3 ms·
What I'd like to know is why the recording equipment kept functioning -- isn't an EMP supposed to wipe out sensitive electronics? At least that's what the movi
by mattparlane 14y ago
What I'd like to know is why the recording equipment kept functioning -- isn't an EMP supposed to wipe out sensitive electronics?
At least that's what the movies tell me...
- pjscott 14y agoVacuum tubes hold up better than today's little transistors, and there are ways of EMP-protecting things, like putting them in Faraday cages.
- mattparlane 14y agoFairy nuff, I thought transistors might have been used in 1957 but I guess not.
- Symmetry 14y agoThe nuke was pretty low energy and it didn't go off in the ionosphere, so no.
- drblast 14y agoWouldn't they have used a mechanical film camera? I don't believe that would be susceptible.
- dredmorbius 14y agoA few things. ICs are a lot more sensitive to EMP than vacuum-tube devices. The amount of EMP experienced is a function both of the size of the size of the nuke, and of the receiving antenna. One reason the Starfish and Hardtack bursts affected street lighting systems is that these were attached directly to the electrical grid: power lines == large antennas. Blast yields were also in the megaton range, 1000x greater than the one here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_altitude_nuclear_explosion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_altitude_nuclear_explosio...
- Sharlin 14y agoThere were no "sensitive electronics" in 1957. There were pretty much no electronics at all, particularly not in cameras. The transistor was just invented.