|
I hope all of our younger goons got the grades they wanted but if not don't fret, University isn't everything.
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 12:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 16:19 |
|
|
baka kaba posted:~* Another thing *~ Contractors count as self employed. In other news: Cliff loving Richard???
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 13:17
|
|
|
Yeah uh.  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28790718 posted:Sir Cliff Richard's Berkshire property searched by police
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
Jedit posted:In other news: Cliff loving Richard??? Not a surprise, he's been linked to that dodgy guest house and other assorted iffy things many times.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
Jedit posted:In other news: Cliff loving Richard??? Someone actually predicted that earlier in the thread. I think Cliff Richard was trying to excuse the actions of someone else (Rolf Harris?).
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
How come they've named him? Don't they normally just say "a hundred and ten year old man from berkshire" and let everyone guess?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 13:31
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:While minorities obviously have more reason to be concerned about armed police (or just police in general) it is really, really unsettling to see armed police in the UK regardless. It's just something we're not used to. I had never even seen a gun in real life until I was 25 I get why Brits might feel odd about it but people in the auspol thread a while ago were talking about how they don't feel comfortable when they see a gun even on a police officer, which I just find odd, every cop in Australia carries a gun. quote:Actually not that different from most countries. There's specialized Firearms Units that can be called in to deal with someone when a weapons involved, which is usually what happens in countries where all their police officers are armed anyway. With the low amount of firearms in the UK it's incredibly rare for an unarmed officer to respond to a call and have a gun pulled on them, normally they know a gun was involved and the Firearm Unit would be the one responding. I don't just mean against guns, surely even if someone pulls a knife, that puts the cop at a disadvantage? I suppose they have tasers and pepper spray but IIRC those are relatively recent introductions. While we're on gunchat, this is one of my favourite articles written by a former cop talking about carrying a gun and the use of weapons: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-20/newton-the-weight-of-responsibility/4382130
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 13:42
|
|
|
Pilchenstein posted:How come they've named him? Don't they normally just say "a hundred and ten year old man from berkshire" and let everyone guess? If he'd been arrested that'd be the approach, but searching his property is apparently different?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 13:58
|
|
|
AKAN All Knights are nonces.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 14:08
|
|
|
freebooter posted:I don't just mean against guns, surely even if someone pulls a knife, that puts the cop at a disadvantage? I suppose they have tasers and pepper spray but IIRC those are relatively recent introductions. Tasers are part of the Firearms Unit and don't usually go to regular cops though the MET are always a bit special and Northern Island has its own rules. If they're in a violent area they'll usually have CS spray, a stab vest and a baton. I've pestered my dad with a few cop questions over the years and I know if someone has a knife you're meant to talk them down. Unless they're about to commit violence you just reason with them and call for backup. Once police are there for small incidents it's rare for something to happen. People get stabbed or shot before the police can turn up, not after. Then again he worked in South Wales and it's not like we're the crime capital of Britain. Party Boat posted:If he'd been arrested that'd be the approach, but searching his property is apparently different? The press can be sued for libel if an investigation doesn't turn into an arrest. This seems like it'd be libel worthy so it's a bit odd to see. Fans fucked around with this message at 14:19 on Aug 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 14:16
|
|
|
Janners are over-represented on SA for some reason, so this is marginally relevant: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/aug/14/trident-missiles-relocate-plymouth-independent-scotland-rusi-report quote:There would be no insurmountable technical or financial obstacle to relocating Britain's Trident nuclear missile base to England out of an independent Scotland, a report by a leading thinktank says on Thursday. "Introducing nuclear-armed [submarines] to Devonport will unavoidably introduce a new risk that an accidental ignition of one or all of a submarine's Trident D5 missiles could spread radioactive material over some of Plymouth's 260,000 inhabitants," eh? Lets check that with Nukemap. Conclusion: Half the city would be hosed from the detonation of one W76 100kt warhead. Each vanguard sub carries "up to 48" warheads. I think its pretty safe to assume that if one warhead goes off the others will in sympathetic detonation. In which case, all that is left of Plymouth is a smoking glass crater. Probably not the smartest thing for that study to say. As it is, Plymouth will probably get it anyway, although that Falmouth stuff is laughable. The current rearmament facility at Faslane is only 5km away, Falmouth is 80 km away. They'll probably reactivate the disused munitions depot built into the hill just north of the tamar crossing instead to do the work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 14:32
|
|
|
Zero Gravitas posted:Each vanguard sub carries "up to 48" warheads. I think its pretty safe to assume that if one warhead goes off the others will in sympathetic detonation. In which case, all that is left of Plymouth is a smoking glass crater. Probably not the smartest thing for that study to say. No, this isn't how nuclear weapons work. And sorry, but it invalidates anything else you've said here about the subject. e: Also, 'accidental ignition' isn't talking about a nuclear explosion, it's talking about the ramifications of a mishap with the propulsion on the missile, which is an entirely different affair (and much more likely to happen than an accidental detonation - which has never happened in 60 years of letting klutzy know-nothings in the USAF and USN fiddle about with them) SybilVimes fucked around with this message at 14:40 on Aug 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 14:37
|
|
|
I'm fairly ignorant about how nuclear weapons work but aren't they pretty much triggered by conventional explosives which have to force the nuclear material together with great force? I mean, it's not as if there's some big switch that makes the nuclear material start fission immediately. I imagine it would be pretty difficult and take a concerted effort to get them to blow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 14:43
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:I'm fairly ignorant about how nuclear weapons work but aren't they pretty much triggered by conventional explosives which have to force the nuclear material together with great force? They need to be triggered by conventional explosives that are timed within 1nS accuracy, that's to say all of the 30+ charges must detonate simultaneously within a window of around 1nS. Otherwise you just get a fizzle or (more likely) nothing but a small wimper from the conventional explosives. At very very worst case if you had a nuclear weapon successfully detonate in the (very close) presence of others, it would simply increase the fissionable mass (which counter-productively will decrease the explosive yield), and you *might* see some boosting from the other warheads booster D/T. More likely it would just be the single nuclear explosion with some minor shielding from the other warheads.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 14:49
|
|
|
SybilVimes posted:No, this isn't how nuclear weapons work. And sorry, but it invalidates anything else you've said here about the subject. I'll keep my own counsel on that, ta. Most info out there implies that the W76 and W88 are teller ulam designs so even if the original fissile explosive lens first stages dont go up/simply get vaporised I think its a reasonable bet that the fusile second stages do. Not that it really matters anyway because even in the first scenario the entire western half of plymouth becomes a smoking crater.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 14:52
|
|
|
So, Julie Burchill, the famous "militant feminist" and writer of Sugar Rush has a new job, as the agony aunt for the magazine Loaded. Whose June front page was this:  
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 14:55
|
|
|
TinTower posted:So, Julie Burchill, the famous "militant feminist" and writer of Sugar Rush has a new job, as the agony aunt for the magazine Loaded. To think she berates Brooke Magnanti for being a whore...
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 15:13
|
|
|
The real story here is that loaded still exists. How has it managed to avoid going bust now that people can get infinite pictures of tits for free on their mobiles?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 15:19
|
|
|
TinTower posted:So, Julie Burchill, the famous "militant feminist" and writer of Sugar Rush has a new job, as the agony aunt for the magazine Loaded. What's wrong with that front cover?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 15:21
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:What's wrong with that front cover? It would make most media feminists have an apoplectic fit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 15:25
|
|
|
TinTower posted:It would make most media feminists have an apoplectic fit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 15:27
|
|
|
Zero Gravitas posted:I'll keep my own counsel on that, ta. Most info out there implies that the W76 and W88 are teller ulam designs so even if the original fissile explosive lens first stages dont go up/simply get vaporised I think its a reasonable bet that the fusile second stages do. Not that it really matters anyway because even in the first scenario the entire western half of plymouth becomes a smoking crater. Uhh... nope? If the primary doesn't go critical you by definition do not get fusion in the secondary. The whole point of the primary is to massively compress the secondary to the point where it can fuse. The conventional explosive that starts the primary isn't anywhere near enough to start the secondary. You have no idea how hard it is to intentionally detonate a nuclear warhead. Let alone accidentally.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
It looks like a cover from the 90's.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 15:29
|
|
|
I can't see Julie Burchill being a good agony aunt tbh, she doesn't strike me as a sympathetic sort or a reliable source of advice about life's various problems.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 15:32
|
|
|
Gonzo McFee posted:It looks like a cover from the 90's. These magazines all look like something from the 90s because they are.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 15:33
|
|
|
StarkingBarfish posted:You have no idea how hard it is to intentionally detonate a nuclear warhead. Let alone accidentally. To amplify this point. I fail to remember the full details but only something like 2% of the fissile material dropped on Hiroshima went Supercritical. In any event whether one warhead or 44 go up at once the situation for Plymouth would still be dire.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 15:38
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:I can't see Julie Burchill being a good agony aunt tbh, she doesn't strike me as a sympathetic sort or a reliable source of advice about life's various problems. The Telegraph's Agony Edit: 
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 15:41
|
|
|
Venmoch posted:To amplify this point. I fail to remember the full details but only something like 2% of the fissile material dropped on Hiroshima went Supercritical. This is missing the point though. There is no possible way for a warhead to 'go up' unless someone arms and launches one. These aren't fireworks that you can wander up to with a lighter. Arguing even about the specifics of 'what happens if x,y,z occur' is ridiculous because the drat things are so complicated you'd need dozens of impossible to engineer fuckups on a catastrophic scale before you got any criticality at all. This is all secondary to the discussion though, because what people are failing to notice is that we've had them at faslane for years without something like this happening. Not wanting them in plymouth because of nimbyism is the wrong answer. Not wanting them anywhere because they are literally an expensive penis extension for imperialists is a much more reasonable critique.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
Fans posted:Tasers are part of the Firearms Unit and don't usually go to regular cops though the MET are always a bit special and Northern Island has its own rules. If they're in a violent area they'll usually have CS spray, a stab vest and a baton.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 15:51
|
|
|
Law enforcement begins before birth.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:00
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Any idea why they went with CS over OC/pepper spray? Isn't CS a known clastogen that has been linked to miscarriages? I thought most police forces used PAVA now? It's more painful than CS without being as nasty/the effects lasting as long, apparently.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
StarkingBarfish posted:This is missing the point though. There is no possible way for a warhead to 'go up' unless someone arms and launches one. These aren't fireworks that you can wander up to with a lighter. Arguing even about the specifics of 'what happens if x,y,z occur' is ridiculous because the drat things are so complicated you'd need dozens of impossible to engineer fuckups on a catastrophic scale before you got any criticality at all. I'm aware of this to, but there have been a few occasions in the past where these weapons haven't acted as expected. However my point was, as far as Plymouth was concerned, it wouldn't make a difference if one warhead exploded or 44 did. Regardless of how they detonated. The concern that many people have over nuclear weapons regarded of where they're stored is the fact that accidents will happen, and that many warheads aren't "Fail-Safe" (As Fail-Safe warheads may decide not go off when they're used.) Also the lack of a Cold War and an increased focus on conventional terrorism rather than Nuclear War means that quite a few people are blasé when it comes to Nuclear weapons. Not to mention the amount of conventional explosive in a warhead will cause a fair bit of damage if detonated accidently.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:08
|
|
|
A fission-fusiondesign relies on radiation pressure generated by the detonation of the (fission) primary to compress and ignite the (fusion) secondary. So yes, you need the precisely-machined explosive lenses around the primary to go off simultaneously for it to work. It is quite difficult to uniformly compress a steel ball with explosives, which is basically how the first stage works. If the timing is even slightly off you just get a load of molten steel squirting out in some random direction. Which is unpleasant, especially since it's plutonium rather than steel, but many many orders of magnitude less unpleasant than what's meant to happen. Having said that I genuinely don't know what would happen if, somehow, a nuclear warhead went off on a submarine filled with dozens more. You'd probably get some induced fission in the tampers of other weapons from the radiation before the blast wave blew everything to bits. No clue what would happen to the explosive lenses. I wonder if anyone's ever tried blasting RDX with stupendously high levels of gamma radiation before? Zephro fucked around with this message at 16:23 on Aug 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:16
|
|
|
I've been watching The Thick Of It, and it's just got to the point where Nicola Murray is about to be dropped as leader of the opposition because she supported a policy that lead to someone killing themselves. If only...
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:21
|
|
|
people who capitalise "MET" - what do you think this is an acronym for?Whitefish posted:Someone actually predicted that earlier in the thread. I think Cliff Richard was trying to excuse the actions of someone else (Rolf Harris?). it's the worst kept secret in showbiz that cliff is gay (with consenting adults), and his career started back when that was generally regarded as worse than paedophilia. so he's unsurprisingly been a bit cagey about accusations from the past & people having skeletons in their closet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:23
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Any idea why they went with CS over OC/pepper spray? Isn't CS a known clastogen that has been linked to miscarriages? Mahmoud Ahmadinejad posted:I thought most police forces used PAVA now? It's more painful than CS without being as nasty/the effects lasting as long, apparently. Some UK forces use PAVA, but CS is still used by plenty. No idea as to why exactly if PAVA has less nasty side effects, maybe its cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Fans posted:Tasers are part of the Firearms Unit and don't usually go to regular cops though the MET are always a bit special and Northern Island has its own rules. If they're in a violent area they'll usually have CS spray, a stab vest and a baton. In NI its not just violent areas all officers are have CS gas, a stab vest, baton and a handgun (a Glock 17)which always had a bullet ready in the chamber. The gun is also taken home and is meant to be kept ready to fire at all times. Under certain circumstances they are allowed to take members of their family in to learn to shoot a handgun too. They also use MP5s under certain circumstances such as outside station entrances and in the armed response units, obviously there is further training before officers use them but the station guard officers with them aren't part of a special unit, it is part of a normal officers shift rotation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:29
|
|
|
Cerv posted:people who capitalise "MET" - what do you think this is an acronym for? I am glad that I'm not the only one annoyed by this. And also by people who talk about MAC computers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
Cerv posted:people who capitalise "MET" - what do you think this is an acronym for? They're just making up for your inability to begin any sentence with a capital letter
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 16:19 |
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 16:33
|
|