"The doomsday plane

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Dan writes:

EMP is much less likely to affect a system that is not powered up.

Why? EMP can vaporize conductors whether they are energized or not.


So what, fjukktard

you have no idea how an airplane works, do you?

Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Dave S writes:

Google EMP, or look it up in the WIKI, and understand what it does to
non-protected electrical systems and generating systems then re-visit
your answer. Back ups are no good if they all drop offline from the
original EMP.

A sufficiently large EMP will fry anything.


Stand too close to a source, did you?

Bertie

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote

Stand too close to a source, did you?

We should be so lucky! :-(
--
Jim in NC

On Sep 14, 8:47 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
Seems pretty clear that it was an E4 called on alert by NORAD. What
is so surprising about that?

It's surprising that the DoD doesn't admit it. What's the harm in doing so,
especially when it is so obviously that aircraft?

General principles, never verify *ANYTHING* having to do with that
plane.

It does strike as a bit odd though, I would have thought SOP would
keep it a outside of the blast zone of a DC nuke attack. George ride
it back to DC instead of the VC-24 perhaps?

John Keeney writes:

It does strike as a bit odd though, I would have thought SOP would
keep it a outside of the blast zone of a DC nuke attack. George ride
it back to DC instead of the VC-24 perhaps?

If the terrorists had had nukes, they wouldn't have bothered with flying
planes into buildings, so it was a safe bet that they didn't have them.

"John Keeney" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Sep 14, 8:47 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
Seems pretty clear that it was an E4 called on alert by NORAD. What
is so surprising about that?

It's surprising that the DoD doesn't admit it. What's the harm in doing
so,
especially when it is so obviously that aircraft?

General principles, never verify *ANYTHING* having to do with that
plane.

It does strike as a bit odd though, I would have thought SOP would
keep it a outside of the blast zone of a DC nuke attack. George ride
it back to DC instead of the VC-24 perhaps?



The Boeing 747 VC-25 is basically an E-4B converted for presidential travel.
It has the same EMP protection as the E-4B however the communications are
as robust as an E-4B

On Sep 13, 11:01 pm, Dave S wrote:
Leadfoot wrote:

Actually the 747 has numerous back-up power systems. When there is a
problem with electrical generation a load shedding system kicks in. The
first electrical buss to be shedded is the passenger cabins.

Google EMP, or look it up in the WIKI, and understand what it does to
non-protected electrical systems and generating systems then re-visit
your answer. Back ups are no good if they all drop offline from the
original EMP.

Already taken care of.

Picture of an E-4B being tested in an EMP generator (test facility).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:E...st_EMP_sim.jpg

"Leadfoot" wrote in message
...

"John Keeney" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Sep 14, 8:47 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
Seems pretty clear that it was an E4 called on alert by NORAD. What
is so surprising about that?

It's surprising that the DoD doesn't admit it. What's the harm in doing
so,
especially when it is so obviously that aircraft?

General principles, never verify *ANYTHING* having to do with that
plane.

It does strike as a bit odd though, I would have thought SOP would
keep it a outside of the blast zone of a DC nuke attack. George ride
it back to DC instead of the VC-24 perhaps?



The Boeing 747 VC-25 is basically an E-4B converted for presidential
travel. It has the same EMP protection as the E-4B however the
communications are as robust as an E-4B

Correction

communications are NOT as robust as an E-4B

mike Z writes:

Picture of an E-4B being tested in an EMP generator (test facility).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:E...st_EMP_sim.jpg

Interesting. I see what looks like fuel being loaded into the aircraft. I
wonder if they tried testing the EMP while the fuel was being taken on.

In rec.aviation.piloting Mxsmanic wrote:
mike Z writes:

Picture of an E-4B being tested in an EMP generator (test facility).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:E...st_EMP_sim.jpg

Interesting. I see what looks like fuel being loaded into the aircraft. I
wonder if they tried testing the EMP while the fuel was being taken on.

747s aren't fueled by carrying 5 gal cans up the stairs.

If they were fueling, there would be a big ass truck next to the plane.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.