Talk:Special Bulletin

Untitled
is there any way i can get my hands on a VHS or DVD copy of this show? i'd like to show it to my U.S. History class. drop me a TALK message. thanks, Kingturtle 23:29, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * In relation to this two-year-old question, there was a very limited DVD release of this film about 5 years ago, but it appears to no longer be available as of 2006. 23skidoo 14:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Electromagnetic Pulse - don't think so.
An EMP is produced by a Fusion explosion, not a fission explosion as was the device depicted in this production. Thus the EMP effects mentioned as a possible blooper would not have occoured.

However, the brightness of an explosion would have certainly burned out any camera pointed at the explosion and thus the pictures obtained from the Aircraft Carrier after the explosion would not be possible. The camera would have burned out at the time of the explosion due to light overload. Such and event happened on the Apollo 12 flight, when the camera was accidently pointed at the sun. The sun, there being no atmosphere on the moon, burned out the camera and thus no furter color pictures were able to be shown during that flight.

Spacestevie 09:05, 17 March 2007 (UTC)


 * I know that it's not the best source in the world, but Wikipedia article on Electromagnetic pulse states that "small pure fission weapons with thin cases are far more efficient at causing EMP than most megaton bombs", so your first point is probably wrong. Frustratingly, and typically, Wikipedia's article has a lot of trivia but doesn't seem to explain exactly how radioflash is produced. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 18:49, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Rebuttal to EMP
EMP can be given off by both kinds of nuclear detonations: fission AND fusion. The amounts of EMP given off by a fusion detonation, however, are significantly larger than the fission ones. I have found a few articles backing this but cannot find a single one stating that EMP is not present in fission detonations. The question would be if the EMP given off by this device was large enough to take out the transmitters. For a bomb the size of the one dropped on Hiroshima, it is estimated (according to at least one article that I have researched) that the EMP will travel about 2 miles or so. This may not be far enough to wipe out the transmitters, but it most certainly would wipe out any solid-state electronics, including TV cameras.


 * Effects of nuclear explosions
 * Electromagnetic pulse
 * David's (Nuclear) Sling: The EMP Threat
 * Direct effects of nuclear detonation

Firerescuelieut 16:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

No EMP
EMP is caused when the free electrons in a nuclear explosion interact with the earth's magnetic field causing synchrotron radiation. In a ground burst, the free electrons would be absorbed by the earth's atomosphere.

Roadrunner 20:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Another "blooper" or plot oversight noted is that when a nuclear device is detonated it sends out an Electromagnetic Pulse (called EMP), which is basically a pulse of free-electrons caused by the Gamma radiation emitted by the nuclear reaction. This pulse renders inoperable any transistor or microchip powered device within its calculated distance.  Although the altitude of the detonation would have to be significant for the effects to be widespread, at ground level a small nuclear device such as the one portrayed in the movie would still give off an EMP within several miles sufficient enough to render the video cameras and possibly the television transmitters inoperable.  None of the post-explosion remote television feeds seen would have been possible.

One Megaton Effects
Immediate vaporization from a 1MT nuclear blast would occur within roughly one mile of the detonation, not five miles. According to Effects of nuclear explosions, the blast and heat waves would still cause damage at five miles away, but a person might survive given adequate protection by nearby structures. Vaporization would occur in something close to five square miles around the detonation point, which might have confused either the reporter or the screenwriter. Patrickbowman 08:57, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Time compression "error"
Early in the movie a Charleston TV reporter describes the fight between Coast Guard personnel and the terrorists on the boat as having taken place about an hour prior to her report. However, she cues up some footage of the firefight supposedly taken by a tourist using a "Super-8" movie camera. Unlike video, images from such cameras had to be processed by film labs, and such a film could not have been shot, developed and scanned for video broadcast within the established time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.140.71.62 (talk) 01:50, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It is not outside the bounds of possibility that a TV station at the time would have access to the means to have the Super-8 footage developed within an hour of it being shot, after which it could be telecined live. It would be pushing the boundary of believability, but not actually impossible. Nick Cooper (talk) 17:49, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Specbull disclaimer.jpg
Image:Specbull disclaimer.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Specbull flanders.jpg
Image:Specbull flanders.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

1400-word synopsis - major plot bloat
Cut the synopsis to 800 words. David F (talk) 02:35, 30 September 2013 (UTC)