Are SOK batteries EMP proof?

[JWLV]

My numbers aren't exact, but you'll get the idea. If the largest class of EMP went off, it would fry most unprotected electronics that are plugged into walls. Desktop computers, servers, LED bulbs, would most likely be toast.

What about desktop computers that are plugged into a UPS backup power supply that is plugged in to the grid? Would it fry the UPS and thereby saving the desktop computer?

 

[MurphyGuy]

Oh wow that good to hear ,do you think the electronics on the grid tied system would survive a solar EMP.
And thank you for all you input and opinions they sound vary knowledgeable.

If the grid tied system is actively connected to the grid, the inverters will probably be smoked.. Luckily we watch the sun 24/7 so if a large CME is headed our way, you should have plenty of time to flip the circuit breakers off to render the system safe.

In a nuclear EMP, don't waste your time.. it will all be toast.

 

[MattiFin]

Oh wow that good to hear ,do you think the electronics on the grid tied system would survive a solar EMP.
And thank you for all you input and opinions they sound vary knowledgeable.

"Probably ok"
Solar EMP is not problem for the grid-tie system per se but there is some small possibility of overvoltage spikes from the grid itself when it goes berserk and transformers are exploding..
Solar EMP or geomagnetic storm causes long-term fluctuations in Earth's magnetic field and this causes induced DC currents in looong cables(national grid).
Induced DC current saturates distribution transformers and they overheat/destruct/shut-off. But the "home equipment" is largely unaffected other than not having electricity. Even your transformers and motors at home are mostly at safe as DC current doesn't pass your nearest pole transformer and the wiring between your home and nearest transformer is so short that induced currents are still tiny.

 

[MurphyGuy]

What about desktop computers that are plugged into a UPS backup power supply that is plugged in to the grid? Would it fry the UPS and thereby saving the desktop computer?

With a Solar EMP, the UPS would probably protect the computer... probably.

There's a catch.. in a large Carrington type solar EMP, while your ups might protect the computer from the surge, it is likely that your UPS will catch fire and burn your home down.. or your microwave will catch fire and burn the home down.. or any one of the wall wart transformers, or your television..
Point is, if we ever have a huge solar EMP, a lot of houses will likely catch fire due to sparks coming out of various electrical appliances.

 

[circus]

Seeing all our electronics come from credible adversaries there's probably a trojan horse built in already. Why bomb when a switch will do?

 

[Sanwizard]

EMP Pulses come in two forms: 1) Conductive 2) Radiative.

The conductive component is easy to stop.. you just need a surge protector with nanosecond response time. The Siemens FS140 can stop the conductive pulse without hardly breaking a sweat.

The problem is the radiative component of a nuclear EMP. This is because the radiateve part directly couples into circuit boards and can't be stopped by anything short of a Faraday cage.

When it comes to Nuclear EMP's, neither the conductive pulse or the radiative part will harm any battery chemistry I'm aware of, but it could harm the battery management system of a lithium ion battery or a charger/charge controller connected to any battery..

The radiative pulse of a Nuclear EMP is very similar to the high voltage static shock you sometimes get on dry days when you shuffle across your carpet. The pulse is very high voltage, but very short lived.. it only affects tiny transistors, and it can burn them out whether they are being used or not.

Which means every CPU.

 

[A.Justice]

Your shipping container will provide about 15db of shielding.. which is better than nothing, but not as good as a 40db trash can sealed up with tape.
I would suggest you bundle the panels up, tape some garbage bags around them for insulation, then a layer of heavy duty tinfoil all the way around.. Just use some packing tape and generous overlapping of the foil..

I keep an old phone, cheap-o SCC, battery charger, BMS, LED flashlight, multimeter, HAM radio, router, small inverter, and Raspberry Pi, metal boxes, wrapped in a 5mil, 6 gallon, mylar bag. Each layer of 5 mil mylar adds 8-10 db of protection (I tested it with a signal db graphing app on my phone). Two bags and a well sealed metal box give me a 30-40db signal reduction on top of my brick walled house, and cost very little. The boxes are also sandwiched between a metal deep freezer and filing cabinet for some additional protection.

They sell thicker mylar as well, I imagine it works better than the stuff I use to seal food.

Like someone already said, it's like an insurance policy that I hope to never have to use, but I'll be really glad that I protected my equipment, IF, god forbid, there is an EMP or solar event.

 

[A.Justice]

Seeing all our electronics come from credible adversaries there's probably a trojan horse built in already. Why bomb when a switch will do?

I always wondered about that. How easy would to be to add a "kill switch" to a BMS.

If SHTF, the BMS could be fried or disabled remotely, it could even have the parameters changed to destroy our cells. A "back door" could be used to create an immense amount of damage and confusion.

 

[MurphyGuy]

If a nuclear EMP hits you batteries will be the least of your problems.
We have long passed the age when one or two bombs would hit. Any attack would release hundreds to thousand of war heads from both sides and possibly other sides. I would spend my time thinking about lightning damage as that is the most likely problem you will have.

That is not true.. First off, none of the super powers are going to launch an EMP attack.. it would be a terrorist or a rogue nation like North Korea.. And under such situations, our response would be purely conventional.. no need to irradiate the entire world when the damage has already been done and a conventional response can finish them off.

Nuclear EMP does not spread radiation on the ground.. except for your lights turning off, you wouldn't even know it happened unless you were looking up in the sky when it went off.

 

[MurphyGuy]

I keep an old phone, cheap-o SCC, battery charger, BMS, LED flashlight, multimeter, HAM radio, router, small inverter, and Raspberry Pi, metal boxes, wrapped in a 5mil, 6 gallon, mylar bag. Each layer of 5 mil mylar adds 8-10 db of protection (I tested it with a signal db graphing app on my phone). Two bags and a well sealed metal box give me a 30-40db signal reduction on top of my brick walled house, and cost very little. The boxes are also sandwiched between a metal deep freezer and filing cabinet for some additional protection.

They sell thicker mylar as well, I imagine it works better than the stuff I use to seal food.

Like someone already said, it's like an insurance policy that I hope to never have to use, but I'll be really glad that I protected my equipment, IF, god forbid, there is an EMP or solar event.

Mylar is an absolutely horrible way to protect against EMP.. Mylar is great for keeping oxygen from getting to food, but that's about it.. The "aluminum" in Mylar is not a solid sheet, its applied as a powder of some sort.

I believe that as the frequency increases, the poor protection of the Mylar decreases.. You need a solid aluminum layer.

What you really want are bags designed for electrostatic protection.. go to Digi-Key, search for Dri-Shield 3400 bags.. They are stupidly cheap and come in a variety of sizes, and will give you about 40db of attenuation for each layer. You don't even need to seal them, just fold over the opening two or three times and tape it shut..

Here you go:

Dri-Shield® 3400 Moisture Barrier Bags - SCS - Static Control Shielding Bags, Materials | Online Catalog | DigiKey Electronics

Browse DigiKey's inventory of Dri-Shield® 3400 Moisture Barrier BagsStatic Control Shielding Bags, Materials. Features, Specifications, Alternative Product, Product Training Modules, and Datasheets are all available.

www.digikey.com

Every item I protect has at least 2 layers of the dri-sheild 3400.. plus the 18 ga layer of steel the container is made from. And if you want to go really cheap (and I have several items this way), just use common heavy duty aluminum foil.. Properly wrapped up and taped, it will also provide 40db of protection.

For some of my larger items, I place them in a plastic bag, then wrap in foil, then another bag, then another layer of foil. My Radian 8048 inverter and HF Ham Radio are done like this.. 3 layers, then put inside the steel container..

 

[robby]

That is not true.. First off, none of the super powers are going to launch an EMP attack.. it would be a terrorist or a rogue nation like North Korea.. And under such situations, our response would be purely conventional.. no need to irradiate the entire world when the damage has already been done and a conventional response can finish them off.

Nuclear EMP does not spread radiation on the ground.. except for your lights turning off, you wouldn't even know it happened unless you were looking up in the sky when it went off.

Hmmm so your saying North Korea launches it's 30+ nukes at the USA and we will respond in a few days with a conventional attack!! I don't think so!

I don't know why you keep calling it an EMP attack? It is possible to create a massive EMP pulse but I don't know of any country that is trying to make it into a bomb. Any kind of bomb that will produce an EMP that will effect you is a massive Nuclear explosion nearby and the EMP is just a by product of the gamma radiation. As I said the least of your problems will be the EMP. And BTW there is no way of predicting what would happen when the USA strikes back. Does China stand by and hope that none of the Bombs heading in their direction are targeting them? Does the USA just preemptively strike China because chaos is running amok in DC after an attack.

 

[MurphyGuy]

Hmmm so your saying North Korea launches it's 30+ nukes at the USA and we will respond in a few days with a conventional attack!! I don't think so!

I don't know why you keep calling it an EMP attack? It is possible to create a massive EMP pulse but I don't know of any country that is trying to make it into a bomb. Any kind of bomb that will produce an EMP that will effect you is a massive Nuclear explosion nearby and the EMP is just a by product of the gamma radiation. As I said the least of your problems will be the EMP. And BTW there is no way of predicting what would happen when the USA strikes back, does China stand by and hope that none of the Bombs heading in their direction are targeting them? Does the USA just preemptively strike China because chaos is running DC after an attack.

The question isn't how many NK launches, the question is: "how many detonate on American soil".. NK's missile technology is pretty basic and low tech and we could probably take out most of them in space.. (shmaybe).. Some might be duds, others might not even make it to their target, and those that did, would probably miss the target by several hundred miles.

But yeah, in an all out nuclear attack that was somewhat successful, we would respond in kind.. and NK knows this and they know they can't win that war so they wouldn't even try. Other nations wouldn't be an issue at that point.

The problem is that nuclear weapons spread radiation all the way around the planet.. why do you think we all stopped testing them? Its because we were killing ourselves. For every bomb you detonate on the other side of the planet, you will suffer a quantifiable amount of harm yourself.

Also, why would NK launch an all out nuclear attack on our soil? Even if all 30+ missiles hit the bullseye successfully, the best they can hope for is to kill 5 or 10 million people.. if even that.. and our response would be nuclear.. so they would lose.

But detonate a nuclear weapon 250 miles up over Kansas, and you could optimistically kill 90% of the country.. Even a solid 30% results in over 100 million dead.. and the USA would no longer be top dog. This is called "Asymmetric warfare"..

This isn't the 1950's anymore.. people don't know how to live without electricity.. Heck, most people don't even know how to do such basic things as preserve food, garden, or hunt.. or how to purify water or dispose of human waste. Add to that the violence that would rock this country and that 90% number makes it into a congressional report.

Nope.. only a drunk idiot would launch all his nukes to give someone a bloody nose when just one of them could take their enemy to their knees.

Nuclear weapons detonated with the purpose of destroying cities do not produce an appreciable EMP that radiates much further out than their own blast damage radius. Yes, they do produce an EMP, but it is 1) restricted to line of sight and the curvature of the earth limits that to around 100 - 200 miles.. making for a very localized event. 2) the very air density that allows the blast radius to do damage (crumble buildings, etc), also restricts and attenuates the amplitude of the EMP that is created.

Nuclear weapons don't create an EMP directly.. detonate a nuclear weapon far out into space and there is no EMP. The mechanism that creates the EMP is a side effect of the detonation's interaction with the atmosphere. Specifically, it is high energy gamma rays that slam into atmospheric atoms and strip those atoms of electrons.. those electrons then latch on to the first magnetic field line they find, which is coming from the core of the planet, and spiral down to the ground. Too much air density (low altitude or ground detonation) and the air density limits how far the gamma rays can travel.. too little air density, and there aren't enough atmosphere molecules to do the job.

On a side note: If you detonated two nuclear weapons in space, the 2nd weapon wouldn't do much.. this is because most of the easily stripped electrons in the atmosphere are already gone. You would have to wait a few days for new "fresh" atmosphere to rotate in over the target area.

Gamma rays travel in a straight line as well.. which means the gamma from a weapon detonated in the trunk of a car would fly right over your head just a couple miles away.. this is because of the curvature of the planet. (ask any HAM radio operator about this) at 12 feet up, it would go about 5 or 6 miles.. If you detonated it at 10,000 feet, the air density would attenuate the gamma rays to a point where they were ineffective in about 50 miles or so...

The reason they want to detonate the weapon 250 miles up at the edge of space is because there is no air to attenuate the gamma.. all the gamma produced that flies in Earth's direction will initiate a process called "Compton Scattering", which amplifies the effect.. and since its so high up, line of sight is no longer part of the math.. at 250 miles up, you can see the east and west coast at the same time.

Prediction of our response:
This would depend on how successful NK's attack was, and how it was conducted. A successful EMP attack (high altitude nuclear EMP), would force us to respond with ICBM's.. I don't think we would be able to respond with conventional weapons because the supporting infrastructure for such a response wouldn't be available, but I'm not certain of that.

Let me ask you: You're a soldier... all of the USA's electrical grid has just been destroyed and it isn't coming back for 5 to 10 years. Are you going to report for duty so you can fill sandbags and shoot at the enemy? Or are you going to stay home to protect your wife and kids from the tens of thousands of armed hungry people? And even if you wanted to report, how do you plan to get there if your car won't start and the roads are clogged?

One other consideration: Most of our military isn't hardened against EMP.. its mostly just the weapons that are hardened. The missile silos, attack planes, tanks, etc. mostly just the weapons.. The truck that delivers fuel to the aircraft is not hardened.. the Hummer is not hardened, the transport aircraft is not hardened..

This is why an EMP attack is so talked about.. its the only viable way a country like NK could strike a significant blow.. the only way.. and doing so means they can hold on to the other 29+ weapons to defend themselves and threaten South Korea, Japan, etc if we attacked them.

They know it, we know it..

 

[ed6269]

The question isn't how many NK launches, the question is: "how many detonate on American soil".. NK's missile technology is pretty basic and low tech and we could probably take out most of them in space.. (shmaybe).. Some might be duds, others might not even make it to their target, and those that did, would probably miss the target by several hundred miles.

But yeah, in an all out nuclear attack that was somewhat successful, we would respond in kind.. and NK knows this and they know they can't win that war so they wouldn't even try. Other nations wouldn't be an issue at that point.

The problem is that nuclear weapons spread radiation all the way around the planet.. why do you think we all stopped testing them? Its because we were killing ourselves. For every bomb you detonate on the other side of the planet, you will suffer a quantifiable amount of harm yourself.

Also, why would NK launch an all out nuclear attack on our soil? Even if all 30+ missiles hit the bullseye successfully, the best they can hope for is to kill 5 or 10 million people.. if even that.. and our response would be nuclear.. so they would lose.

But detonate a nuclear weapon 250 miles up over Kansas, and you could optimistically kill 90% of the country.. Even a solid 30% results in over 100 million dead.. and the USA would no longer be top dog. This is called "Asymmetric warfare"..

This isn't the 1950's anymore.. people don't know how to live without electricity.. Heck, most people don't even know how to do such basic things as preserve food, garden, or hunt.. or how to purify water or dispose of human waste. Add to that the violence that would rock this country and that 90% number makes it into a congressional report.

Nope.. only a drunk idiot would launch all his nukes to give someone a bloody nose when just one of them could take their enemy to their knees.

Nuclear weapons detonated with the purpose of destroying cities do not produce an appreciable EMP that radiates much further out than their own blast damage radius. Yes, they do produce an EMP, but it is 1) restricted to line of sight and the curvature of the earth limits that to around 100 - 200 miles.. making for a very localized event. 2) the very air density that allows the blast radius to do damage (crumble buildings, etc), also restricts and attenuates the amplitude of the EMP that is created.

Nuclear weapons don't create an EMP directly.. detonate a nuclear weapon far out into space and there is no EMP. The mechanism that creates the EMP is a side effect of the detonation's interaction with the atmosphere. Specifically, it is high energy gamma rays that slam into atmospheric atoms and strip those atoms of electrons.. those electrons then latch on to the first magnetic field line they find, which is coming from the core of the planet, and spiral down to the ground. Too much air density (low altitude or ground detonation) and the air density limits how far the gamma rays can travel.. too little air density, and there aren't enough atmosphere molecules to do the job.

On a side note: If you detonated two nuclear weapons in space, the 2nd weapon wouldn't do much.. this is because most of the easily stripped electrons in the atmosphere are already gone. You would have to wait a few days for new "fresh" atmosphere to rotate in over the target area.

Gamma rays travel in a straight line as well.. which means the gamma from a weapon detonated in the trunk of a car would fly right over your head just a couple miles away.. this is because of the curvature of the planet. (ask any HAM radio operator about this) at 12 feet up, it would go about 5 or 6 miles.. If you detonated it at 10,000 feet, the air density would attenuate the gamma rays to a point where they were ineffective in about 50 miles or so...

The reason they want to detonate the weapon 250 miles up at the edge of space is because there is no air to attenuate the gamma.. all the gamma produced that flies in Earth's direction will initiate a process called "Compton Scattering", which amplifies the effect.. and since its so high up, line of sight is no longer part of the math.. at 250 miles up, you can see the east and west coast at the same time.

Prediction of our response:
This would depend on how successful NK's attack was, and how it was conducted. A successful EMP attack (high altitude nuclear EMP), would force us to respond with ICBM's.. I don't think we would be able to respond with conventional weapons because the supporting infrastructure for such a response wouldn't be available, but I'm not certain of that.

Let me ask you: You're a soldier... all of the USA's electrical grid has just been destroyed and it isn't coming back for 5 to 10 years. Are you going to report for duty so you can fill sandbags and shoot at the enemy? Or are you going to stay home to protect your wife and kids from the tens of thousands of armed hungry people? And even if you wanted to report, how do you plan to get there if your car won't start and the roads are clogged?

One other consideration: Most of our military isn't hardened against EMP.. its mostly just the weapons that are hardened. The missile silos, attack planes, tanks, etc. mostly just the weapons.. The truck that delivers fuel to the aircraft is not hardened.. the Hummer is not hardened, the transport aircraft is not hardened..

This is why an EMP attack is so talked about.. its the only viable way a country like NK could strike a significant blow.. the only way.. and doing so means they can hold on to the other 29+ weapons to defend themselves and threaten South Korea, Japan, etc if we attacked them.

They know it, we know it..

Wow

 

[robby]

The question isn't how many NK launches, the question is: "how many detonate on American soil".. NK's missile technology is pretty basic and low tech and we could probably take out most of them in space.. (shmaybe).. Some might be duds, others might not even make it to their target, and those that did, would probably miss the target by several hundred miles.

We have no idea how good their missiles are but we do know that our own missiles from the 1960s where not very good when compared to the missiles we have today. Those 1960 missiles could still hit a city and by the 1980s we could hit a football field in the city and by the 1990s they declared they could send one through the goal posts. NK only has to hit the City and we are screwed. If you thought 3 planes hitting buildings in 2001 was an social and economic catastrophe, you should consider what even one Nuke hitting NY or LA would do.

BTW once A Nuke reaches space it's almost impossible to shoot it down. The payload shells open and several warheads along with a dozen fake (Metallic Balloon type) Warheads start heading back to earth at a tremendous speed. This presents multiple targets to radar and only 1/3rd of them are real. If you wanna shoot down a nuke the best time is before it launches or before it gets into space and release the Warheads.

But yeah, in an all out nuclear attack that was somewhat successful, we would respond in kind.. and NK knows this and they know they can't win that war so they wouldn't even try. Other nations wouldn't be an issue at that point.

The problem is you keep on thinking of NK like its a regular country. With NK it's all about one man and how is he feeling. If Kim knew he was going to die of cancer in 3 months would you wanna play a game of chicken with him? He doesn't care a bit about the people, his have been starving for the last 12 months while he has been eating Caribbean Lobster right in front of their starving faces.

The problem is that nuclear weapons spread radiation all the way around the planet.. why do you think we all stopped testing them? Its because we were killing ourselves. For every bomb you detonate on the other side of the planet, you will suffer a quantifiable amount of harm yourself.

The Radiation from a cleanly detonated Nuclear weapon dies off a lot faster than you might think, within two days it is at a low level. Yes it would spread radiation around the globe but not at the levels that you see in the movies.

Also, why would NK launch an all out nuclear attack on our soil? Even if all 30+ missiles hit the bullseye successfully, the best they can hope for is to kill 5 or 10 million people.. if even that.. and our response would be nuclear.. so they would lose.

Reminder we are not dealing with a country we are dealing with a single man who is not all that stable in the head.

But detonate a nuclear weapon 250 miles up over Kansas, and you could optimistically kill 90% of the country.. Even a solid 30% results in over 100 million dead.. and the USA would no longer be top dog. This is called "Asymmetric warfare"..

The International Space station is not even 250 Miles up in space. A blast at that Altitude would have no impact on life on the ground but it would produce a mild EMP that would be large in radius. The field produced would not be sufficient to do harm to most devices.

This isn't the 1950's anymore.. people don't know how to live without electricity.. Heck, most people don't even know how to do such basic things as preserve food, garden, or hunt.. or how to purify water or dispose of human waste. Add to that the violence that would rock this country and that 90% number makes it into a congressional report.

Agree, that is why I do not worry about what my solar panels or batteries will be doing, it is the least of my concerns.

Nope.. only a drunk idiot would launch all his nukes to give someone a bloody nose when just one of them could take their enemy to their knees.

Hmmm you do know who runs NK LOL..

Nuclear weapons detonated with the purpose of destroying cities do not produce an appreciable EMP that radiates much further out than their own blast damage radius. Yes, they do produce an EMP, but it is 1) restricted to line of sight and the curvature of the earth limits that to around 100 - 200 miles.. making for a very localized event. 2) the very air density that allows the blast radius to do damage (crumble buildings, etc), also restricts and attenuates the amplitude of the EMP that is created.

Nuclear weapons don't create an EMP directly.. detonate a nuclear weapon far out into space and there is no EMP. The mechanism that creates the EMP is a side effect of the detonation's interaction with the atmosphere. Specifically, it is high energy gamma rays that slam into atmospheric atoms and strip those atoms of electrons.. those electrons then latch on to the first magnetic field line they find, which is coming from the core of the planet, and spiral down to the ground. Too much air density (low altitude or ground detonation) and the air density limits how far the gamma rays can travel.. too little air density, and there aren't enough atmosphere molecules to do the job.

On a side note: If you detonated two nuclear weapons in space, the 2nd weapon wouldn't do much.. this is because most of the easily stripped electrons in the atmosphere are already gone. You would have to wait a few days for new "fresh" atmosphere to rotate in over the target area.

Gamma rays travel in a straight line as well.. which means the gamma from a weapon detonated in the trunk of a car would fly right over your head just a couple miles away.. this is because of the curvature of the planet. (ask any HAM radio operator about this) at 12 feet up, it would go about 5 or 6 miles.. If you detonated it at 10,000 feet, the air density would attenuate the gamma rays to a point where they were ineffective in about 50 miles or so...

The reason they want to detonate the weapon 250 miles up at the edge of space is because there is no air to attenuate the gamma.. all the gamma produced that flies in Earth's direction will initiate a process called "Compton Scattering", which amplifies the effect.. and since its so high up, line of sight is no longer part of the math.. at 250 miles up, you can see the east and west coast at the same time.

Prediction of our response:
This would depend on how successful NK's attack was, and how it was conducted. A successful EMP attack (high altitude nuclear EMP), would force us to respond with ICBM's.. I don't think we would be able to respond with conventional weapons because the supporting infrastructure for such a response wouldn't be available, but I'm not certain of that.

Let me ask you: You're a soldier... all of the USA's electrical grid has just been destroyed and it isn't coming back for 5 to 10 years. Are you going to report for duty so you can fill sandbags and shoot at the enemy? Or are you going to stay home to protect your wife and kids from the tens of thousands of armed hungry people? And even if you wanted to report, how do you plan to get there if your car won't start and the roads are clogged?

One other consideration: Most of our military isn't hardened against EMP.. its mostly just the weapons that are hardened. The missile silos, attack planes, tanks, etc. mostly just the weapons.. The truck that delivers fuel to the aircraft is not hardened.. the Hummer is not hardened, the transport aircraft is not hardened..

Most military devices use electronic components that are hardened. The military has strict specifications on what they require from IC's and other devices that may come in contact with an EMP.

This is why an EMP attack is so talked about.. its the only viable way a country like NK could strike a significant blow.. the only way.. and doing so means they can hold on to the other 29+ weapons to defend themselves and threaten South Korea, Japan, etc if we attacked them.

They know it, we know it..

Yes that is what they have been doing for the last 15 years and we simply ignore them. If they should go on the attack one day it will not be nuclear, it will be a full blown conventional attack into SK. The problem is that our Dear Leader is not sure if he wants to be constantly running from missile strikes and living in deep bunkers or just keep on eating Lobster and living like a king like his father did.

 

[Jerrys13]

The question isn't how many NK launches, the question is: "how many detonate on American soil".. NK's missile technology is pretty basic and low tech and we could probably take out most of them in space.. (shmaybe).. Some might be duds, others might not even make it to their target, and those that did, would probably miss the target by several hundred miles.

This is an accurate statement.

But yeah, in an all out nuclear attack that was somewhat successful, we would respond in kind.. and NK knows this and they know they can't win that war so they wouldn't even try. Other nations wouldn't be an issue at that point.

Never say never. If it's a joint effort it's another matter entirely.

The problem is that nuclear weapons spread radiation all the way around the planet.. why do you think we all stopped testing them? Its because we were killing ourselves. For every bomb you detonate on the other side of the planet, you will suffer a quantifiable amount of harm yourself.

We "all" didn't stop testing them. NK tested in 2017 and we believe others are conducting "low yield" tests today

Also, why would NK launch an all out nuclear attack on our soil? Even if all 30+ missiles hit the bullseye successfully, the best they can hope for is to kill 5 or 10 million people.. if even that.. and our response would be nuclear.. so they would lose.

This is true

But detonate a nuclear weapon 250 miles up over Kansas, and you could optimistically kill 90% of the country.. Even a solid 30% results in over 100 million dead.. and the USA would no longer be top dog. This is called "Asymmetric warfare"..

This isn't the 1950's anymore.. people don't know how to live without electricity.. Heck, most people don't even know how to do such basic things as preserve food, garden, or hunt.. or how to purify water or dispose of human waste. Add to that the violence that would rock this country and that 90% number makes it into a congressional report.

This is also true. Less than 2% of our society have these skill sets.

Nope.. only a drunk idiot would launch all his nukes to give someone a bloody nose when just one of them could take their enemy to their knees.

In "WWII talk" tis is not exactly true. Hitlers Blitzkrieg was pretty successful and third world countries aiming for the US would most likely pull all their eggs in one basket knowing we retain "first strike capability" AFTER we detect their launch.

Nuclear weapons detonated with the purpose of destroying cities do not produce an appreciable EMP that radiates much further out than their own blast damage radius. Yes, they do produce an EMP, but it is 1) restricted to line of sight and the curvature of the earth limits that to around 100 - 200 miles.. making for a very localized event. 2) the very air density that allows the blast radius to do damage (crumble buildings, etc), also restricts and attenuates the amplitude of the EMP that is created.

This is accurate.

Nuclear weapons don't create an EMP directly.. detonate a nuclear weapon far out into space and there is no EMP. The mechanism that creates the EMP is a side effect of the detonation's interaction with the atmosphere. Specifically, it is high energy gamma rays that slam into atmospheric atoms and strip those atoms of electrons.. those electrons then latch on to the first magnetic field line they find, which is coming from the core of the planet, and spiral down to the ground. Too much air density (low altitude or ground detonation) and the air density limits how far the gamma rays can travel.. too little air density, and there aren't enough atmosphere molecules to do the job.

This is a VERY accurate explanation of the science behind it all.

On a side note: If you detonated two nuclear weapons in space, the 2nd weapon wouldn't do much.. this is because most of the easily stripped electrons in the atmosphere are already gone. You would have to wait a few days for new "fresh" atmosphere to rotate in over the target area.

Gamma rays travel in a straight line as well.. which means the gamma from a weapon detonated in the trunk of a car would fly right over your head just a couple miles away.. this is because of the curvature of the planet. (ask any HAM radio operator about this) at 12 feet up, it would go about 5 or 6 miles.. If you detonated it at 10,000 feet, the air density would attenuate the gamma rays to a point where they were ineffective in about 50 miles or so...

The reason they want to detonate the weapon 250 miles up at the edge of space is because there is no air to attenuate the gamma.. all the gamma produced that flies in Earth's direction will initiate a process called "Compton Scattering", which amplifies the effect.. and since its so high up, line of sight is no longer part of the math.. at 250 miles up, you can see the east and west coast at the same time.

Again, a very accurate explanation.

Prediction of our response:
This would depend on how successful NK's attack was, and how it was conducted. A successful EMP attack (high altitude nuclear EMP), would force us to respond with ICBM's.. I don't think we would be able to respond with conventional weapons because the supporting infrastructure for such a response wouldn't be available, but I'm not certain of that.

Unless they targeted SK at the same time, SK would be a first responder.

Let me ask you: You're a soldier... all of the USA's electrical grid has just been destroyed and it isn't coming back for 5 to 10 years. Are you going to report for duty so you can fill sandbags and shoot at the enemy? Or are you going to stay home to protect your wife and kids from the tens of thousands of armed hungry people? And even if you wanted to report, how do you plan to get there if your car won't start and the roads are clogged?

Speaking for a soldier is a far stretch. First, the Government would NOT immediately say "publicly" that the grid was not going to come back for 5 to 10 years. They would control the people and tell them that it will be 90 days and stretch it out from there in an attempt to maintain order. They may even construct some narrative that will control the people like they did with COVID. Most "soldiers" will do their duty for the simple fact that 99% of them live a few miles from their duty station. I cant speak for the Reserves or Guard. I would trust they would fulfill their obligation.

One other consideration: Most of our military isn't hardened against EMP.. its mostly just the weapons that are hardened. The missile silos, attack planes, tanks, etc. mostly just the weapons.. The truck that delivers fuel to the aircraft is not hardened.. the Hummer is not hardened, the transport aircraft is not hardened..

This is where your wrong. Military equipment ARE hardened against EMP's. I know because I worked on them. Especially the case with the HMMWV. You don't have to take my word for it:

The EMP-Proof Truck: AM General Doubles Down On Humvee - Breaking Defense

SOUTH BEND, IND.: The US military replaced its Humvees in Afghanistan and Iraq, with heavier, better armored vehicles because of the threat from roadside bombs. But that approach may not work In a high-tech conflict, argues manufacturer AM General. You might want to go back to the Humvee. Why...

breakingdefense.com

Fuel tankers, aircraft, all of it down to Singer Radios require NBC proofing which why ATSM. If that fails, we have entire war reserves where we have NEW old stock equipment from WWII in Division size fleets. I know this because I have worked at them. We have Jeeps and Harleys still new in the crate wrapped up in cosmoline. Hell, even Northrop has entire EMP proof building at plant 42 where B-2 upgrading comes from and you expect the Aircraft don't have the same protections? Especially transport aircraft?

This is why an EMP attack is so talked about.. its the only viable way a country like NK could strike a significant blow.. the only way.. and doing so means they can hold on to the other 29+ weapons to defend themselves and threaten South Korea, Japan, etc if we attacked them.

They know it, we know it..

EMP "bombs" would be effectively utilized if an invading force wanted to keep the enemies infrastructure intact and control its people.

 

[MurphyGuy]

This is an accurate statement.

Never say never. If it's a joint effort it's another matter entirely.

We "all" didn't stop testing them. NK tested in 2017 and we believe others are conducting "low yield" tests today


This is true

This is also true. Less than 2% of our society have these skill sets.

In "WWII talk" tis is not exactly true. Hitlers Blitzkrieg was pretty successful and third world countries aiming for the US would most likely pull all their eggs in one basket knowing we retain "first strike capability" AFTER we detect their launch.

This is accurate.

This is a VERY accurate explanation of the science behind it all.

Again, a very accurate explanation.

Unless they targeted SK at the same time, SK would be a first responder.

Speaking for a soldier is a far stretch. First, the Government would NOT immediately say "publicly" that the grid was not going to come back for 5 to 10 years. They would control the people and tell them that it will be 90 days and stretch it out from there in an attempt to maintain order. They may even construct some narrative that will control the people like they did with COVID. Most "soldiers" will do their duty for the simple fact that 99% of them live a few miles from their duty station. I cant speak for the Reserves or Guard. I would trust they would fulfill their obligation.

This is where your wrong. Military equipment ARE hardened against EMP's. I know because I worked on them. Especially the case with the HMMWV. You don't have to take my word for it:

The EMP-Proof Truck: AM General Doubles Down On Humvee - Breaking Defense

SOUTH BEND, IND.: The US military replaced its Humvees in Afghanistan and Iraq, with heavier, better armored vehicles because of the threat from roadside bombs. But that approach may not work In a high-tech conflict, argues manufacturer AM General. You might want to go back to the Humvee. Why...

breakingdefense.com

Fuel tankers, aircraft, all of it down to Singer Radios require NBC proofing which why ATSM. If that fails, we have entire war reserves where we have NEW old stock equipment from WWII in Division size fleets. I know this because I have worked at them. We have Jeeps and Harleys still new in the crate wrapped up in cosmoline. Hell, even Northrop has entire EMP proof building at plant 42 where B-2 upgrading comes from and you expect the Aircraft don't have the same protections? Especially transport aircraft?

EMP "bombs" would be effectively utilized if an invading force wanted to keep the enemies infrastructure intact and control its people.

Thanks for the correct on the military equipment, it had been my understanding that only the weapons systems were hardened and a lot of the supporting infrastructure was not.

 

[Big Matt]

Looks like a lot of the information on this thread is false. Let's look to the people that test these products and get some education. I was absolutely shocked (pun intended!!!) by the results.
If your solar panels are not hooked up they will be unaffected. Even your cell phone will be good to go with probably no network connection but you can always play plants vs zombies to get ready for the real thing. LOL!
Don't take my word for it just watch this video. Really cool stuff. Unfortunately there is a lot of false info out there.