|
LtCol J. Krusinski posted:Did you dudes know we only have one mdegaton class warhead in the nuclear stockpile anymore? And it's a "measly" 1 megaton gravity bomb at that. I am pretty sure we've never had megaton class warheads on top of our ICBMs, we always went for MIRV and "just enough boom to completely destroy a city". A ~300 kt warhead will still flatten the gently caress out of anything you care to hit, and won't create enough fallout to wreck the world by itself. Castle Bravo, the 15MT test detonation that we did, vaporized the reef it happened over, scattered radioactive calcium over the entire world via the upper atmosphere, and its fallout is still carried in the bones of every man woman and child today.
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 19:00 |
|
|
Zeris posted:That was a good watch
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
EVA BRAUN BLOWJOBS posted:105 mm at best, what are you expecting? The 40mm and the pair of miniguns doing work as well 
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
orange juche posted:I am pretty sure we've never had megaton class warheads on top of our ICBMs, we always went for MIRV and "just enough boom to completely destroy a city". A ~300 kt warhead will still flatten the gently caress out of anything you care to hit, and won't create enough fallout to wreck the world by itself. Titan, Atlas, and Thor had a multi megaton unitary warheard. And we made a poo poo ton of multi megaton gravity bombs. Don't get me wrong, Minuteman + Trident + B-2 grav bombs and B-52 ALCM's is a goddamn frightening amount of firepower. But uh, we used to have a lot more fire power than that and it was at a higher state of readiness too. LtCol J. Krusinski fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Mar 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
orange juche posted:I am pretty sure we've never had megaton class warheads on top of our ICBMs, we always went for MIRV and "just enough boom to completely destroy a city". A ~300 kt warhead will still flatten the gently caress out of anything you care to hit, and won't create enough fallout to wreck the world by itself. The Minuteman missiles used to carry the 1.2 megaton W56 warhead
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:36
|
|
|
The good old days, when you used to be able to drive five minutes down the road and visit your local neighborhood Nike missile site.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
Doesn't our accuracy with our nukes more or less make multiple 300-350kt strikes more efficient than one big strike anyway?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:38
|
|
|
facialimpediment posted:Gaze upon Ted Koppel's massive balls. I'm really curious what Hannity thinks when people say this. Like is that poo poo-eating grin because he knows the dude is right and doesn't give a gently caress? Or is he just being an rear end in a top hat because he has the patience of a goldfish and can barely contain himself until it's his turn to speak? What is his level of self-delusion here?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
Untagged posted:The good old days, when you used to be able to drive five minutes down the road and visit your local neighborhood Nike missile site. you laugh but this is true for me it's decommissioned but a lot of people hike into it
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
Things have gotten more accurate as well, I mean sure Atomic Annie and Davie Crocketts are off the table but we have GPS and laser guided stuff now (that can even tell the difference between target and emitter! Kung Fu Action Grip!) and I'm pretty sure that a lot of the guided stuff takes selfies now so it's not gonna be long before we see the snapchat filters on jihadi john before he turns into shoes and face bacon.Bolow posted:Doesn't our accuracy with our nukes more or less make multiple 300-350kt strikes more efficient than one big strike anyway? Yeah, we no longer have to do the nuclear equivalent of a sweep and zone mission to do the damage we want.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
LtCol J. Krusinski posted:Titan, Atlas, and Thor had a multi megaton unitary warheard. And we made a poo poo ton of multi megaton gravity bombs. Yeah it's the state of readiness that is more concerning than the power of the weapons. What good is a 300kt warhead if noone has inspected it in years and you're honestly not sure if the loving thing will go off if it is needed? For example the older W series weapons had an internal safety that will corrode if not replaced and they had something north of 50% dud rate when they were tested, instead of a multi megaton boom, they got a 1t wet fart in tests.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
Bolow posted:Doesn't our accuracy with our nukes more or less make multiple 300-350kt strikes more efficient than one big strike anyway? Not just nukes. Our conventional capabilities are at the point that they can counter nuclear capabilities. Russia, too. There's a growing concern about cruise missile proliferation. Not to mention the growth of hypersonic missiles.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
Pesticide20 posted:Not just nukes. Our conventional capabilities are at the point that they can counter nuclear capabilities. Russia, too. There's a growing concern about cruise missile proliferation. Not to mention the growth of hypersonic missiles. Out of curiosity, what systems can counter nuclear capabilities? Accurate & stealthy cruise missiles?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
Missionary Positron posted:Out of curiosity, what systems can counter nuclear capabilities? Accurate & stealthy cruise missiles? Essentially precision conventional munitions have reached the point where they can mission kill even hardened nuclear launch platforms. Hypersonic low observable cruise missiles will only do better.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:48
|
|
|
Crossposting Vertical Lime posted:https://twitter.com/ChelseaClinton/status/845751278387052544  goddamn the clintons continue to be dumb.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
Missionary Positron posted:Out of curiosity, what systems can counter nuclear capabilities? Accurate & stealthy cruise missiles? Pretty much. The idea is that we can use conventional weapons like cruise missiles to eliminate an enemy's offensive capabilities by taking out mapped missile silos. That allows nuclear weapons to be used for other missions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
M_Gargantua posted:Crossposting As happy as I am to poo poo on the Clinton's this is kinda disingenuous, because we were asking the same exact question in here not long ago. The question being "Someone photoshopped that, right? That's not an actual thing Trump had hanging as a massive backdrop for his Clinton memorial dinner, right?" Pretending Chelsea Clinton thinks this is what Lincoln was wearing is pretty dumb.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
Duzzy Funlop posted:Pretending Chelsea Clinton thinks this is what Lincoln was wearing is pretty dumb.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
M_Gargantua posted:Essentially precision conventional munitions have reached the point where they can mission kill even hardened nuclear launch platforms. Pesticide20 posted:Pretty much. The idea is that we can use conventional weapons like cruise missiles to eliminate an enemy's offensive capabilities by taking out mapped missile silos. That allows nuclear weapons to be used for other missions. Ah, right. It's still pretty mindblowing to me that a conventional cruise missile can take out a nuclear missile silo built to withstand at least some form of nuclear attack.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
TheAlphaChaser posted:I'm really curious what Hannity thinks when people say this. Like is that poo poo-eating grin because he knows the dude is right and doesn't give a gently caress? Or is he just being an rear end in a top hat because he has the patience of a goldfish and can barely contain himself until it's his turn to speak? What is his level of self-delusion here? I think it's uncomplicated smuggery; I bet he thinks the idea is ridiculous on its face, that he does good work that helps the American people, and that Koppel has lost touch with reality.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
Missionary Positron posted:Ah, right. It's still pretty mindblowing to me that a conventional cruise missile can take out a nuclear missile silo built to withstand at least some form of nuclear attack. That's because when those silos were built they were hardened against a weapon where the CEP was measured in hundreds of meters and GPS was a pipe dream.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Butts posted:you laugh but this is true for me Oh yeah, me too. There were two old one's fairly close to my parents old house. I believe one was technically the radar/command station, which was separate from the missile site. Both long since overgrown and sold off. Still pretty cool to look at and see where stuff used to be.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
Missionary Positron posted:Ah, right. It's still pretty mindblowing to me that a conventional cruise missile can take out a nuclear missile silo built to withstand at least some form of nuclear attack. Withstanding a nuclear air burst in the 70s took a giant concrete door. So they spread out silos so that one huge blast could never take out more than one at once. Once MIRVs got to the point where you could hit each solo silos within kill radius they essentially gave up and started clumping them again but with the expectation that our more mature radar systems would give us enough warning to launch any missile that was threatened by an incoming missile. Now your threat is a wave of tomahawks which even if you've got a giant concrete door will certainly break the door enough where you can't fire the misssle, and will likely destroy the missile and warhead from falling concrete and blast wave. Hence the mission kill. So now we are left with only submarine and road mobile missiles that act as survivable second strike missiles. And the US doesn't do road mobile missiles. Check out Arms Control Wonk's episode about potential basing modes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
M_Gargantua posted:Withstanding a nuclear air burst in the 70s took a giant concrete door. So they spread out silos so that one huge blast could never take out more than one at once. Once MIRVs got to the point where you could hit each solo silos within kill radius they essentially gave up and started clumping them again but with the expectation that our more mature radar systems would give us enough warning to launch any missile that was threatened by an incoming missile. That episode is well worth listening to and features some absolutely crazy basing ideas, like just letting launchers float around the ocean or on barges along the Mississippi
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
LtCol J. Krusinski posted:Did you dudes know we only have one megaton class warhead in the nuclear stockpile anymore? And it's a "measly" 1 megaton gravity bomb at that. I know you are being partially sarcastic, but... Because we discovered blast wave lensing. We found out we could do a ridiculous amount of damage with sub megaton weapons, and carrying multiple smaller rated weapons on MIRV Busses.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
Sounds like we need to convert all those tactical class warheads into nuclear EFPs and cassabla howizers
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
M_Gargantua posted:Withstanding a nuclear air burst in the 70s took a giant concrete door. So they spread out silos so that one huge blast could never take out more than one at once. Once MIRVs got to the point where you could hit each solo silos within kill radius they essentially gave up and started clumping them again but with the expectation that our more mature radar systems would give us enough warning to launch any missile that was threatened by an incoming missile. Oh poo poo, Arms Control Wonk has a podcast?  Can't mash the subscribe button fast enough.Is there a specific reason why the US decided to not go with road mobile launchers, unlike China & Russia? Are subs + dispersed bombers loaded with nuclear tipped cruise missiles considered "good enough"? Missionary Positron fucked around with this message at 21:31 on Mar 26, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
Pesticide20 posted:That episode is well worth listening to and features some absolutely crazy basing ideas, like just letting launchers float around the ocean or on barges along the Mississippi  MAJOR NEGATIVE FEATURES Operability - Inability to Check Status Without Revealing Missile Location Arms Control - Use of Ocean Floor Violates Treaties MAJOR POSITIVE FEATURES Endurance - Months Public Interface - Minimal Environmental Impact - Minimal Cost - Low
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 21:32
|
|
|
The inclusion of the whale is what really ties that illustration together
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
Pesticide20 posted:That episode is well worth listening to and features some absolutely crazy basing ideas, like just letting launchers float around the ocean or on barges along the Mississippi What about some sort of tank, perhaps one with legs so you could launch from any terrain. A gear between infantry and artillery.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
A Bad Poster posted:What about some sort of tank, perhaps one with legs so you could launch from any terrain. A gear between infantry and artillery. Oh poo poo we need to build an AT-AT that can launch nukes. This is my idea, please don't steal it
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
Pesticide20 posted:Oh poo poo we need to build an AT-AT that can launch nukes. This is my idea, please don't steal it Metal... Gear?!
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
Missionary Positron posted:Is there a specific reason why the US decided to not go with road mobile launchers, unlike China & Russia? Are subs + dispersed bombers loaded with nuclear tipped cruise missiles considered "good enough"? Pretty much. The US has naval dominance with good submarines and surface, good Anti-submarine warfare capabilities outside of attack subs alone, and unlike everyone else we also have dozens of airbases around the world.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
Carteret posted:Metal... Gear?! Real life isn't anime enough IMO.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
Look what trump did now: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2017/03/26/two-girls-barred-from-united-flight-for-wearing-leggings/
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 22:12
|
|
|
Poppyseed Poundcake posted:Look what trump did now: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dr-gridlock/wp/2017/03/26/two-girls-barred-from-united-flight-for-wearing-leggings/ Throw on a pair of boxers and move on. Company policy on people using a perk meh.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 22:17
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:Throw on a pair of boxers and move on. Company policy on people using a perk meh. the issue is that there's nothing in the policy about leggings and it is literally up to the people at the gate's discretion.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
TBeats posted:the issue is that there's nothing in the policy about leggings and it is literally up to the people at the gate's discretion. The rest of the article seemed to go on about how the girls were traveling g under employee family passes which fall under united's dress code which does explicitly prohibit leggings. Now while I agree leggings aren't pants I'm against the tyranny of pants in general and yoga butts are the future.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
After so much talk about healthcare, war, corruption and espionage, it's great to kick back and get a chance to be outraged about truly meaningless bullshit for a change.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 22:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 19:00 |
|
M_Gargantua posted:The rest of the article seemed to go on about how the girls were traveling g under employee family passes which fall under united's dress code which does explicitly prohibit leggings. okay, fair enough. but their PR department bombed pretty hard at handling this without making it worse.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2017 22:34
|
|