I still do not believe that the coverage is anything like that map.
Field density is very hard to project and there is no reliable data to support the article.
It may be that 500 miles is an overstate.
Ok lets say it only knocks out only half the radius shown. In the right metropolitan corridor. I again ask you how long before first responders are over whelmed and the area becomes Hell on earth?
Ok lets say it only knocks out only half the radius shown. In the right metropolitan corridor. I again ask you how long before first responders are over whelmed and the area becomes Hell on earth?
By the way the map is from a declassified report by Dr. Michael P. Bernardin of Los Alamos headed the Joint DoD/DOE Phase 2 Feasibility Study of a High Power Radio Frequency (HPRF) Weapon, which focused on the feasibility and effectiveness of developing an HPRF (i.e. enhanced EMP) weapon for offensive purposes. Consequently, the U.S. has designed low yield nuclear weapons with massively enhanced EMP output.
http://glasstone.blogspot.com/2009/02/how-emp-turned-off-1-3-of-streetlamps.html
So in your estimation he’s wrong? Why?
“Field density is very hard to project and there is no reliable data to support the article.”
You do know that one reason we don’t have some data on atmospheric tests back in the day is that the EMP blew out the data collection equipment.
Once the EMP effect was understood, it was immediately classified.