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.
Originally posted by Lumos
How is a detonator that requires transmission of a specific code to trigger, possibly on a non-civilian band, susceptible to random civilian EMR? It's not. It's laughable. Still.
ValHall
Lumos
In case explosives were incorporated within the building from scratch, the detonators could've been installed in the weeks prior to 9/11, that's the most I was estimating.
So, since you won't come out and pick a timeframe for the placement of the demolition charges, am I to infer from your previous post that you are choosing a "few weeks" prior to 9/11?
ValHall
And, yes, if they were rigged to electronic detonators they would be susceptible to accidental detonation.
ValHall
I'm not pulling authority. I'm telling you I know more than you on this, apparently, because you're making some statements that aren't correct. And because of my experience I know they're not.
ValHall
And apparently you've made the decision to call names instead of doing research. So be it.
AgentSmith
Depending on the design of the detonator (and don't forget it would be at least 4-5 years old) it could still be susceptable to EMI like any electronic device unless adequate precautions are taken place.
Originally posted by Lumos
I thought if I called you "tool" you would ignore me. Well. Again I ask: Where is your research? I've just seen you invoke authority as of yet, repeatedly. So be it. Tool.
Electronic Detonator (ESK3)
The transmitter COMBIFIRE and both receiver types (RU2 and FAE) support the firing of bridgewire detonators and the ignition of electronic detonators ESK3 alternatively.
The electronic detonator ESK3 is the result of the newest development in the area of military electronic detonators.
The greatest advantage of this detonator type is its safety against any stray currents, radar radiation or other electromagnetic interference (EMI) and its safety against misuse. It cannot be fired simply by a battery or other electric sources.
This safety characteristic is achieved by the necessity of a special code in addition to energy.
www.dynitec.com...
Lumos
How would random EMR on civilian bands be able to input a specific code on non-civilian bands?
Originally posted by Lumos
For the third time: Where is your research? How come you failed twice to answer this:
Lumos
How would random EMR on civilian bands be able to input a specific code on non-civilian bands?
How were my statements inaccurate? "How" implies an actual argument, including facts, not just unsubstantiated reference to your alleged expertise, that'd be the "That" domain. Capiche?
meg·a·lo·ma·ni·a ( P ) Pronunciation Key (mg-l-mn-, -mny)
n.
1. A psychopathological condition characterized by delusional fantasies of wealth, power, or omnipotence.
2. An obsession with grandiose or extravagant things or actions.
Originally posted by Lumos
Smith, it's not your opinion that's authoritative for my opinion, I rely on science, logic and observables. Amusing that you think I'd just be your negative, megalomaniac.
You know, there was no need to dig up links to existing hardware, as my argument was based on science and logic. It's no surprise that these principles were applied in this detonator. In order to disprove the possibility of such a device, you would have simply had to dispute the grounds on which it was based, which you apparently couldn't.
You know, son, I have a background in physics, so I know what EMR can do, as well. Why didn't you use your grand knowledge to debate my then hypothetical detonator?
Originally posted by Lumos
Well, that was telling. Answering my posts before I even submit them. So, I was right on. Not surprisingly.
Originally posted by Lumos
Well, no matter what the timestamp says. I said I was well informed on EMR and called you a megalomaniac only after you incorporated both into your uber-timely response, which showed up right above my post after I submitted it.
A blast usually consists of one or more charges, each initiated by a detonator. In the case of electric detonators, the wires are connected using extension wires (the blasting circuit) so that the blaster -- the person setting off the blast -- is safely removed from the actual site.
The blasting circuit can behave like an antenna, much like the antenna for a radio, and can convert electromagnetic waves into electrical current. If sufficient energy is created, the detonator(s) can function. A number of factors need to be considered: the length and arrangement of the detonator and extension wires and their relative angle to the waves (efficiency as an antenna); the power of the transmitting device; the distance between the transmitting device and the blasting circuit; and the frequency that is used by the transmitting device.
The AM and FM radios in cars are receivers and do not constitute a hazard. Cellular phones pose a unique problem in that when they are turned on but not in use, they are interrogated several times per hour by a cell transmitter to determine whether they are within the range of the cell and if they are on. A cell phone that is turned on replies and this may pose a hazard. Accidents have been attributed to transmitters being too close to the blasting circuit.