Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Fwd: Near Field Lightning Damage

To: Bill Aycock <baycock@mediacombb.net>, towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Fwd: Near Field Lightning Damage
From: Patrick Greenlee <patrick_g@windstream.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 08:36:51 -0500
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Bill, no problem. I would have been skeptical as well had I not been there when the boat came in to be re stocked with electronics. It is altogether possible that the skipper, navigator, and chief engineer exaggerated the claims. Maybe one crewman's wristwatch survived... Nothing wrong with healthy skepticism. Even eye witnesses are frequently unreliable. This was 35 years ago... I have sent an email to two friends who worked with me back then. Both are reliable and will tell me their recollection which could be enlightening and or diverge from mine. One is a chief scientist for Leidos and the other is an EE specializing in antennas, mostly microwave. Both are hams.

No extraterrestrial beings, no strange lights in the sky, or other weirdness just fried solid state equipment and the claim that the boat was not hit by lightning but had a close miss. Maybe it was hit but they didn't notice where. I don't recall if this was a wooden hulled boat or steel. Some were conversions from Navy surplus and some purpose built. I'd guess a wooden hulled vessel to be more likely to "allow" the claimed effects.

There are lightening super strokes many times the magnitude of "regular" lightening.

Patrick   NJ5G



On 4/19/2015 9:34 PM, Bill Aycock wrote:
Patrick-
I apologize; from your earlier post, it was not clear that you were directly involved, hence my skepticism.
Bill--W4BSG

-----Original Message----- From: Patrick Greenlee
Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2015 9:15 PM
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Fwd: Near Field Lightning Damage

Bill, in so doing you would be just as wrong as Hans.  Re the CB
comment.  To my knowledge we never replaced a CB for lighting causes.

Patrick   NJ5G

On 4/19/2015 7:33 PM, Bill Aycock wrote:
Hans is right, if a little too gentle. I would have called the tale
"manufactured" on "Invented" rather than "Anecdotal".
Bill--W4BSG

-----Original Message----- From: Hans Hammarquist via TowerTalk
Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2015 2:44 PM
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: [TowerTalk] Fwd: Near Field Lightning Damage

This sounds very anecdotal. Yes, a near strike lightning may take out CB radios etc but that it took out digital watches make me suspicious. The are usually metal encapsulated and very immune to external field. I believe a EMP strong enough to take out a watch also will take out the person carrying that watch.


Depending on the grid size, a Faraday cage is useful for the EM from a lightning as the "M" will introduce back EMF in the cage which will neutralize the "M".


I hope the "falme" will not be too long,


Hans - N2JFS



-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Greenlee <patrick_g@windstream.net>
To: towertalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Sat, Apr 18, 2015 10:18 pm
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Near Field Lightning Damage


Back in the 80's a tuna boat pulled into San Diego with every device on
board
containing a semi-conductor inoperative.  CB radio, Marine VHF,
SSB, SONAR,
RADAR, VHS tape player, SatNav LORAN, and on and on...  All
the crew members
wore digital watches which were all totally dead.

One near miss by a large
lightning stroke took out everything with solid
state semiconductor junctions.
The good news was they didn't have a
spotter chopper aloft at the time
dependent on the aircraft beacon band
transmitter on board to find the boat
(helipad is the roof of the pilot
house.)  We theorized it was the EMP that
ate everything as there was no
evidence that the bolt hit the boat.

Later
when asked what could be done to provide an immune backup comm
radio we told
them a mu metal box.  A Faraday cage wouldn't stop the
magnetic pulse.

Just
a thought in case there are any serious preppers in our midst.

Patrick
NJ5G
_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk
mailing
list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk


_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com


_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>