darkness, with electricity lost for days, even months, perhaps in some places years. All computerized activity in the region would cease. The culprit: High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse.
The very day the 9/11 Commission report was issued another report, that may one day prove itself to be even more important to our security, also was released. "The Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse Attack" stated that our country has the ability to prevent the worst-case scenarios from occurring in this age of international terrorism.
When NATO started to bomb the Serbs in the spring of 1999 to stop Slobodan Milosevic's expulsion campaign against ethnic Albanians, the Russians were very unhappy about our military aggressions against one of their longtime allies. Rep. Bartlett was part of a bi-partisan delegation assembled by Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA) to examine the situation. They conferred with some counterparts from the Russian Duma. One Duma member, Vladimir Lukin (at the time chairing the Duma's International Affairs Committee and formerly a high-level member of the Soviet national security apparatus under Gorbachev), threatened that if Russia really wanted to hurt us without fear of retaliation, Russia would launch a missile against us from a submarine, explode it high over our skies and shut down our power grid and communications for six months.
Rep. Bartlett was very disturbed by what he had heard; he wanted to know if the Russians were bluffing and sought the opinions of our country's military experts. After he found that the Clinton Administration was ignoring the threat, Rep. Bartlett decided to establish the Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Commission. The EMP Commission was established by unanimous consent of the House and Senate.
If a nuclear blast occurred in high altitudes over our country, people would not be killed by the fallout from the blast itself. The most serious and far-reaching damage would be done by the EMP emissions. The result? According to the report, "the 'electromagnetic shock' that disrupts or damages electronics-based control systems, sensors, communication systems, protective systems, computers, and similar devices. Its damage or functional disruption occurs essentially simultaneously over a very large area." One scenario outlined by the EMP Commission predicted that a blast over Chicago, where 70% of our country's total power generation occurs, would instantly impact cities as distant as New York and Washington, D.C.
Important economic and life-sustaining sectors that stand to be severely damaged or shut down are our electronic power infrastructure, telecommunications, banking and finance, transportation, fuel/energy, food and emergency services, water supply, space systems and government operations.
An EMP attack cannot be compared to an ordinary blackout, even a very large blackout, because it will occur over a greater area, damage major electronic systems and cause recovery to be measured in months.
Here is some of the damage that stands to occur immediately after an attack unless sensible "hardening" precautions are taken to protect data and systems. They are:
Electronic records in computers, such as your savings and checking accounts, would be inaccessible.
Your telephone line, even for a cellular, would go dead.
The systems that operate petroleum refineries would be stopped, forcing energy production to halt for some time.
Transportation would be disrupted. Car and truck engines, train engines would be disabled. Traffic signals would become inoperable. Our air traffic control system would cease to exist.
Calling 911 would be a thing of the past.
The EMP Commission report warned: "Many citizens would be without power, communications and other services for days - or perhaps substantially longer - before full recovery could occur. During that interval, it will be crucial to provide a reliable channel of information to those citizens to let them know what has happened, the current situation, when help of what types for them might be available, what their governments are doing, and the host of questions which, if not answered, are certain to create more instability and suffering for the affected individuals, communities, and the Nation as a whole."
The Boy Scout motto -- "Be prepared" -- is sound advice for our nation's policymakers in this era of global terrorism. They cannot afford to ignore this report or its warnings or other warnings that biological and chemical warfare agents, cyber attacks and surface-burst nuclear weaponry are other significant threats. Those types of attacks would be the more deadly when combined with an EMP attack.
There are steps we can take to increase our ability to quickly recover from an EMP attack. For example, the Department of Homeland Security should have a list that prioritizes emergency electricity delivery to hospitals, regional food warehouses, water supply and critical communications and transportation. Preparing and protecting spare transformers could quickly repair the power grid and permit the recovery of electric power, enabling other important infrastructures to be functional. The EMP Commission made the point that we need wise and effective planning; it needs to be done now.
The Wall Street Journal did not ignore the Commission's report on the perils of an EMP attack. It published an editorial warning that China and Russia have the capability to launch an EMP strike against us. Over the next 15 years our relations with these countries are likely to be volatile and unpredictable. Russian Duma members threatened us five years ago. Chinese publications have carried articles about EMP, including threats to use EMP to neutralize our aircraft carriers if we were to war with China over Taiwan. The Commission appeared most concerned about an EMP attack from terrorists or rogue states who believe they have absolutely nothing to lose.
Wall Street is indeed concerned about this problem. The EMP Commission delivered a briefing to the Securities Industry Automation Corporation, which handles the communications networks responsible for the New York Stock Exchange. EMP Commissioner Lowell L. Wood, Jr. estimated in an Aerospace Daily & Defense Report article published earlier this fall that, all told, an EMP attack that shuts down our critical infrastructure systems could carry a $10 trillion dollar price tag.
The nine members who served on the EMP Commission have strong credentials: Commission Chairman, Dr. William R. Graham, served as Director of the White Office of Science & Technology Policy and as Science Advisor to President Ronald Reagan; General Richard L. Lawson, USAF, Ret., is a former President and CEO of the National Mining Association; Dr. Lowell L. Wood is Senior Staff Scientist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
Rep. Bartlett brings a unique skill set: With a master's degree in physiology, he worked at the John Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory, directing a unit in Space Life Sciences and at IBM on biomedical engineering projects. He speaks on this issue with a background in the sciences. At 78 years of age, he has the energy and drive that would shame many young people.
Bartlett is undeterred by the lack of response from the establishment news media, driven by his understanding of what may truly be at stake if our nation's policymakers and business leaders continue to ignore the EMP Commission's work. Some have called the 9/11 Commission report a look in the rear view mirror. By contrast, the EMP Commission report is a look down the road at the kind of attack that instantaneously could change our status as the world's superpower to that of a nation with an infrastructure so diminished that Third World nations might be envied.
Many important issues will be taken up by the next Congress, starting in January. This issue deserves strong consideration as does our ability to deal with other kind of attacks, such as biological warfare, that represent the deadly future of warfare and terrorism. If the worst case scenario were to occur, it also would be important that our public officials respond in a manner that seeks to preserve our liberties and heritage as much as possible.
Rep. Bartlett advises that sensible steps taken now can prepare us to deal with, even thwart, the mayhem caused by terrorists and rogue nations. I hope we have some lawmakers who share Mr. Bartlett's concern in preserving our American way of life for future generations. If we do, then I expect Congress will delve further into the work of the EMP Commission and its unsettling findings.
-----------
Paul M. Weyrich is Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.
--------------------
Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.
You are correct. However a $600 EMP generator is not going to have enough OMPFF to fry circuits. Remember Ocean's 11 where they supposedlly used a univeristies "pinch" to blackout Las Vegas... Well here from the scientists mouth:
""I enjoyed the movie and the 'pinch' was an amusing twist but had little to do with science," says Jeff Quintenz, a physicist at Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico.
Quintenz should know-he works on a real-life pinch device, one of the world's largest, at Sandia. A 100-foot diameter, 20-foot tall cylinder-shaped machine, Sandia's "Z-pinch" is the world's most powerful electrical generator."
"The pinch is "a poor EMP source," says Sandia's Jeff Quintenz. "We have on occasion interfered with the sensitive electronics in cameras and computers located in the same laboratory space," he says, but "to my knowledge we have never caused a problem with any electronics or electrical system outside the accelerator building itself."
Instead, the Z mainly produces x rays, which have a variety of scientific uses, from simulating the outpourings of neutron stars to understanding the devastating effects of nuclear weapons to testing possible designs for clean, abundant fusion energy. The Z pinch gets its name from the fact that an initial burst of electricity creates a magnetic field that compresses or "pinches" a gas of charged particles along the vertical direction, denoted by scientists as the "z" direction. Creating a bunch of hot, moving charged particles generates a rainbow spectrum of intense x-rays, but a feeble EMP.
In the end, nuclear weapons are probably the only existing devices that could really create electromagnetic pulses with a blackout punch. EMPs from a nuclear blast would contain intense electric and magnetic fields. These fields would generate, in power cables, overwhelming electrical currents which would trip circuit breakers and temporarily shut down a city's power grid."
You are correct.
A 60,000' airburst requires an extra-atmospheric delivery vehicle. We would know the point of origin as soon as the launch was detected. 90 minutes (or less) later that place would simply cease to exist.
MAD is real.
Shutting it down first would be innefective, it is the presence of the chip itself, the micro-circutry that gets shorted out from the radio waves, they generate protons that fry it
We need to look this up for a better descr!
I think you miss the impact of a total loss of electricity on our version of civilization in a metro area.
Think it through.
You couldn't even flee the area, except on foot or bicycle.
I've built a CBNR shelter in my yard, and have stocked it well.
I would hope that the message it sends is that I intend to survive. (Gotta make sure it is not just the .gov and the cockroaches.)
FAS | Nuke | Intro | Nuke ||||| Index | Search | Join FAS
You got it. We are capable of detectng and tracing the delivery of a nuclear payload. Any country sening one our was would cease to exist shortly thereafter. Same would happen to us if we did it to the Russians.
What I am saying is that we are making confusing statements to the world by debating this. If we want to quietly and secretly do it as a matter of national security that's another matter. Debating it openly is like an invitation to try it. We cannot think in terms of conventional wisdom, but in terms of extremism. It used to be we were worried about shipping containers pulling into Newark with a nuke. Now we're worried about terrorists obtaining a jet with a service ceiling of 60,000 feet(and there are not too many) and setting off a nuke? There are as many ways to smuggle a nuclear device into this country and set it off as there are days in a decade, I think that's the issue at hand. Debating how we'll still get to work or get dialysis, or still get our property tax bill, or file our income taxes on April 15th is crazy as a national discussion.
This concern is stupid beyond imagination. Terrorists are a million times more likely to detonate a nuke on the ground. Why would they bother with a fancy airburst (which would require ballistic missles or jets to transport it) when a ground explosion would be so much easier and more destructive? Any sitution were an airburst would be likely (exp: full-blown nuclear war with China) the status of our electrical instruments would be the least of our concern.
The Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP)
This is an essay I wrote about EMP. The sources may not be cited as well as they should, but some documentation was lost when converting to html. If you want a better citation, please ask.
Introduction
Nuclear weapons can have devastating effects. Usually, one thinks only of the blast, thermal, and radiation effects as they relate to the human body. However, considering only these factors ignores some of the other devastating effects. One such effect is that of the nuclear electromagnetic pulse (EMP). The effects of the nuclear electromagnetic pulse must be considered and calculated when preparing for a nuclear war.
This essay will try to describe what the electromagnetic pulse is. It will then explore the types of bursts that produce different pulses, and the possible effects of the pulses will be examined. Next, the ways to guard against EMP will be examined. Finally, the policy issues concerning the vulnerability of the United States will be explored. To achieve these goals, three basic sources will be used to describe the technical aspects of the pulse. Once this has been completed, several journal and magazine sources will be used to consider the vulnerability and policy issues. This format will create a technically based essay. From this science base, several observations of vulnerability will be made to evaluate the United States?policy and strategy.
EMP Physics
Early on in the development of nuclear weapons, the presence of the electromagnetic pulse was known. Before the July 16, 1945 Trinity test, Enrico Fermi had tried to calculate the possible electromagnetic fields that would be produced. Unfortunately, the actual effects of the EMP were still not truly known. It wasnt until the mid-1960s that the true nature of the EMP was better understood. However, even then, many of the possible effects, like other nuclear weapon effects, were not well-known due to the lack of data.1 The basic theory of EMP is now well understood.
In a nuclear detonation, gamma rays are produced. These gamma rays interact with the surrounding air molecules by the Compton effect to produce electrons. In this effect,
"...the gamma ray (primary) photon collides with an electron and some of the energy of the photon is transferred to the electron. Another (secondary) photon, with less energy, then moves off in a new direction at an angle to the direction of motion of the primary photon. Consequently, Compton interaction results in a change of direction (or scattering) of the gamma-ray photon and degradation in its energy. The electron which, after colliding with the primary photon, recoils in such a manner as to conserve energy and momentum is called a Compton (recoil) electron"(2)
These Compton-recoil electrons travel outward at a faster rate than the remaining heavier, positively charged ions. This separation of charges produces a strong electric field. The lower-energy electrons produced by collisions with the Compton electrons are attracted to the positive ions. These ions produce a conduction current. This current is directly related to the strength of the Compton effect. Also, this conduction current flows in a direction opposite to the electrical field produced by the Compton effect. Because of this, the conduction current limits the electrical field and stops it from increasing.(3-5)
Varieties of EMP Explosions
There are three main types of explosions to consider when examining the effects of the electromagnetic pulse. These are near-surface busts, medium-altitude bursts, and high-altitude bursts. Near-surface bursts are those at altitudes up to 1.2 miles, medium-altitude bursts range from 1.2 miles to 19 miles, and high-altitude bursts are those above 19 miles. These altitudes are only rough guidelines, but a better understanding of where each occurs will be gained after examining each type of burst briefly.(6)
The greatest effect on surface bursts is caused by the ground. Unlike in the air, the gamma rays cannot escape the blast in all directions. For this reason, near-surface bursts are also in this category. Although they may not be on the ground, they have similar effects. The ground absorbs many of the gamma rays. This produces an asymmetric field. The resulting field is very similar to that of a hemisphere that is radiating upward. The electrons also are able to return to the burst point through the ground. This makes the area near the center of the burst contain a high concentration of highly ionized particles. This net movement of electrons creates current loops that generate a magnetic field running around the burst point. This is the basic model of a near-surface burst.(7)
When the nuclear explosion occurs in the medium-altitude range, the effects of the ground are much. A medium-altitude range would be away from the ground but below the upper atmosphere. As the height of the burst increases, the asymmetry of the field produced decreases. However, the asymmetry increases, after a point, with altitude due to changes in the atmospheric density. This asymmetry can be seen in Figure One.
Figure One--Approximate variation of an asymmetry factor relative to a surface burst as a function of altitude8
Since the ground is absent, the magnetic field produced in near-surface bursts will be absent. The electric fields will be similar to those of near-surface bursts.(9)
High-altitude electromagnetic pulses (HEMP) produced by high-altitude bursts occur in an area of the atmosphere where the density of the air is low. Because of this, the gamma rays can travel very far before they are absorbed. These rays travel downward into the increasingly dense atmosphere. Here, they interact with the air to form ions as previously described. This region, called the deposition or source region, is roughly circular. It is thick in the middle and thinner toward the edges. It extends horizontally very far creating source regions that are over 1000 miles in diameter.(10) The size of it depends on the height of the burst and the yield of the weapon. The EMP in this source region gets deflected downward towards the earth due to the earths magnetic field. Although the fields produced from a high-altitude burst are not as great as those for a near-surface burst, they affect a much larger area.(11) Because of this huge potential, high-altitude bursts could be the most dangerous type of EMP.
EMP Effects
The electrical field produced by the EMP only lasts a very short time before it quickly tails off. The electric field has a rise time of about 1 nanosecond.(12) Even with such a short pulse, the effects can be tremendous. For a high altitude burst, the effects can also be far reaching. By many calculations, one properly placed nuclear bomb detonated above the center of the United States could produce huge electrical fields on the surface of the earth. "The EMP from a single hydrogen bomb exploded 300 kilometers over the heart of the United States could set up electrical field 50 kV/m strong over nearly all of North America"(13). Since EMP is electromagnetic radiation traveling at the speed of light, all of the area could possibly be effected almost simultaneously.
With such a possible threat, it is important to consider what may be affected. "Because of the intense electromagnetic fields (about 10 kV/m) and wide area of coverage, the HEMP can induce large voltages and currents in power lines, communication cables, radio towers, and other long conductors serving a facility"(14). Some other notable collectors of EMP include railroad tracks, large antennas, pipes, cables, wires in buildings, and metal fencing. Although materials underground are partially shielded by the ground, they are still collectors, and these collectors deliver the EMP energy to some larger facility. This produces surges that can destroy the connected device, such as, power generators or long distance telephone systems. An EMP could destroy many services needed to survive a war.
"Society has entered the information age and is more dependent on electronic systems that work with components that are very susceptible to excessive electric currents and voltages."(15) Many systems needed are controlled by a semiconductor in some way. Failure of semi-conductive chips could destroy industrial processes, railway networks, power and phone systems, and access to water supplies. Semiconductor devices fail when they encounter an EMP because of the local heating that occurs. When a semi-conductive device absorbs the EMP energy, it displaces the resulting heat that is produced relatively slowly when compared to the time scale of the EMP. Because the heat is not dissipated quickly, the semiconductor can quickly heat up to temperatures near the melting point of the material. Soon the device will short and fail. This type of failure is call thermal second-breakdown failure.(16)
It is also important to realize how vulnerable the military is to EMP. "Military systems often use the most sophisticated and therefore most vulnerable, electronics available, and many of the systems that must operate during a nuclear war cannot tolerate the temporary disturbances that EMP may induce."(17) Furthermore, many military duties require information to be communicated over long distances. This type of communication requires external antennas, which are extremely susceptible to EMP. Also, some military duties require information-gathering techniques. Many of these techniques use electronic devices connected directly to antennas or radar. Although the devices may be inside shielded buildings, the antennas bring the EMP inside to the electronics. Therefore, the effectiveness of shielding must be examined.
EMP Hardening
There are two things to consider when considering hardening targets against EMP. The first question to answer is whether the hardened system will become useless if shielded. The second question to be answered is whether the target is economically worthwhile to harden. The answers to these two questions are used to determine what devices should be shielded
To explain the first consideration, Makoff and Tsipis give the following simple example. If there was a communication plane with many antennas used to collect and transfer data, it would not be useful if its antennas were removed. However, to harden the plane, the antennas would need to be removed because they provide a direct path to the interior of the plane.(18) It is important to understand how the hardening will affect the performance of the hardened item.
The second consideration is very easy to understand. Some systems, although important, may not seem worthwhile enough to harden due to the high costs of shielding. "It may cost from 30% to 50% of the cost of a ground based communication center
just to refit it to withstand EMP," and, "as high as 10% of the cost for each plane."(19)
There are two basic ways to harden items against EMP effects.20 The first method is metallic shielding. The alternative is tailored hardening. Both methods will be briefly described.
Metallic shielding is used to, "Exclude energy propagated through fields in space."(21) Shields are made of a continuous piece of some metal such as steel or copper. A metal enclosure generally does not fully shield the interior because of the small holes that are likely to exist. Therefore, this type of shielding often contains additional elements to create the barrier. Commonly, only a fraction of a millimeter (22) of a metal is needed to supply adequate protection. This shield must completely surround the item to be shielded. A tight box must be formed to create the shield. The cost of such shielding (in1986 dollars) is $1000 per square meter for a welded-steel shield after installation.(23)
The alternative method, tailored hardening, is a more cost-effective way of hardening. In this method, only the most vulnerable elements and circuits are redesigned to be more rugged. The more rugged elements will be able to withstand much higher currents. However, a committee of the National Academy of Sciences is skeptical of this method due to unpredictable failures in testing.(24) Also, the use of this method is not recommended by the National Research Council. They doubted whether the approximations made to evaluate susceptibilities of the components were accurate. They did concede that tailored hardening may be useful to make existing systems less vulnerable.(25)
United States Policy
There are four issues to examine in the United States policy toward EMP. The effects of EMP must be considered when the United States decides when to launch its missiles to avoid possible EMP damage, how effective their nuclear warheads will be, where to use extra EMP hardening techniques after considering costs, and if development of an EMP device is in its best interest. These issues are very crucial to maintaining the United States deterrence against attack.
The first issue arises from the possible effects of the EMP. When deciding whether to launch missiles in a nuclear war, the United States must be aware of the EMP. A high-altitude burst or local-surface burst used on the United States could negate many of the United States advantages. Although many crucial systems are hardened, "Predicting the effects of EMP on givens systems
are riddled with uncertainty."(26) The first nuclear burst used on the United States might disable some or many key systems. The United States is using simulators to better estimate EMP effects, but even with good EMP hardening technology, many systems, particularly the older ones, may not get hardened. This is because, "The high cost of EMP hardening implies that only the most important systems will be made to withstand the pulse."(27) If some of these less important systems include some missile systems or other offensive systems, it may be worthwhile to use them before they are potentially destroyed.
Once the missiles have been launched, they may still be vulnerable to EMP effects. "Intercontinental missiles and their fire control centers depend heavily on sensitive electronic systems for guidance, radar, and communications as well as to control the functioning of their nuclear warheads."(28) The vulnerability of radar and communication has already been discussed, and because of this, the vulnerability of intercontinental missiles can be seen. Also, EMP from neighboring "friendly" warheads may destroy the warhead, as well. So, once the missile is fired, it is by no means safe from EMP.
Cost also has to be considered. With EMP hardening so expensive, the United States must decide what are reasonable losses due to EMP. These considerations have to include not just military losses. Many of the new military systems are having hardening technology built into them, but much of the civilian world is left unguarded. The single hydrogen bomb alluded to earlier could cause an EMP that would destroy, "In an instant tens of billions of dollars worth of communications equipment and other electronics. Almost all electric power will be knocked out."(29) With the United States?electronic and social base of today, this would be catastrophic. This amount of losses would probably be unacceptable. However, the United States must decide if it is worthwhile to shield all of its vulnerable systems. This scope of hardening would be incredibly expensive. However, after the war, society would need these systems to rebuild itself. With such a potential for destruction, it does not seem wise for the United States to continue development of EMP weapons.
Right now, "The electromagnetic pulse generator is emerging as one of the strongest contenders...to find effective weapons to defeat an enemy without causing loss of life."(30) The motive may be right, but the idea may be bad. It is nice to be searching for a weapon that reduces casualties, but such a weapon could be very destructive if used against the United States. Although the weapon is designed to be used by the United States, the possibility of it being used against the United States may not be as unlikely as it seems. With the extensive technology base of the United States, it seems extremely vulnerable to such a weapon.
Conclusions
The threat of EMP effects is real. The first nuclear bomb detonated over the United States could cause widespread destruction. It should be noted that in EMP tests not all electronics and systems at risk were initially destroyed. Some items did not fail in the first test or even the second. However, eventually they all failed. This poses a problem. The actual effects of EMP are not clear. It is clear that the potential for damage is there. Following this conclusion, the need for EMP hardening is clear.
If the United States is still preparing for war, it must shield itself from the effects of EMP. Theoretically, damage due to EMP could be extensive. Much of this damage may be avoidable if the United States takes measures to harden all its communication systems, power systems, and such. Also, the United States must further explore EMP effects to better prepare for them. This includes informing the United States public about the effects of EMP simulators. If current public opinion continues(31) and all the EMP simulators close, further EMP testing cannot be done. The public must understand that the EMP simulators are not harmful, and that the destruction of the American infrastructure would be devastating. This must be avoided at all costs, but without testing, America is vulnerable to this destruction. This is why the United States must be prepared for the effects of the EMP.
Works Cited
1. Makoff, Greg and Kosta Tsipis, "The Nuclear Electromagnetic Pulse," Report #19. Program in Science and Technology for International Security, Cambridge, MA, March 1988, p.3.
2. Glasstone, Samuel and Phillip J. Dolan, The Effects of Nuclear Weapons. Department of the Army, Washington D. C., 1977, pp. 353-54
3. Ibid, pp.514-41.
4. Makoff and Tsipis, "The Nuclear Electromagnetic Pulse," pp. 6-13.
5. Bridges J. E., J. Miletta, and L.W. Ricketts, EMP Radiation and Protective Techniques. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, 1976, pp.3-35.
6. Glasstone and Dolan, The Effects of Nuclear Weapons pp. 515-519.
7. Ibid. pp. 515-517.
8. Bridges, Miletta, and Ricketts, EMP Radiation. p. 19.
9. Ibid. p.18.
10. Ibid. p.6.
11. Glasstone and Dolan, The Effects of Nuclear Weapons. pp. 518-519.
12. Bridges, Miletta, and Ricketts, EMP Radiation. p.11.
13. "Mushrooming Vulnerability to EMP," Aerospace America, August, 1984, p.74.
14. High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse Protection for Ground Based Facilities. Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Alexandria, VA, 1986, p. 12.02-4.
15. International Union of Radio Science, "Nuclear Electromagnetic Pulse and Associated Effects," Telecommunication Journal, Vol 52, p.57.
16. Bridges, Miletta and Ricketts, "EMP Radiation and Protective Techniques," pp. 75-121.
17. Makoff and Tsipis, "The Nuclear Electromagnetic Pulse," pp. 15-17.
18. Ibid, p.18.
19. Ibid, p.19.
20. Klass, Philip J., "Study Raises Doubt on EMP Protection," Aviation Week and Space Technology, September 17, 1984, pp. 76-77.
21. High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse Protection for Ground Based Facilities. p. 12.02-85.
22. Ibid. p. 12.02-85.
23. Ibid. p. 12.02-217.
24. Norman, Colin, "NAS Study Casts Doubt on Existing EMP Protection," Science. August 24, 1984, pp.816-817.
25. Klass, "Study Raises Doubt," p.77.
26. Makoff and Tsipis, "The Nuclear Electromagnetic Pulse," p.24.
27. Ibid, p.19.
28. Ibid. p.17.
29. "Mushrooming Vulnerability," p.76.
30. Fulghum, David A., "EMP Weapons Lead Race for Non-Lethal Technology," Aviation Week and Space Technology, May 2, 1993, p. 61.
31. Norman, Colin, "Court Order Puts EMP Test Program on Hold," Science. May 27, 1988, pp. 1139-1140.
?
Last Updated (the body text) 02/01/97
Send your mail to :
BaloosBrew@yahoo.com
You are visitor since 3/10/00.
http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/5971/emp.html
http://www.google.as/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2003-34,GGLD:en&q=electro+magnetic+pulse+effects
Thank you for understanding my point(which I thought was obvious).
I want a simple emp device that will project a focused pulse from the rear of my car for, say, 200 feet.
The cop comes up behind me and I flip the switch.
I have daydreamed about such a thing since I first heard EMP can kill a cars ignition.
There has got to be a way...
Nonsense. 70% is not generated in the Chicago area. A statement like that makes me question the credibility of the author.
In addition, the source of any high altitude nuclear attacks would be immediately identified and would result in retaliation by US Nuclear Forces who would be undamaged after such an attack. The US military began "hardening" electronic systems against EMP attacks in the 1970s. Critical systems are already protected.
CLICK HERE to join the Internet's most popular conspiracy discussion forum |
ATS Links Contact ATS Campaign Issues Breaking News Terrorism News Discussion Board Joining ATS Recent ATS Posts Submit ATSNN News Sports Discussions Ignorance Denied |
|
|
CLICK HERE to join the Internet's most popular conspiracy discussion forum |
All content on AboveTopSecret.com is either copyrighted by AboveTopSecret.com ©2004, or reprinted with premission of the original author and copyright owner. No reporduction without expressed written permission from Simon Gray, owner of AboveTopSecret.com. |
Natural terrain kills the EMP quickly. That's why it's studied in terms of sea level on our navy. Yes, Chicago is flat, but it's still got presence to block travel. I guess one could also say the same for da Bears.
I like the idea, but I always wonder who I am going to talk to when it is over.....
A good argument for having a pre-computer chip car hanging around..."Honey, we HAVE to get that '69 GTO in order to contribute to the national defense. Where's your sense of patriotism?"
Ok I understand.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.