FuturePastNow posted:

If that's not the ultimate slogan for artillery, then I don't know what is.

Phanatic posted:

CZ-75.

JcDent posted:

Speaking of which, I dunno if anybody posted this yet:

SeanBeansShako posted:

More like Pedantic.

JcDent posted:

Speaking of which, I dunno if anybody posted this yet:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSNNNMYmTKQ

P-Mack posted:

What did France's tank factories get used for during the occupation?

Mazz posted:

Just to shortly follow up on this with more detail, the B61s all have full safety/PAL/manual disable functions that must be activated (or deactivated) correctly to achieve any sort of nuclear detonation as the warheads themselves are extremely physics based in operation. You can’t just blow up a nuclear bomb and get a nuclear explosion, you have to very accurately trigger the fission and fusion stages. You can get dirty bomb functionality but it’s probably a lot easier to do that domestically vs attacking a major US installation and stealing B61s.

This doesn’t include the possibility that the underground storage facility (assuming it’s the same setup as European storage) is actually secure enough on lockdown that Turkey can’t actually get to those bombs and secure them before Tomahawks start raining into Incirlik from every major body of water around Turkey.

I won’t get into the politics side of it because Turkey getting control of those bombs likely means they killed/captured several thousand USAF/NATO servicemen to do so, and probably still don’t have any feasible way to use them in the short or even medium term. It’s not a good idea for anyone involved.

Chamale posted:

Setting off a plutonium-core nuclear bomb requires millisecond precision. The detonators have different delays worked into them, and the nuclear code for each bomb is an encrypted list of these delays so that the detonators can go off with the correct timing. Without this code, the bomb can't be set off. Also, even trying to steal a warhead outside of an active nuclear exchange would lead to staggering military consequences for Turkey.

LatwPIAT posted:

I can go into more detail on the design of US PAL systems if you want!

P-Mack posted:

What did France's tank factories get used for during the occupation?

Nenonen posted:

Allied target practise? Nazis had scarce resources to invest and in occupied areas they preferred being in the 'taking' rather than the 'giving' business. Skoda factories had several strategic benefits to them: they had become part of Germany proper rather than just occupied enemy turf, they were close by to other German industrial centers, they were out of reach for bombers until much later and their engineers and managers understood German (at least at gun point).

TooMuchAbstraction posted:

video game stuff

bewbies posted:

I know this is way ex post facto but did you guys consider doing a thing that's not really based on real life stuff? like... if you're not going for realism, why not let players just build whatever they want even if it is ridiculous (awesome)?

ie maximum battleship

TooMuchAbstraction posted:

Sorry, yeah, I'm not planning on having the Mk32 until any other "modern" tech starts getting unlocked. I still don't know what the scale on the launchers needs to be though. Like, in that diagram you linked, would the torpedo be the full length of the tube, or would it stop short of the spoon, or would it be even shorter?

taqueso posted:

Can you mount the guns on the side, if your ship had sides like a breastwork monitor?

FrangibleCover posted:

TooMuchAbstraction posted:

Sorry, yeah, I'm not planning on having the Mk32 until any other "modern" tech starts getting unlocked. I still don't know what the scale on the launchers needs to be though. Like, in that diagram you linked, would the torpedo be the full length of the tube, or would it stop short of the spoon, or would it be even shorter?


Here's a ship I just made in the designer:



That's a Fletcher-class hull with three 11-inch turrets. I fully intend to let players make ridiculous ships.

bewbies posted:

lol awesome

how much latitude do they have in designs? like can they make stupid oversized cruisers and armored hulk battleships and stuff?

TooMuchAbstraction posted:

Here's a ship I just made in the designer:



That's a Fletcher-class hull with three 11-inch turrets. I fully intend to let players make ridiculous ships.

Platystemon posted:

I want.

FuturePastNow posted:

ah the USS Vasa

FuturePastNow posted:

ah the USS Vasa

The Lone Badger posted:

I suggest letting the player spend mass on things like crew quarters if they want to. Like: as you spend time in continuous combat your stats slowly decline as the crew get tired. Each 1% of your displacement you spend on crew quarters decreases this by 10%.

Or: you can assign crew to parts odd for ship to boost performance, like distributing power in a space game. More quarters mean more points to distribute. Using crew to boost ROF is less potent than buying more guns, but you can reassign them to damage control or the engines.

LatwPIAT posted:

6) A weaklink that resets the Intent Safety to 'safe' if the bomb loses electrical power for more than seven seconds

LatwPIAT posted:

The MC4137 TSSG
The TUQS will only transmit if the MC4137 TSSG receives electrical power. When the TSSG receives electrical power, it will generate the TUQS by encoding a 24-bit pulse train stored in ROM (the IUQS). This ensures that the TUQS can't be read by anyone breaking open a B61, and ensures that the B61 can't be detonated without an IUQS.

The Lone Badger posted:

I suggest letting the player spend mass on things like crew quarters if they want to. Like: as you spend time in continuous combat your stats slowly decline as the crew get tired. Each 1% of your displacement you spend on crew quarters decreases this by 10%.

Or: you can assign crew to parts odd for ship to boost performance, like distributing power in a space game. More quarters mean more points to distribute. Using crew to boost ROF is less potent than buying more guns, but you can reassign them to damage control or the engines.

The Lone Badger posted:

Or: you can assign crew to parts odd for ship to boost performance, like distributing power in a space game. More quarters mean more points to distribute. Using crew to boost ROF is less potent than buying more guns, but you can reassign them to damage control or the engines.

LatwPIAT posted:

Basically the system I know the most about is the D-cat PAL fitted to the B61 nuclear bomb, so I'll talk about it:

The basic idea of the Permissive Action Link is that if you accidentally drop a nuclear bomb out of a plane, you don't want it to detonate by itself. This poses a problem, since if you intentionally drop a nuclear bomb out of a plane, you very definitely want it to detonate by itself. This is the same problem faced by all bombs - you want them to explode on something you want to kill and definitely not explode at any other time - but while someone dropping two tons of TNT by accident will at worst kill a city block, someone dropping two megatons of nuclear warhead by accident will destroy a city. And while the loss of the city block is regrettable, it's not the same as accidentally killing an entire city and/or setting off WWIII.

There's also two more factors to consider:
a) You don't want a nuclear bomb to explode while it's sitting in storage. Again, bad enough when regular bombs explode by accident, but a nuclear warhead is far worse.
b) You don't want anyone to steal your nuclear bomb and use it for nefarious purposes.

This creates two broad requirements for the Permissive Action Link - the system that tells the nuclear bomb when it is and isn't OK to detonate.
1) There has to be an intent to use the bomb: no accidental detonations
2) There has to be authorization to use the bomb: no nuclear terrorist, fanatical Greeks and Turks, or rogue generals planning to win WWIII by preemptive strike

In the B61, this is solved by numerous safety systems in the Permissive Action Link:
1) The B61 will only explode if it has been dropped from an airplane
2) The B61 will only explode if the correct code has been input
3) The B61 will not explode if you try to guess the code
4) The B61 will not explode if subjected to extreme conditions, such as e.g. falling off a shelf, being inside a crashed plane as it burns, etc.
5) The B61 will not explode if anyone tries to disable the safety systems

This is achieved through two processes called "stronglinks" and "weaklinks". Stronglinks ensure that the bomb will detonate only if certain conditions have been met, such as a correct code or having been dropped out of a plane: they're strong, permitting detonation only if met and never failing. Weaklinks ensure that the bomb will disable itself if involved in an accident or tinkered with: they're weak, failing easily in a way that disables the bomb.

The publicly known PAL subsystems of the B61 bomb are:
1) A Trajectory Safety stronglink that measures whether the bomb has experienced acceleration and rotation that would indicate it'd been chucked out the back of a plane
2) An Intent Safety stronglink that only arms when someone enters the correct code
3) An Arming Safety stronglink that ensures the battery doesn't have power to detonate the nuclear warhead until someone's intentionally recharged the battery
4) A weaklink that disables the bomb if the B61 is subjected too much heat, electrical discharges, etc.
5) A weaklink that disables the bomb if someone tries to open it
6) A weaklink that resets the Intent Safety to 'safe' if the bomb loses electrical power for more than seven seconds
7) A Command Disable feature that allows an operator to disable the bomb permanently
8) A weaklink that prevents brute forcing of the Intent Safety

To understand how all this fits together, I think it's best to work backwards from the bomb:

The Exclusion Unit
The exclusion unit, or X-unit, is an isolated and sealed package that contains the primary working components of the nuclear bomb: there's a hydrogen 'secondary' that's activated by a 'primary' of uranium and plutonium that's in turn activated by conventional explosive 'lenses'. The difficult part of nuclear bomb making is making the explosive lenses detonate exactly when they're supposed to. In the B61 bomb, this careful orchestration is done by "neutron generator timing circuitry". The neutron generator timing circuitry activates automatically when given electrical power. So once you give electrical power to the X-unit, the bomb goes off. (Second-generation PAL, which I'm not entirely sure if is the B, D, or F version, would add a second safety feature: until intentionally armed, the explosive lenses point in the wrong direction. When armed, servos rotate the explosive lenses into position.)

The X-unit also contains the dial-a-yield feature that determines exactly how destructive the bomb will be.

There may or may not be "disablement loads" inside the X-unit that through some means or another will permanently disable the X-unit. Exactly how this works isn't publicly known, but may involve locking a switch between the neutron generator timing circuity and the battery in the open position, destroying the explosive lenses with more explosives, or using a small shaped charge to destroy the uranium/plutonium core so it doesn't explode properly when the lenses fire.

In any case, the X-unit detonates when fed electrical power.

The MC2969 Intent Safety Switch
To ensure that the X-unit only receives electrical power when we actually want the bomb to detonate, the MC2969 Intent Safety Switch is a mechanical switch that has three modes: by default it's in the open position, feeding it a specific code - the TUQS - will rotate it to the closed position, and feeding it an incorrect code will lock it in an open position where even the TUQS won't work. (There's another code to unlock it again, putting it in the regular open position.) Once the MC2969 is closed, it completes the circuit between the battery and the X-unit.

Hence, to cause a detonation, we need to provide the Intent Safety Switch with the TUQS and electrical power and provide the X-unit with electrical power.

The Trajectory Switch, Part 1
To ensure that the TUQS is only transmitted to the Intent Safety Switch when the B61 has been dropped out of a plane, the TUQS has to pass through three accelerometers. These work by rolamites. There are two rolamites that will lock in the closed position when the B61 is spinning at a specific rate, and one that locks in the closed position when the B61 is accelerating as if dropped from a high altitude. When the rolamites lock in the closed position, the TUQS can pass through to the Intent Safety Switch.

Hence, to cause a detonation, we need to close the Trajectory Switches, provide the Intent Safety Switch with the TUQS and electrical power, and provide the X-unit with electrical power.

The MC4137 TSSG
The TUQS will only transmit if the MC4137 TSSG receives electrical power. When the TSSG receives electrical power, it will generate the TUQS by encoding a 24-bit pulse train stored in ROM (the IUQS). This ensures that the TUQS can't be read by anyone breaking open a B61, and ensures that the B61 can't be detonated without an IUQS.

Hence, to cause a detonation, we need to provide the TSSG with electrical power and IUQS, close the Trajectory Switches, provide the Intent Safety Switch with the TUQS and electrical power, and provide the X-unit with electrical power.

The Trajectory Switch, Part 2
To ensure that the TSSG only encodes the IUQS into the TUQS when the B61 has been dropped out of a plane, power to the TSSR also passes through the rolamites mentioned above.

The ROM
To ensure that activating the trajectory switches doesn't cause the TSSG to generate the TUQS, the IUQS is not stored permanently in the B61. Instead, it is stored in a 24-bit chip of read-only memory on a temporary basis. This ROM will erase the IUQS after seven seconds of not receiving power or when subjected to too much heat. This ensures that the IUQS will only be stored in the B61 for as long as necessary. If the plane crashes and the bomb loses power, the IUQS will be erased. If an armed B61 is subject to a fire, the IUQS will be erased.

Hence, to cause a detonation, we need to provide the ROM with electrical power and an IUQS, close the trajectory switches, provide the TSSG with electrical power, provide the Intent Safety Switch with the TUQS, and provide the X-unit with electrical power.

The IUQS
When it's time to actually use a B61 bomb, the IQUS can either be manually entered into the B61, to be stored in the ROM for as long as the B61 has electrical power, or it can be entered in flight through an electronic connection from a device called an AMAC.


This isn't what a real AMAC looks like, but it's going to look a bit like this. Six wheels to write in an IUQS, and a button to send the IUQS to the B61's RAM. This can also be used to send the Command Detonate code to the B61 or the codes to unlock the Intent Safety Switch.


The MC4136 Preflight Controller: this allows the IQUS to be entered into the B61 before a plane takes off, which is useful if it doesn't have an AMAC advanced enough to transmit IUQSes mid-flight.


As yet another safety, the AMAC can't transmit the IUQS unless the MC4142 Strike Enable Plug has been screwed in: this completes a circuit between the cable that connects the B61 to the AMAC and the IUQS entry panel above.

Electrical Power
The B61 has an onboard battery. This battery is not normally charged, but instead charges up when connected to a plane's electrical system. If the B61 is disconnected from the plane's electrical system for too long, there won't be any electrical power to activate the TSSG, drive the electrical switches, or power up the X-unit.

All Together
You connect a plane's AMAC or an MC4137 Preflight Controller, and a plane's electrical system to a B61 nuclear bomb. Then you enter the IUQS into into the B61's ROM. Then, when you drop the bomb, rolamites in the Trajectory Safety complete a circuit that gives electrical power to the MC4137 TSSG circuit board. When the bomb decides it has fallen far enough that it's time to detonate, the TSSG encodes the IQUS into a TUQS. The TUQS is sent through the Trajectory Safety to the Intent Safety Switch, which activates servos that connect the B61's battery to the X-unit. Inside the X-unit, the power is used to detonate the explosive lenses that start the nuclear explosion.

Here, electrical power and the IUQS is used to show intent: when the bomb has both of these things, someone's definitely and purposefully planning to use the bomb for its intended purpose. Someone who doesn't have the IUQS can provide the B61 with power, but they cannot brute force the IUQS without disabling the bomb. The Trajectory Safety ensures that, even with the intent to use it and the IUQS, the B61 cannot be used unless it's been dropped from the air: this ensures that the bomb can only be used as an air-delivered munition. Even with an IUQS and a B61, you can't just blow up New York City willy-nilly, you're going to need a USAF/USN plane.

The Final Safety
The IUQS is stored in a safe at some Air Force or Navy base. The commander of the base is only supposed to unlock this safe when he receives an authorization code from the US President. For a long time, the USAF were afraid this would take too long and set the IUQS to 000000.

The US President tells the base command that it's time to use the nuclear weapons. The base command unlocks a safe and hands the crews or pilots the IUQS, which they use to tell the B61 that they're definitely on purpose planning to use the nuclear weapon. If someone tries to tamper with a B61 such as by cracking it open to poke around inside, or try to guess the IUQS, it'll disable itself. If you fear an enemy that could tamper with the bomb without disabling it, the Command Detonate can be used to disable the bomb on a much more permanent basis. This is supposed to ensure the safety of the nuclear bombs.

You know, unless someone steals an USAF jet and enters 000000, or extracts the X-unit and connects it to a car battery. That'd make it explode when it shouldn't...

Platystemon posted:

Under what conditions might the bomb lose electrical power for six seconds but it’s still desirable for it to stay “armed”?

Platystemon posted:

The idea here is that TSSG performs a cryptographic transformation on the word from ROM, correct?

quote:

Germany started aerial bombing trials in 1910, though two years later a report described results as 'very bad,' even from a height as low as three hundred feet. In 1914, a secret bomber squadron was created, under the cover-name of Brieftaubenabteilung Ostende – the "Ostend carrier-pigeon unit.' This was disbanded because it proved unable to hit anything, but the experience of war dramatically accelerated the development of both aircraft and bombing techniques. On 18 September, an RFC officer named Maj. Musgrove conducted the first British experiment on dropping a bomb from his aircraft. 'It exploded,' noted an observer laconically, 'but not exactly where nor how it was expected to.'

Nothingtoseehere posted:

None of this stops someone cutting the bomb open and taking the enriched nuclear material out to make their own bombs out of, correct? Do the explosive lenses reduce the quantity of material required to hit critical mass and fission, or just increase the yield of that fission event?