It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Keeping a car running after Nuke/EMP situation.(Help!)

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Tranny
 


Plus all the relays, breakers, and possibly fuses in the panels. Plus the speed sensor on the transmission, plus the speed sensors in the wheel/hub assemblies. Plus the igniter in some distributor units.

I am not saying it is impossible to collect up all the spare parts, but it is big gamble, because if you miss one, then all that expense and planning was worthless. I think it would be cheaper to buy an old truck than it would be to buy a trunk full of spare parts that may not be sufficient.

@ Opi,
Nuclear wars are not as devastating as you have been told. I am 10 miles from the Capital building in Florida. Only the largest known Nuclear device would effect me at this distance, and it would be a sunburn on exposed skin. If I stay indoors during the explosion, tape the doors and windows, and wait 3-7 days depending on rain and wind after the explosion, then I should be able to venture outside as long as I am fully clothed. After 1 weeks time, I could load up the family and move to a safer area.

Granted, a major nuclear event would change the world forever in ways that are unanticipated and difficult to predict, but it doesn't hurt to have a basic plan. I don't think my family and I would feel good about just giving up and dying?




posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 02:44 PM
link   
335 ECU
126 MAF
120 dist
120 coil
95 alt

45 knock

15 EFI relay
18FP relay

$874 Total

US prices.
Threw in a knock sensor because I seen that your unit may have one. And ECU gets cranky without the knock sensor sometimes.


[edit on 1-9-2010 by Mr Tranny]



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 02:46 PM
link   
better off to have a vehicle that doesn't count on electronics, the kind that uses points and electromechanical components.

ones that don't have electric fuel pumps, but mechanical pumps or a gravity feed system. ones that have mechanical injectors and not electric ones, that goes for diesel or gas



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 02:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Tranny
 


Excellent info from you,thanks-many sensors etc I had forgotton about,
Hmm its looking like an old diesel then.

reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Nice info,I guess my petrol golf is a bad move in th EMP situation then.
Not much chance of collecting all those spares I think.

And even if i did,imagine another solar super flare a few days later...
Game over.

Old diesel it is then,gotta look out for a big one I think.




posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Mr Tranny
 


Plus all the relays, breakers, and possibly fuses in the panels. Plus the speed sensor on the transmission, plus the speed sensors in the wheel/hub assemblies. Plus the igniter in some distributor units.

I am not saying it is impossible to collect up all the spare parts, but it is big gamble, because if you miss one, then all that expense and planning was worthless. I think it would be cheaper to buy an old truck than it would be to buy a trunk full of spare parts that may not be sufficient.


Most transmission pickups are coil type. They won’t be bugged.
The pickups on the wheels are for the ABS unit. They are not needed.

Igniter in the distributor????
Don’t you mean ignition module?
Or the hall effect pickup?

Breakers should be fine, they can be reset.
You should normally have spare fuses on hand anyway.
There is only two relays to worry about The fuel pump relay and ECU power relay. All the others are not of concern.



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere


Another "myth" that seems to have grown up with information on EMP is that nearly all cars and trucks would be "knocked out" by EMP. This seems logical, but is one of those cases where "real world" experiments contradict theoretical answers and I'm afraid this is the case with cars and EMP. According to sources working at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, cars have proven to be resistant to EMP in actual tests using nuclear weapons as well as during more recent tests (with newer cars) with the US Military's EMP simulators.

One reason for the ability of a car to resist EMP lies in the fact that its metal body is "insulated" by its rubber tires from the ground. This creates a Faraday cage of sorts. (Drawing on the analogy of EMP being similar to lightning, it is interesting to note that cases of lightning striking and damaging cars is almost non-existent; this apparently carries over to EMP effects on vehicles as well.)AusSurvivalist



Yhea, as insightful as this is I simply don't trust any modern vehicle, and the reason is simple, waaaaayyyy to complicated for their own good... Sensors here there and everywhere, and what for? A very slight improvement in fuel economy? - One example I always use is the little sensor somewhere in the exhausts system, the UK once got a rather large batch of 'bad' fuel, the cars ran just fine on it but it tripped out any thing modern and people paid thousands to have this sensor tripped and the fuel drained (the smart people shorted out the sensor till the fuel had run through)......

Now natural Faraday cage or not, all it takes is one obscure unprotected gidgetypoke, probably the GPS enabled wing mirror position / cigar lighter customer satisfaction sensor, to fry and the engine wont start... Which is fine if your willing to trace the problem, a pain if it's raining and the kids are hungry.

This could work!




posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 03:21 PM
link   
Why not get a car with a carbeuretor and make a wood gasifier and attach it straight to it? This would create gas and run the car for short distances at a time.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Now_Then

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere


Another "myth" that seems to have grown up with information on EMP is that nearly all cars and trucks would be "knocked out" by EMP. This seems logical, but is one of those cases where "real world" experiments contradict theoretical answers and I'm afraid this is the case with cars and EMP. According to sources working at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, cars have proven to be resistant to EMP in actual tests using nuclear weapons as well as during more recent tests (with newer cars) with the US Military's EMP simulators.

One reason for the ability of a car to resist EMP lies in the fact that its metal body is "insulated" by its rubber tires from the ground. This creates a Faraday cage of sorts. (Drawing on the analogy of EMP being similar to lightning, it is interesting to note that cases of lightning striking and damaging cars is almost non-existent; this apparently carries over to EMP effects on vehicles as well.)AusSurvivalist




Don’t spoil the wild conjector with truth.
You will take all the fun out of it.



In my own opinion, the damage from an EMP will be underwhelming.

If anything at all, I think the government is trying to hype it to show a false weak spot, hoping that if another country tries to attack, they will pick “An easy target” Which in reality, won’t do any real damage, and the US government knows it.



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Now_Then
 



By Now_Thenthe UK once got a rather large batch of 'bad' fuel, the cars ran just fine on it but it tripped out any thing modern and people paid thousands to have this sensor tripped and the fuel drained (the smart people shorted out the sensor till the fuel had run through)......


I remember that,what a complete con that turned out to be.

Bad petrol-or some kind of test I wonder?
Imagine if you could con a whole bunch of folks into thinking their cars needed £400 plus work,

someone makes a quick packet no doubt...

Hmm who would do that I wonder?




posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 08:07 PM
link   
The Toyota Hilux also survived a trip to the North pole.
From Northern Canada the top gear crew drove over frozen arctic waters to the magnetic North Pole.



posted on Sep, 1 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


You are right if the bomb blew up on the surface but they usually explode a mile or so above the surface which will significantly increase the blast radius. I am uncertain of the distance for safety, but there are a significant number less obstacles to slow the explosion when it occurs above the surface. If you get 1 mile on the surface, you would get probably 5 or 6 miles when exploded 1 mile above the surface(depending on the size of your bomb. 20kT is pretty small compared to the 5 and 6 Megaton bombs most countries that can threaten the US have).

www.nukefix.org...

Russia even tested a 57MT bomb once:
en.wikipedia.org...

Here is a simulation tool and it has a damage chart. Put in 5500 to get a 5.5 Megaton bomb and see the damage. Pretty scary, but yes, mostly overstated by the powers that be.
meyerweb.com...



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 08:19 AM
link   
reply to post by memarf1
 


carloslabs.com...

I like this site better for nuking stuff. The 50 MT Tsar Bomba USSR bomb that was tested is the one that I looked at for Tallahassee's town center. I could survive it at my house, as long as I had a little time to prepare. Chances are that they would never waste an asset like the largest bomb ever produced on a small target like Tallahassee, so in reality, I am plenty far enough from the town center to survive any of the smaller bombs with very little preparation, other than keeping some tape and plastic and bottled water on hand in the house.

www.nuclearterror.org...
This site has a better graphic and map simulation, but it only allows you to use a 10kt weapon. With that size weapon the damage is unimpressive.

This was interesting, from THIS site. It compares Nuclear Weapons to Gravity weapons, and shows that Nuclear Weapons are inferior in damage ability.

According to Encarta, the damage radius increases with the power of the nuclear bomb, approximately in proportion to its cube root. If exploded at the optimum height, therefore, a 10-megaton weapon, which is 1,000 times as powerful as a 10-kiloton weapon, will increase the distance tenfold, that is, out to 17.7 km (11 mi) for severe damage and 24 km (15 mi) for moderate damage of a frame house.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 09:17 AM
link   
If an EMP takes out any part of your vehicle and you get it going again, where are you driving too, your funeral? Driving would be futile, you will die from the radiation after the EMP.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by earthdude
If an EMP takes out any part of your vehicle and you get it going again, where are you driving too, your funeral? Driving would be futile, you will die from the radiation after the EMP.


That was the point of the two posts above, plus some earlier ones. There are a lot of misconceptions about nuclear weapons. Unless you live in an urban center, or within a couple of miles of a direct hit, then you are not going to die from the explosion, or the radiation. There are simple precautions to take that will protect you.

Now, if you live 10 or 15 miles out from the explosion, and you take the precautions to survive the blast and the next few days of fallout, then you may need a car, and your car may or may not have been affected by the EMP. It is prudent to plan for surviving the blast and needing an operational vehicle.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 09:32 AM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 

I guess you are right. It is hard for me to imagine such a scenario. I suppose I would drive to Mexico, where they would have redneck Mexican guys shooting me as I tried to be an illegal alien.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by getreadyalready
 

I guess you are right. It is hard for me to imagine such a scenario. I suppose I would drive to Mexico, where they would have redneck Mexican guys shooting me as I tried to be an illegal alien.




True. What would be the point of nuking Mexico? Seems redundant!


Same goes for just about any of the Caribbean islands, so I think I might head that direction myself.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Does this mean we now have to start looking for the boat equivalent of a Toyota Hilux?



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by davespanners
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Does this mean we now have to start looking for the boat equivalent of a Toyota Hilux?


Nope. Sails!! You can't go wrong with sails!!



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthdude
If an EMP takes out any part of your vehicle and you get it going again, where are you driving too, your funeral? Driving would be futile, you will die from the radiation after the EMP.


If you are not hit with acute radiation exposure from the initial blast, most likely, you will live a long and healthy life.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Good thread OP!

I think there are plenty of other modes of transportation that can be used. If the effected area includes parts, oil, fuel or the vehicle itself, perhaps radiation off from these objects should be more concening. Therefore, the risk you would be giving to yourself to use a rad hot vehicle would counteract the survival you are attempting to do.

This is just me. Get a few dogs... and a sled. If they don't work, use a bike... Still no luck... Eat the dogs and enjoy the pretty clouds.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join