Has anyone come up with non-nuclear EMP weapons? I've checked a few
sources but haven't found any. I thought that they might make for a nice
alternative to what's been published for combating Virus.
I read about "Explosively pumped flux compression generators" on Wiki
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_pumped_flux_compression_generator)
and thought that would be a good choice." EPFCG" from here out.
My initial concept is that of a spear gun with a backpack. The spear is
fired at the Virus-inhabited thing (stationary server, robot, or
vehicle). Attached to the shaft of the spear is the EPFCG package which
produces the EMP. But said package requires a starting current to
operate, much like the early A-bombs required a conventional explosion
to trigger the start of the fission process (unless I'm misremembering
that). This starter current is fed from capacitors stored in the
backpack (just like laser rifles). The spear is connected to the
backpack via a 20-meter cable. The EPFCG package is destroyed in the
process of generating the pulse. I'd imagine that once the EMP is
generated, the cable could detach from the spear and retract back to the
person who fired it. Said cable could then be attached to the next spear.
I haven't figured out the "blast radius" for the EMP or the number of
charges produced by each backpack before re-charging was required. I
suspect that there's a formula to determine EMP strength per amps or
watts used, but that's outside my knowledge base. I suppose I could just
rely on handwaving, but I'd prefer to have some numbers to play with.
> Has anyone come up with non-nuclear EMP weapons? I've checked a few
> sources but haven't found any. I thought that they might make for a
> nice alternative to what's been published for combating Virus.
>
> I read about "Explosively pumped flux compression generators" on Wiki
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_pumped_flux_compression_gen
> erator) and thought that would be a good choice." EPFCG" from here
> out.
>
> My initial concept is that of a spear gun with a backpack. The spear
> is fired at the Virus-inhabited thing (stationary server, robot, or
> vehicle). Attached to the shaft of the spear is the EPFCG package
> which produces the EMP. But said package requires a starting current
> to operate, much like the early A-bombs required a conventional
> explosion to trigger the start of the fission process (unless I'm
> misremembering that). This starter current is fed from capacitors
> stored in the backpack (just like laser rifles). The spear is
> connected to the backpack via a 20-meter cable. The EPFCG package is
> destroyed in the process of generating the pulse. I'd imagine that
> once the EMP is generated, the cable could detach from the spear and
> retract back to the person who fired it. Said cable could then be
> attached to the next spear.
The cables aren't gonna work. the capacitors *have* to be part of the
package. Remember, you are running insane *currents* (not so much
voltage) thru the coil that gets explosively compressed.
Long cables and high current don't go together well. The longer the
cable the higher the resistance and thus the higher the losses (and
the heating of the cable). They'd "wear out" rather quickly.
Also, the high current thru the cable would be generating a
significant magnetic field all by itself. Which would cause the cable
to whip around in all sorts of ways.
Given examples from other things Traveller capacitor tech should be
able to keep the bulk down even with the capactitors as part of the
"bomb".
So depending on how good the tech is, you may have anything from
briefcase sized (sort of an EMP satchel charge) to grenade sized.
> I haven't figured out the "blast radius" for the EMP or the number of
> charges produced by each backpack before re-charging was required. I
> suspect that there's a formula to determine EMP strength per amps or
> watts used, but that's outside my knowledge base. I suppose I could
> just rely on handwaving, but I'd prefer to have some numbers to play
> with.
Can't help you on the figures. But I think the strength drops by
inverse square law.
Ooo! Since EMP induces high voltages in conductors, and the voltage
is dependent on the *length* of said conductors. That's an even
*bigger* reason to not use those long cables.
Don't forget that not everything is susceptible to EMP either. Tube
(and related) tech is pretty much immune. Can't find a link for the
old TIMMs, but they are solid blocks of metal and ceramics. Tubes the
size of a dime No filaments, just heat the entire block to the
required temp. Rugged as hell in a number of ways.
Don't think TIMMs based systems could support Virus though. Not
unless it was the size of a multi-story building.
But optical computers would be immune as well. Their power supplies,
and interface devices (ie the stuff used to connect the optical
system to electrical based devices) would be vulnearable to some
extent.
And then, of course, there are Faraday cages. Of course, those only
protect as long as there aren't any wires connecting to the outside.
You could use fiber optic connections thru the "cage" but the same
problem that optical computers have with interface devices exists.
--
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
shadow at shadowgard dot com
> Has anyone come up with non-nuclear EMP weapons? I've checked a few
> sources but haven't found any. I thought that they might make for a
> nice alternative to what's been published for combating Virus.
>
> I read about "Explosively pumped flux compression generators" on Wiki
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_pumped_flux_compression_gen
> erator) and thought that would be a good choice." EPFCG" from here
> out.
>
> My initial concept is that of a spear gun with a backpack. The spear
> is fired at the Virus-inhabited thing (stationary server, robot, or
> vehicle). Attached to the shaft of the spear is the EPFCG package
> which produces the EMP. But said package requires a starting current
> to operate, much like the early A-bombs required a conventional
> explosion to trigger the start of the fission process (unless I'm
> misremembering that). This starter current is fed from capacitors
> stored in the backpack (just like laser rifles). The spear is
> connected to the backpack via a 20-meter cable. The EPFCG package is
> destroyed in the process of generating the pulse. I'd imagine that
> once the EMP is generated, the cable could detach from the spear and
> retract back to the person who fired it. Said cable could then be
> attached to the next spear.
The cables aren't gonna work. the capacitors *have* to be part of the
package. Remember, you are running insane *currents* (not so much
voltage) thru the coil that gets explosively compressed.
Long cables and high current don't go together well. The longer the
cable the higher the resistance and thus the higher the losses (and
the heating of the cable). They'd "wear out" rather quickly.
Also, the high current thru the cable would be generating a
significant magnetic field all by itself. Which would cause the cable
to whip around in all sorts of ways.
===============
See, this is why I asked for help.
===============
Given examples from other things Traveller capacitor tech should be
able to keep the bulk down even with the capacitors as part of the "bomb".
So depending on how good the tech is, you may have anything from
briefcase sized (sort of an EMP satchel charge) to grenade sized.
===============
Great! Didn't think it could be scaled down that small. Makes for a
better delivery system.
===============
> I haven't figured out the "blast radius" for the EMP or the number of
> charges produced by each backpack before re-charging was required. I
> suspect that there's a formula to determine EMP strength per amps or
> watts used, but that's outside my knowledge base. I suppose I could
> just rely on handwaving, but I'd prefer to have some numbers to play
with.
Can't help you on the figures. But I think the strength drops by
inverse square law.
===============
That'll work for me.
===============
Ooo! Since EMP induces high voltages in conductors, and the voltage
is dependent on the *length* of said conductors. That's an even
*bigger* reason to not use those long cables.
===============
Got it.
===============
Don't forget that not everything is susceptible to EMP either. Tube
(and related) tech is pretty much immune. Can't find a link for the
old TIMMs, but they are solid blocks of metal and ceramics. Tubes the
size of a dime No filaments, just heat the entire block to the
required temp. Rugged as hell in a number of ways.
Don't think TIMMs based systems could support Virus though. Not
unless it was the size of a multi-story building.
===============
No, they don't. I don't think even the Vilani used vacuum tubes. ;)
Virus evolved from those Cymbeline silicon-based life forms so that's
all we have to worry about.
===============
But optical computers would be immune as well. Their power supplies,
and interface devices (ie the stuff used to connect the optical
system to electrical based devices) would be vulnerable to some extent.
===============
I don't believe that optical computers were ever thought of in the TU.
But regardless, if the power supplies to a Virus infested host are
disrupted, said host shuts down.
===============
And then, of course, there are Faraday cages. Of course, those only
protect as long as there aren't any wires connecting to the outside.
You could use fiber optic connections thru the "cage" but the same
problem that optical computers have with interface devices exists.
===============
Right. I've read about Faraday cages. Again, not something embedded in
Traveller, but maybe more evolved strains of Virus will realize this and
construct appropriate defenses.
===============
--
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
shadow at shadowgard dot com
> Given examples from other things Traveller capacitor tech should be
> able to keep the bulk down even with the capacitors as part of the
> "bomb".
>
> So depending on how good the tech is, you may have anything from
> briefcase sized (sort of an EMP satchel charge) to grenade sized.
>
> ===============
> Great! Didn't think it could be scaled down that small. Makes for a
> better delivery system. ===============
Well, the capacitors can be smaller (after all, k=look at what the
capacitors a Black Globe* uses can store! Or "jump capacitors for
those versions of Traveller that have them as part of the drive.
But now that I think about it, the physical size of the coil in the
EMP unoit is probably going to limit the strength of the field and
thus the strength of the EMP effect.
Remember, the basic design works like this:
Have a coil that'll produce a strong magnetic field.
Dump a *lot* of current into it fast.
As the field strength peaks detonate an explosive charge that
compresses the coil which spikes the field density even higher.
High current requires thicker wires (for lower resistance). You can't
use superconductors (even if they are available in your TU, because
superconductors revert to being fairly lousty conductors when any of
three things are exceeded:
Critical temperature. Not only do they quit superconducting when the
temp exceeds this, but since there's now a significant amount of
resistance, you get termal runaway as the current makes it even
hotter, which increases the resistance which makes it even hotter
which...
Can you say postive feedback loop?
Critical current. Above a certain number of amps, supercondoctors
revert as well. Again, you get a feedback loop as the now high
resistance causes heating which leads to the critical temp problems.
Critical field strength. If the ambient magnetic field strength gets
too high, superconductors revert to high resistance. You may not get
a feedback loop because the reversion won't affect the field
strength.
The values of critical temp, current and field strength will be
different for different superconducting materials. But they seem to
nbe an inherent part of the physics that makes superconductors work.
Since a coil for an EMP uniot will be subjected to high current *and*
high magnetic fields, superconductors are right out.
So, with regular conductors, the thickness of the wires limits the
current. Given that you only need them to handle it for a second or
less, helps, but only so much.
Field strength depends on three things. Number of turns in the coil,
size of the coil, and what it is using for a "core".
More turns is good. But "bigger" (length and width) are bad. But
smaller coils mean fewr turns for the same size wire...
So, with the same materials, in general a bigger coil will give you a
bigger spike.
Capacitors ability to store power depends opn size (all else being
equal). So the bigger the capacitors the more current they can dump
into the coil.
So a briefcase sized unit can probably kill unshielded electronics
within a dozen meters, but a grenade sized one may be lucky to do it
to something a foot away.
I'm guessing that "power" of the unit depends on volume, so a unit
twice as big (ie 2 times as high, wide and deep) will be 8 times as
strong.
Size matters <eg>
--
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
shadow at shadowgard dot com
I made a 10mm gauss rifle that was built for the express purpose of taking out toasters. The size of the round 10x50 iirc might be more than capable of housing a miniature HPG. Of course the round itself was more than capable of destroying a LSP guard bot in a single shot so the electricity might just be overkill.
Derek Stanley
Sent from my iPhone...
> On Aug 25, 2016, at 11:04, [Traveller_TNE] <> wrote:
>
> On 25 Aug 2016 at 9:29, DED [Traveller wrote:
>
> > Given examples from other things Traveller capacitor tech should be
> > able to keep the bulk down even with the capacitors as part of the
> > "bomb".
> >
> > So depending on how good the tech is, you may have anything from
> > briefcase sized (sort of an EMP satchel charge) to grenade sized.
> >
> > ===============
> > Great! Didn't think it could be scaled down that small. Makes for a
> > better delivery system. ===============
>
> Well, the capacitors can be smaller (after all, k=look at what the
> capacitors a Black Globe* uses can store! Or "jump capacitors for
> those versions of Traveller that have them as part of the drive.
>
> But now that I think about it, the physical size of the coil in the
> EMP unoit is probably going to limit the strength of the field and
> thus the strength of the EMP effect.
>
> Remember, the basic design works like this:
>
> Have a coil that'll produce a strong magnetic field.
>
> Dump a *lot* of current into it fast.
>
> As the field strength peaks detonate an explosive charge that
> compresses the coil which spikes the field density even higher.
>
> High current requires thicker wires (for lower resistance). You can't
> use superconductors (even if they are available in your TU, because
> superconductors revert to being fairly lousty conductors when any of
> three things are exceeded:
>
> Critical temperature. Not only do they quit superconducting when the
> temp exceeds this, but since there's now a significant amount of
> resistance, you get termal runaway as the current makes it even
> hotter, which increases the resistance which makes it even hotter
> which...
>
> Can you say postive feedback loop?
>
> Critical current. Above a certain number of amps, supercondoctors
> revert as well. Again, you get a feedback loop as the now high
> resistance causes heating which leads to the critical temp problems.
>
> Critical field strength. If the ambient magnetic field strength gets
> too high, superconductors revert to high resistance. You may not get
> a feedback loop because the reversion won't affect the field
> strength.
>
> The values of critical temp, current and field strength will be
> different for different superconducting materials. But they seem to
> nbe an inherent part of the physics that makes superconductors work.
>
> Since a coil for an EMP uniot will be subjected to high current *and*
> high magnetic fields, superconductors are right out.
>
> So, with regular conductors, the thickness of the wires limits the
> current. Given that you only need them to handle it for a second or
> less, helps, but only so much.
>
> Field strength depends on three things. Number of turns in the coil,
> size of the coil, and what it is using for a "core".
>
> More turns is good. But "bigger" (length and width) are bad. But
> smaller coils mean fewr turns for the same size wire...
>
> So, with the same materials, in general a bigger coil will give you a
> bigger spike.
>
> Capacitors ability to store power depends opn size (all else being
> equal). So the bigger the capacitors the more current they can dump
> into the coil.
>
> So a briefcase sized unit can probably kill unshielded electronics
> within a dozen meters, but a grenade sized one may be lucky to do it
> to something a foot away.
>
> I'm guessing that "power" of the unit depends on volume, so a unit
> twice as big (ie 2 times as high, wide and deep) will be 8 times as
> strong.
>
> Size matters <eg>
>
> --
> Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
> shadow at shadowgard dot com
>
>
can't help on the EMP side, but you remembered correctly, in part,
regarding A-bombs. The "Fatman" A-bomb used chemical high explosive shaped
charges to "squeeze" the core and trigger the reaction. The "Tall Boy"
however used a "cannon" to fire the 2 halves of the critical mass, which
were kept separate until this point, together. Modern nukes continue to
use variations of the "Fatman's" trigger sequence.
Have fun exploring the EMP questions
On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 1:54 PM, DED [Traveller_TNE] <
> wrote:
>
>
> Has anyone come up with non-nuclear EMP weapons? I've checked a few
> sources but haven't found any. I thought that they might make for a nice
> alternative to what's been published for combating Virus.
>
> I read about "Explosively pumped flux compression generators" on Wiki (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_pumped_flux_
> compression_generator) and thought that would be a good choice." EPFCG"
> from here out.
>
> My initial concept is that of a spear gun with a backpack. The spear is
> fired at the Virus-inhabited thing (stationary server, robot, or vehicle).
> Attached to the shaft of the spear is the EPFCG package which produces the
> EMP. But said package requires a starting current to operate, much like the
> early A-bombs required a conventional explosion to trigger the start of the
> fission process (unless I'm misremembering that). This starter current is
> fed from capacitors stored in the backpack (just like laser rifles). The
> spear is connected to the backpack via a 20-meter cable. The EPFCG package
> is destroyed in the process of generating the pulse. I'd imagine that once
> the EMP is generated, the cable could detach from the spear and retract
> back to the person who fired it. Said cable could then be attached to the
> next spear.
>
> I haven't figured out the "blast radius" for the EMP or the number of
> charges produced by each backpack before re-charging was required. I
> suspect that there's a formula to determine EMP strength per amps or watts
> used, but that's outside my knowledge base. I suppose I could just rely on
> handwaving, but I'd prefer to have some numbers to play with.
>
> I'd love some feedback (and help) on this.
>
> \_/
> DED
> TNE @ Yahoo ml Admin
>
>
>