[SG] EMP

4 posts ยท Mar 27 2001 to Mar 28 2001

From: Roger Books <books@m...>

Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 13:38:38 -0500 (EST)

Subject: [SG] EMP

I just read through a long thread about EMP and the affect on starships. My
real assumption would be "not much" but that's neither here nor there.

My real question is what would the affects of EMP be in SG?

Initially I would say:

All communications gear down. Anything with an antenna (some missiles?) down.

What about these heavily electronic gizmo rifles? Can you still fire one if
the HUD is broken?

From: Derk Groeneveld <derk@c...>

Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 22:34:38 +0200 (CEST)

Subject: Re: [SG] EMP

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Roger Books wrote:

> I just read through a long thread about EMP and the affect on

Exactly what do you mean? Do you mean an atmospheric detonation of a nuke? Or
a directed EM pulse? If I understood the matter correctly, the first may
seriously hamper communication for a good while, whereas the second EITHER
knocks your gear out, or it will be back online.

Whether stuff actually gets knocked out would depend greatly on the amount of
EMP shielding? I know our radar equipment HAS to be EMP shielded. I would
imagine most bigger equipment in Stargrunt would be, and wouldn't be at all
surprised if all smilspec gear was.

Then again, I'm no specialist on the subject, maybe someone can enlighten us?

Cheers,

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2001 20:03:44 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: [SG] EMP

> --- Roger Books <books@mail.state.fl.us> wrote:

> Initially I would say:

1st: All military electronics are going to be hardened to EMP to the point
that if you're close enough to be affected by EMP, you've got other problems
(like shockwaves and such).

2nd: If the ESU as adopted the technology, it can be fired with dead
batteries, after being as a club by
non-technological savages, dropped in the mud, and
buried for a geologic age or so. It just won't be terribly accurate.

From: Robert Makowsky <rmakowsky@y...>

Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2001 05:15:43 -0400

Subject: Re: [SG] EMP

This leads to a good reason why chemical fire arms are still the standard.
Easy to maintain hard to jam.

Bob Makowsky

[quoted original message omitted]