11–16 of 16 posts
You don't need batteries to make an EMP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_pumped_flux_compres... The question is if the equipment is inside a Faraday Cage and the device is outside, will it affect it.
You don't need batteries to make an EMP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_pumped_flux_compres... The question is if the equipment is inside a Faraday Cage and the device is outside, will it affect it.
True, but that device is destroyed with operation unlike the device described in the article.
There's no reason these couldn't be left like a suitcase bomb and take out an entire blocks electronics. These could easily be walked into a companies headquarters and take out all the electronics in the entire company.
The article seems to confuse EMPs and continuous interference devices. As far as I know, there is no viable way to make a particularly powerful EMP that can be used multiple times inside of a suitcase. The only method I know of constructing a reasonably powerful portable EMP is by creating an EPFCG, which would be very dangerous to the operator inside a suitcase, is directional, and can only be used once.
From 2010: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2552508/posts
"BP with oversight from NATO and the help of several government agencies has successfully tested a Nuclear explosively pumped flux compression generator (EPFCG). It is a device used to generate a high-power electromagnetic pulse by compressing magnetic flux using high explosive."
This part was curious:
"The USGS and Canada Earthquake center are reporting a mild earthquake in the region registering between 3.8 and 4.2 magnitude."
I agree though, getting something this powerful into a suitcase would be a feat of engineering and would leave the operator in a very dangerous position.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
True, but that device is destroyed with operation unlike the device described in the article.
However, the device described in the article doesn't destroy equipment (at least its highly unlikely a suitcase size one would generate the field voltage necessary) where as an EPCFG very likely would. There's no reason these couldn't be left like a suitcase bomb and take out an entire blocks electronics. These could easily be walked into a companies headquarters and take out all the electronics in the entire company…
Box with a flywheel that spins up to very high RPM using a motor/generator, then change it from motor to generator using a higher number of windings and then dumping all the energy accumulated in a couple of minutes back into the local grid in a few milliseconds. Probably better to use 2 flywheels so the forces cancel out otherwise the whole thing might come apart.
You could connect this to any wall socket in the company and it wouldn't be much bigger than a suitcase or even fit in one.
If the pulse is short enough it will probably even be re-usable, unlike the power supplies in everything connected to that particular bit of the supply rail. The question is how long you can sustain the pulse, longer = more damage but also more chance of damaging the device itself.
The article seems to confuse EMPs and continuous interference devices. As far as I know, there is no viable way to make a particularly powerful EMP that can be used multiple times inside of a suitcase. The only method I know of constructing a reasonably powerful portable EMP is by creating an EPFCG, which would be very dangerous to the operator inside a suitcase, is directional, and can only be used once.
Just to be clear - you're talking about Nuclear Explosively Pumped Flux Compression Generator correct? From 2010: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2552508/posts "BP with oversight from NATO and the help of several government agencies has successfully tested a Nuclear explosively pumped flux compression generator (EPFCG). It is a device used to generate a high-power electromagnetic pulse by compressing magneti…
The article seems to confuse EMPs and continuous interference devices. As far as I know, there is no viable way to make a particularly powerful EMP that can be used multiple times inside of a suitcase. The only method I know of constructing a reasonably powerful portable EMP is by creating an EPFCG, which would be very dangerous to the operator inside a suitcase, is directional, and can only be used once.
Just to be clear - you're talking about Nuclear Explosively Pumped Flux Compression Generator correct? From 2010: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2552508/posts "BP with oversight from NATO and the help of several government agencies has successfully tested a Nuclear explosively pumped flux compression generator (EPFCG). It is a device used to generate a high-power electromagnetic pulse by compressing magneti…