Is this true - Alvin Booth
Just watching a film I taped off TV called Atomic Train in which a train carrying a nucluar bomb exploded near an American city.
In the aftermath the cars wouldn't start because of an electro magnetic pulse from the bomb knocked out the computer chip on the car.
Was this artistic licence from the film makers or would it be true.
I understand that mobile phones emit radiation or even overhead power lines.
Is this the same as a electro magnetic pulse???
I understood from my handbook that if a fault occurs all systems restore to default and will operate albeit inefficiently.
What is the definitive answer from our panel of experts.

Re: Is this true - Dai Watchalowski
Yes.......In the 70s when I was in the armed forces we had to shield sensitive electronic equipment as part of NBC (Nuclear/Bilogical/Chemical) training. - I was involved in Signals and the EMP was a specific weapon (i.e. Warheads exploded above the atmosphere giving an exact geographic fingerprint for EMP
fallout). This was the predicted Warsaw Pact pre-emptive strike designed to knock out NATO communications and computer infrastructure to disprupt a response. That's why communication landlines were hardened around that time.
Re: Is this true - Mark
Also see my warning on an earlier thread to a correspondent who thought an EMP device might be something he would develop in relation to Gatsos.

It is more likely that not it would also take out his ECU.

Hence my personal desire to create a deathray instead


Re: Is this true - Alex. L. Dick
I understand that the relatively primitive valve (or "toob"!) radio and electronic equipment in some Eastern bloc aircraft had the advantage of being intrinsically EMP proof. Whether this was accidental or by intent I am not sure.
Re: Is this true - Alvin Booth
Top marks for the guy who thought of using this EMP for a Gatso.
But looking further than that why bother with the stinger device which the Police employ. Although I must admit it gives me some enjoyment watching them use it on TV. Why not have a Policeman on the side of the road with an electro pulse widget to bring the fugutive to an halt. Although thinking on, it wouldn't stop my wifes Maestro TD which has no electronics.
For a moment there I was thinking of joining the inventors club.
With all this high tek what a knife edge we must all be living on.
If cars have computers which can be knocked out, all other service we depend on must have similar components including water, electric and gas.
Take me back to the good old days when breaking down on the continent was no big deal and the local blacksmith, part time motor mechanic could cobble something together with his compulsory gaulloisse fag hanging from his mouth.
Perhaps President Bush should be informed that star wars could be simplified by having an EMP screwed to a satellite which could blast the missile launchers computer chips before it launches its rocket.
I'm sure you guys could cobble something together for a fraction of the cost.

Re: Is this true - Rod Maxwell
An EMP stinger device has been developed (in the US) but I don't know if this has been employed yet.
Re: Is this true - Mark

one of the main problems with an EMP based weapon is that of focus. In basic terms the pulse is indiscriminate in its aim and spreads in a circle of strength decreasing over distance according to its initial energy from the point of discharge.

With regards to starwar type weapons the emp emitting device would have to be very close to its target and reletively low strength when deployed or else it would take out friendly items such as any other nearby satelite or other objects.

A deathray however could be much more targetable, if only I could get the parts.
Re: Is this true - Dai Watchalowski

Warsaw Pact equipment was more primative than Nato's but was, consequently,
more EMP proof - you have to admit there is a lot to be said for their military equipment, you've just got to look at the AK47 compared to the NATO weapons
i.e. the Armalite (crap before it was sorted, it just wouldn't work in Vietnam) and the SA80 which is still pretty crap - ask any squaddie.
Re: Is this true - Mark
Hence my comment in the earlier thread that the prospective EMP gatso destroyer should deploy this weapon from a Lada.

As ever

Re: Best stinger device ever! - Stuart B
Funniest stinger device ever is the one the Finnish police have/had consisting of a harpoon mounted on the front of a car. Modus operandi est, follow the bad guys, fire the harpoon into their boot, apply the brakes. Never really knew if it was a wind up or not. Come back Moby Dick!

BTW Mark re death ray 'er indoors not keen about being towed up and down the M6 on a trailer but thinking about the free holiday in Rio offer!
At the moment she's a bit preoccupied with licensing junior to use the dr stare up to stun level, you know irresponsibilities of youth and all that.

Tara a bit
Re: Best stinger device ever! - Michael Thomas
It is true. The Sukhoi Su-27 fighter planes up to the brand new state of the art Su-30 have avionics deliberately built using non-IC technology. i.e valves !! Don't laugh. The reason being they are EMP proof.

Any ECU in a car can be knocked out with a serious pulse of electro-magnetic radiation. Before you panic, the amount of electrical power required runs close to 1 Mw to have any effective range of 100 meters from source.

It wouldn't be particularly healthy for the occupant of the car either.
Re: Best stinger device ever! - Bill Doodson

I must admit I didnt have time to reply to your last post on my comment on gatsos and EMP, however here goes again. The unit should be clamped to the gatso and fed from capacitors charged from a battery. I certainly would not wish my car to be anywhere to close to the thing when it was set off, athough my old 1961 Ford Anglia would probably have survied. Using magnets such as in the rear of a TV should help to direct the pulse into the gatso, I THINK, but as in my last comment hopefully there is an expert in the forum who can direct me elsewhere.

Re: Best stinger device ever! - Mark

4oz of blasting explosive would be just as effective


Re: Best stinger device ever! - John Kenyon
Mark wrote:
> Bill
> 4oz of blasting explosive would be just as effective

A bit more noticable to the local constabulary though...

Value my car